Withdrawals in favor of Ukraine
The new British Prime Minister Liz Truss, while still heading the Foreign Office, has repeatedly said that the UK will continue to implement and even tighten sanctions against Russia. She, like her predecessor Boris Johnson, is firmly committed to supporting Ukraine. The second tranche of sanctions against Russia in the UK was announced on the first day of the Russian invasion of Ukraine, February 24, 2022. Since then, the sanctions have expanded, adding companies and individuals close to Vladimir Putin to the lists. The British sanctions list includes more than a thousand Russians. The most famous of them is the former owner of the famous Chelsea club Roman Abramovich. In May, Abramovich was allowed to sell Chelsea for £4.25bn, on the condition that £2.5bn of that amount would be frozen in Abramovich's English bank account to be transferred to a fund to help victims of the war in Ukraine. But on September 6, when Liz Truss took office, it turned out that the money was still in the account.
On the day Liz Truss took office, it turned out that the money was still in Abramovich's account.
Why is it taking so long to transfer money to war victims, Labor MP Chris Bryant asked in Parliament, but Assistant Foreign Secretary Rehman Khishti declined to comment specifically on the case, reiterating that there were 1,100 individuals on the UK sanctions list, including 123 oligarchs and members their families. They are worth £130bn, but their assets are frozen, as are 120 companies and 19 banks, whose assets amount to £940bn. This is 80% of everything that the Russian banking sector, together with partners, has. More than 60% of foreign reserves of the Central Bank are also frozen. This, according to a representative of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, suggests that the government strictly adheres to the criteria set by the parliament: to do everything possible to bring those responsible for the aggression against Ukraine to justice.
The deputy was not satisfied with such an excuse and he shouted : “Nonsense!”
Bring back the golden visas!
Chris Bryant is a member of the Inter-Parliamentary Committee on Foreign Affairs, which includes deputies from all parliamentary factions. At the end of June, the committee published a report , "The Price of Complacency: Illicit Finance and the War in Ukraine." Listing the important sanctions measures imposed by the British government since February 24, the parliamentary commission criticizes all previous governments, including the Johnson government, for turning a blind eye to illegal transactions and assets for many years, to the "dirty money" that came into the country, posing a threat to national security. The report welcomes the amendments to the Economic Crimes Act , which now includes a registry of overseas territories' beneficiaries, but concludes that the measures listed in the law, which came into force on March 14, are not well drafted, drafted, or enforced. additional funding for law enforcement agencies.
The government, according to the authors of the report, does not take into account the presence of accomplices and shell companies that help those who are under sanctions. The Inter-Parliamentary Commission recommends that the government create a unit that would ensure compliance with sanctions with funding for the entire period of the Ukrainian crisis, and suggest that the government better coordinate its actions with other countries, introduce collective sanctions by combining sanctions lists with the US, EU, South Africa, Canada or Australia.
In addition, members of the international committee of parliament are demanding that the government reconsider the cases of obtaining British citizenship, especially those who were holders of the so-called "golden visas" ("Tier 1") received in exchange for large investments in the UK. A foreigner who received such a visa could obtain a residence permit for himself and his family. For a £10 million investment, a permanent residence permit could be obtained in as little as two years. After a five-year stay in the country, the holder of the "golden visa" was entitled to receive British citizenship. The practice of issuing such visas was discontinued a few days before the Russian invasion of Ukraine.
According to the anti-corruption organization Spotlight, half of the more than 6,000 golden visa holders have been screened for "possible threats to national security." Between 2008, when the golden visa system was introduced, and 2015, about 3,000 people received such visas, including 700 millionaires from Russia. The government has not reported who and how received these visas. The Parliamentary Committee on Foreign Affairs is demanding that the government reconsider all such visa cases since 2015, especially in cases where it is suspected that visas and/or citizenship were obtained in violation of the national security screening procedure.
Back to Russia?
