The Russian Central Bank has escalated tensions by filing a lawsuit against Euroclear, a major international settlement institution, amid the EU's push to enforce asset seizures. The move underscores growing friction over how cross-border financial infrastructure handles frozen assets and custody arrangements during periods of international tension. For crypto market participants and institutional players relying on traditional settlement mechanisms, the case highlights critical questions around asset security, jurisdictional authority, and the vulnerability of centralized custodial systems to geopolitical pressure. As regulators tighten controls on asset transfers and settlement protocols, the dispute signals a broader shift toward more fragmented financial systems and may accelerate demand for decentralized alternatives.
This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.
10 Likes
Reward
10
3
Repost
Share
Comment
0/400
CryptoSourGrape
· 18h ago
If I had bet on DeFi earlier, I wouldn't be watching traditional finance blow up right now...
View OriginalReply0
MetaverseLandlord
· 19h ago
The Central Bank of Russia is going to court with Euroclear. Basically, this exposes the fragility of the traditional financial system... Now, with frozen assets and jurisdictional chaos, centralized custodians can't withstand geopolitical pressures at all. It's really time to consider decentralization.
View OriginalReply0
GateUser-44a00d6c
· 19h ago
The Russian Central Bank files a lawsuit against Euroclear. It seems that traditional finance has really been messed up by geopolitical issues. This is the real reason for the existence of DeFi.
The Russian Central Bank has escalated tensions by filing a lawsuit against Euroclear, a major international settlement institution, amid the EU's push to enforce asset seizures. The move underscores growing friction over how cross-border financial infrastructure handles frozen assets and custody arrangements during periods of international tension. For crypto market participants and institutional players relying on traditional settlement mechanisms, the case highlights critical questions around asset security, jurisdictional authority, and the vulnerability of centralized custodial systems to geopolitical pressure. As regulators tighten controls on asset transfers and settlement protocols, the dispute signals a broader shift toward more fragmented financial systems and may accelerate demand for decentralized alternatives.