"Pandora's box opened." How the "nuclear umbrella" and a French businessman became the price for pardoning Fridman and Usmanov

22 September the European Union, after lengthy negotiations, reached a compromise. The EU is extending sanctions against roughly 3 thousand Russian citizens and companies for another three years — until September 2029 — but is removing two well-known Russian oligarchs, Alisher Usmanov and Mikhail Fridman, from the list. Both spent years seeking various ways to lift or at least circumvent the restrictions: lawsuits, lobbying at the EU level, appeals by third countries, straightforward buyouts (that is, of course, legal fines) — and ultimately succeeded. What is behind this EU decision? No one will admit it openly, but the media write about behind-the-scenes "hostage" exchanges, about how France became the new "battering ram" against EU sanctions instead of Hungary, and that Latvia agreed to lift its veto in exchange for a vague promise of nuclear protection. More on how sanctions became a bargaining chip, how Russia obtained a proven pressure tactic, and how Europe opened Pandora's box — in the GORDON piece.

The fight to remove Usmanov and Fridman from sanctions has been going on for a long time, reminds European Pravda.

Usmanov is among the ten richest people in Russia: in spring 2026 his fortune was estimated at $14,5 billion (and before the full-scale war — over $18 million). He was hit by EU sanctions on 28 February 2022 as a businessman close to Putin whose support, according to the European Union, makes a significant contribution to the war against Ukraine. Usmanov challenged the restrictions in the EU court, but lost in 2024.

Read also

After EU sanctions, a 156-meter yacht of Russian billionaire Usmanov was seized in Germany – media

3 March, 01.22

World

Uzbekistan requested lifting restrictions on Usmanov and his sister Gulbahor as early as 2022, arguing that sanctions hinder investment and charitable projects (the oligarch was born there and also holds Uzbek citizenship). Hungary defended him several times, but under pressure from other EU countries Budapest retreated. In 2022 and 2025 Usmanov achieved partial successes: his sisters — Saodat Nargizueva and Gulbahor Ismailova — were removed from the list, and Gulbahor, on whose name his superyacht Dilbar is registered (worth roughly $600 million), was delisted.

Fridman — born in Lviv, holding Russian and Israeli passports, who has lived in London since 2017. He ranks ninth among the richest Russians, his fortune is estimated at $16,5 billion. He has also been under EU sanctions since 28 February 2022 as one of the leading Russian financiers from Putin's inner circle.

Read also

Ponomaryov: Abramovich and Fridman — the two smartest Russian Jews who crawled away in time

19 August, 18.25

World

Fridman litigated against the European Union somewhat more successfully — in 2024 the EU court annulled sanctions against him and his business partner Petr Aven for an earlier period, from February 2022 to March 2023, citing insufficient justification at the time. But that did not remove later restrictions: the EU adopted new decisions with updated reasoning.

After that, Hungary defended Fridman's interests in sanctions disputes, and in the current round — Luxembourg.

Who pushed the decision — and what they got

France

In the past the role of "sanctions battering ram" was usually played by the Hungarian government led by Viktor Orbán, which often lost those battles. Now the main lobbyist — and a much more successful one — has been France.

Paris demanded removing Usmanov, citing "national security considerations." According to the Financial Times, Paris linked this issue to an agreement on the release of several French citizens held in Azerbaijan. Among them is French businessman Martin Ryan, head of the company Mercorama. He was detained in December 2023 and in March 2026 was sentenced to 10 years in prison on charges of espionage. France rejected the charges, saying Ryan became a "victim" and a "hostage" of tensions in Baku–Paris relations.

23 September, the day after the EU decision, these rumors and inside information were confirmed: Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev signed a decree pardoning a group of prisoners. Ryan is named in the document.

Slovakia

In spring 2026 President of Turkey Recep Tayyip Erdoğan asked Slovakia to support removing Usmanov from the sanctions lists — "a philanthropist who makes a significant contribution to strengthening human ties in the Turkic world." Bratislava sought removal of sanctions on Usmanov and Fridman, but at the time could not convince partners. Success came in September — after France joined the campaign.