The report does not mention the case of Yevgeny Lebedev, the son of Alexander Lebedev, a former KGB resident in London and later a well-known Russian banker. Recently, there have been fears in the press and in the House of Commons that the owner of two British newspapers, who has not lost his Russian citizenship and has recently become a member of the House of Lords (the title of Yevgeny was granted by his "friend" Boris Johnson), despite warnings from the security services, may represent a threat to national security. Talk about this resumed after reports appeared in the Italian press that in 2018, Johnson, as foreign minister, was seen leaving Yevgeny Lebedev's villa without bodyguards and assistants. This summer, Johnsonadmitted in parliament that he did often meet alone with Alexander Lebedev at his son's villa, in particular, when he was foreign minister.
As the BBC investigation showed, despite seemingly tough sanctions and strict laws against money laundering (everyone remembers the complaints of Fridman and Aven about the lack of money to pay the cleaner and driver), Russian oligarchs still manage to get around money laundering laws .
But the conditions of life under the sanctions, apparently, are not very pleasant. Moreover, in addition to everyday problems, there are also searches, and even the initiation of criminal cases on violation of sanctions. In May, BBC correspondents described a search of Petr Aven's London apartment during which £400,000 was seized. The operation was carried out by the NCA's "Cell-K" unit, where the "K" stands for kleptocracy.
Not surprisingly, some billionaires who are on sanctions lists and find themselves in straitened circumstances in countries where they have lived for many years and hoped to live further are thinking about what to do next. According to a report in the Financial Times, the Kremlin is calling businessmen who have left Russia asking them to return.
Billionaires on sanctions lists think what to do next
This was reported to the Financial Times by two people who were called, and several other interlocutors who are aware of such calls. To find out how businessmen facing restrictions are living, the newspaper spoke with seven Russian businessmen under sanctions, as well as high-ranking bankers, company executives, former and current officials.
According to the author of the note, many said that the sanctions are pushing businessmen back to Russia. “Some people think: “Do I need all this? I will return to Moscow where I can enjoy dining out and feel great,” says one businessman. The sanctions, he argues, are forcing elites to get even closer to the Kremlin, even those entrepreneurs who would like to distance themselves from the current Russian authorities.
Western governments, writes the author of the FT, counted on the opposite effect. Faced with the risk of losing their fortunes, businessmen were supposed to turn their discontent against the Kremlin and put pressure on Putin.
It would seem that Bloomberg's report on Russian billionaire German Khan, who lived in the West for almost a decade and returned to Russia due to sanctions, confirms the thesis that the oligarchs are returning under Putin's wing. (The EU and the UK imposed sanctions on Khan in March 2022). However, Alfa Group shareholder Khan, as sources told The Insider, went to Moscow not to “go out to restaurants with pleasure” and “not manage Alfa Bank assets,” but to continue negotiations on the sale of Alfa Bank in Russia. It is wrong to say that the oligarchs who were once close to Putin fled to Russia. For example, Khan’s partner in LetterOne, Pyotr Aven, recently left the UK, where he was given “unbearable” conditions by freezing his assets, but for some reason left not for Russia, but for the United States, where he was not included in the sanctions list.
Khan went to Moscow not to go out to restaurants and manage assets, but to sell Alfa-Bank in Russia
Bloomberg writes that the move of some billionaires back to Russia was "a victory for Vladimir Putin." The Kremlin has long tried to bring back wealthy citizens from abroad. Now, the sanctions, according to the publication, have made the Russian elite more dependent on the president, and Russia more attractive for preserving assets that could be frozen in the West. But so far this victory has been won only in theory. First, the fate of Mikhail Khodorkovsky and Yevgeny Chichvarkin, who live in London, does not confirm the thesis that Russia is attractive for preserving assets. Secondly, no matter how severe Western sanctions are, on the other side of the scale is security, which, if returned to Russia, will be a big question. Moreover, in recent times it is not only about the risk of criminal prosecution, but also about physical security. And such amazing stories as the poisoning of Roman Abramovich during his mediation in peace negotiations do not add patriotic nostalgia to the departed entrepreneurs.
