In September 2026, Russian billionaires began studying the legal pathways used by Alisher Usmanov and Mikhail Fridman to escape European Union sanctions. The unexpected lifting of EU restrictions on the two high-profile tycoons offered a glimmer of hope to other sanctioned Russian oligarchs whose assets have remained frozen in the West for years.
The Precedent Set by Usmanov and Fridman
The European Union reached a compromise in late September 2026 to prolong sanctions for around 3,000 Russian individuals, entities, and companies for 36 months, securing an extension until September 22, 2029. However, the tense negotiations ahead of the deadline also resulted in the removal of Alisher Usmanov and Mikhail Fridman from the restrictions list. Previously, sanctions were subject to six-month extensions, making the three-year extension a stabilizing move for the bloc that avoided repeated political squabbles.
The decision to drop the two oligarchs sparked immediate backlash from Kyiv. Ukrainian Foreign Minister Andrii Sybiha denounced the removal as shameful and unjustifiable, stating on social media that Moscow gained a sense of impunity, the humiliation of the European Union, and division among Europeans. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy similarly criticized the concessions to the aggressor’s entourage, though he expressed gratitude to European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen for her readiness to work on adding more Russian names to the sanctions list. Kyiv subsequently called on EU countries to impose national sanctions on both oligarchs.
Diplomatic Interventions and Legal Strategy
The exemptions granted to Usmanov and Fridman were driven by distinct national strategies from member states. France pushed for the removal of the Uzbek-born metals and telecom tycoon Alisher Usmanov due to national security concerns. According to diplomatic sources cited by AFP, the French demand linked directly to a potential prisoner release deal involving French nationals held in Azerbaijan, a regime maintaining close ties to Usmanov. Emulating Usmanov's path requires building close relationships with political leaders across Central Asia, the Caucasus, and beyond, as figures from Turkey, Slovakia, and the former Hungarian government actively lobbied on his behalf.
Meanwhile, Luxembourg put forth the sanctions exemption for Mikhail Fridman, the founder of Alfa Group and co-founder of investment firm LetterOne. To challenge the freezing of his assets, Fridman initiated a $16 billion (approx. €15 billion) legal action against Luxembourg on the grounds that an investment protection treaty had been violated, while also seeking financial restitution for the harm suffered. Following France’s intervention for Usmanov, Luxembourg stated that its legal position in court had weakened and requested Fridman’s exclusion as well.
Sergei Glandin, a sanction law specialist and partner at the Moscow law firm BGP Litigation, noted that investment arbitration serves as an effective tool to pressure Western authorities into opening negotiations or lifting restrictions. According to Glandin, the larger the amount of the claim, the faster the process can move.
| Oligarch | Net Worth | Key Business Assets | Backing State / Driver |
|---|---|---|---|
| Alisher Usmanov | $14 Billion | USM Holding, MegaFon (Metals & Telecom) | France (National Security / Prisoner Deal context) |
| Mikhail Fridman | $16 Billion | Alfa Group, LetterOne | Luxembourg ($16B Investment Arbitration Lawsuit) |
Reactions Across the Russian Business Elite
While at least two interviewed business figures indicated plans to closely examine Fridman’s legal approach as a potential precedent for their own claims, many of Russia’s wealthiest individuals see few prospects for a swift end to their isolated status. They believe the decisions regarding Usmanov and Fridman stemmed from unique circumstances that cannot easily be replicated.
Some Russian billionaires reacted to the exemptions with dark humor, remarking that they could not find enough European prisoners in sympathetic countries to trade. Apprehension grew among other parties regarding the future environment for Russian enterprises still functioning within Europe, with worries centered on potential EU retaliation sparked by the harm done to the union’s sanction enforcement framework through the exceptions made for the two prominent businessmen.
For now, the broader population of sanctioned Russian individuals remains largely restricted to travel in Asia and the Middle East, watching closely to see whether investment arbitration and high-level state lobbying can carve out additional exceptions to an otherwise tightening Western economic perimeter.