Why Slovakia did this (aside from the opportunity to do a favor for Turkey) remains unclear. EUobserver in spring suggested that Prime Minister Fico's government was acting in concert with Hungary in favor of the Kremlin. Foreign Minister Juraj Blanár cited "strong legal arguments" and solidarity with other countries that previously supported Slovakia in a case involving its citizen allegedly unfairly listed for sanctions.

Luxembourg

When France and Slovakia began pushing to remove Usmanov, Luxembourg said it would seek the same concession for Fridman.

The reason is clear: Fridman has long demanded from Luxembourg $ 16 billion in compensation for frozen assets (similar claims he filed against the Netherlands and the UK). The dispute continues and creates serious pressure on Luxembourg.

In the end, the fates of the sanctions against Fridman and Usmanov were indeed considered "as a package."

"This story confirmed the danger of a domino effect from sanction relaxations. If one capital gets an exemption for a chosen oligarch, lobbyists appear in others too," notes European Pravda.

Latvia

"A choice between bad and much worse"

Latvia opposed easing the sanctions, but ultimately abandoned its objections and came away "with a profit."

As of 22 September Latvia remained the only EU member opposed to lifting sanctions against the Russian businessmen. However on the day of the vote Riga removed its veto and abstained, promising to impose national sanctions on both oligarchs.

Latvian Prime Minister Andris Kulbergs said his country was forced to compromise. "This was not a choice between a good and bad decision, but between bad and much worse — the possibility of changing the status of two individuals and the future of the entire sanctions regime, which affects roughly 3 thousand natural and legal persons linked to Russian aggression," he explained.

He immediately added: France agreed to start talks about Latvia's participation in its nuclear deterrence initiative. Macron also expressed readiness to strengthen the French military presence in the country, especially in air defense.

How Ukraine, Russia and Europe reacted

The Kremlin's reaction was predictable: its spokesman Dmitry Peskov said the sanctions are "illegal" and should be lifted not only for Usmanov and Fridman but for "all Russian businessmen" and citizens.

Read also

A tense conversation took place between Zelensky and von der Leyen in New York – Bloomberg

23 September, 11.30

Politics

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky called the signals about lifting restrictions on certain Russian oligarchs "suicidal and counterproductive." "Wars end with resolve and strength, not concessions for the aggressor's inner circle," he emphasized.

Foreign Minister Andriy Sybiha called the decision "shameful and unjustified" and urged EU countries to impose national sanctions against Usmanov and Fridman.

"The EU's lifting of sanctions on two Russian oligarchs — Usmanov and Fridman — is a shot in the foot for the European Union. This decision sends a very bad security signal to Russia: keep pressing — and sooner or later Europe will give in," said Serhiy Hanchenko, an MP from Servant of the People party.

Many European politicians' assessments were also harsh.

European Parliament Vice-President Pina Picierno called the decision "shameful, cowardly and absolutely unacceptable," placing political responsibility on the EU member states.

Polish MEP Mateusz Wonsik called what happened "a compromise of the EU" and asked why the Polish government did not speak out against it.

Estonian Foreign Minister Margus Tsahkna reported that his country abstained during the vote and will impose national sanctions against Usmanov and Fridman.

Lithuanian Prime Minister Mindaugas Sinkevičius said the oligarchs are part of Russia's war machine and ordered the start of national sanctions procedures.

"Unfortunately, the EU couldn't withstand the pressure... The only positive result was that we managed to secure a three-year extension of sanctions. This will make it harder for Russia to exploit internal EU disagreements every six months in the future," added Lithuanian Foreign Minister Kęstutis Budrys.

"A triumph of money, disgust and hypocrisy"

The decision also outraged Russian opposition figures in exile. Among them were some who earlier supported revisiting sanctions.

For example, Alexei Navalny's ally Leonid Volkov 2022 signed a letter to the European Commission asking to lift sanctions against Mikhail Fridman and other top managers of Alfa Group. He proposed the EU adopt "a clear and simple set of criteria" for removal from the sanctions list. After this became known in 2023, Volkov called it his "big political mistake" and stepped down as head of the Anti-Corruption Foundation's International Foundation (ACF International). He nevertheless remained one of the main figures in Navalny's team.

Volkov now said the EU's decision to lift sanctions against Fridman and Usmanov is "shameful, bad, and creates a terrible precedent."

Opposition politician Vladimir Kara-Murza limited himself to: "Shame on you, European Union."

Former head of the FBK investigations department Maria Pevchikh wrote: "A gigantic, planetary-scale disgrace. A triumph of money, vileness and hypocrisy." She reminded that she had previously proposed exchanging oligarchs' yachts for the release of political prisoners.

"It turns out that for Europe it doesn't matter whether you support the war or not, whether you are friendly with Putin or against him. In the end, it seems far more important how much money sits in your bank accounts," said Yulia Navalnaya. She reproached Europe for lifting sanctions on the wealthy Russians while ordinary Russian citizens face obstacles — they are denied visas, bank accounts are not opened.

She received a response from one of the European Commission spokespeople: if Russian citizens do not like the consequences of this war, they can do something about it in their country.

Sanctions policy — and beyond — under threat

"Pandora's box doesn't close on demand"

Latvian MEP Rihards Kols published a long text on X about what this decision threatens for the whole European Union. He noted that all the "reasons" for lifting the oligarchs' sanctions have nothing to do with Ukraine or European security, and there were no legal grounds for them.

"They are removed from the lists because one or two capitals needed to satisfy their own national interests. You couldn't design a better gift for Moscow's main narrative: that EU sanctions are arbitrary punishment that need no justification, imposed and lifted based on political convenience. We spent years proving the opposite. And today we themselves denied it," he wrote.

Kols also criticized his native Latvia for abstaining during the vote in exchange for potential access to France's "nuclear umbrella."

"Think about this again. Sanctions policy disagreements were settled by a bilateral offer in the security sphere. However beneficial that offer may be, common foreign and security policy does not work that way," the MEP wrote.

He warned that authoritarian regimes now have a proven method: detain EU citizens, pressure the relevant capital — and EU policy toward Russia becomes a bargaining chip.

"The Kremlin learned the lessons... Pandora's box, once opened, does not close on demand," the MEP emphasized.

The EU decision was analyzed by numerous global media outlets, and most of their conclusions are also not optimistic.

"A reward for those who hold Europeans hostage"

Bloomberg notes this is not the first time national interests have prevented the bloc from maintaining pressure on Russia. Earlier this year the EU already softened a major sanctions package over fears of harming local industry.

Politico conveys the mood of dissatisfied diplomats in Brussels who believe the politically motivated concession creates a dangerous precedent for the future. In addition, several countries privately complained that at the ambassadors' meeting colleagues did not explain why they lobbied — they only cited "national security considerations."

Euronews notes that France's position complicated Brussels' efforts to extend EU sanctions and quotes an EU official on Paris's stance: "France does not intend to back down, but this is absolutely the wrong signal at the wrong time." One diplomat compared Paris's tit-for-tat approach, equivalent to vetoing a common EU position, to tactics Hungary used under Orbán.

Reuters also mentions this, noting that hopes of European leaders to show a more united front against Russia after the change of government in Hungary were not fulfilled.

"This will be a reward not only for Russia but for everyone who holds Europeans hostage," Financial Times quotes a senior European diplomat as saying. The paper also notes: in the past such "political" exemptions from sanctions occurred under pressure from Hungary or Slovakia. There were also prisoner swaps between Western countries and Russia. But the current deal is the first time a hostage release is directly tied to lifting sanctions over Russia's invasion of Ukraine.

European Pravda does not consider this compromise an absolute failure. At least for the next three years it will be impossible to remove someone from the sanctions list by blackmail. But the price of the decision goes beyond purely Russian sanctions: it set a precedent where sanctions against top figures were lifted for political bargaining, and hostage trading may become one tool to soften sanctions pressure.

In the end, the conclusion is bleak. The EU bought three years of stability for the main part of the sanctions list, but paid a price: it openly demonstrated for the first time that with sufficient pressure and the right hostage the sanctions list can be edited. Therefore, the next actor who wants to repeat the trick now has a ready-made instruction — and it could concern not only individual oligarchs but sectoral sanctions on the Russian economy as well.