The European Union’s decision to remove two high‑profile Russian oligarchs from its sanctions list has ignited a diplomatic firestorm, with Kyiv denouncing the move as a betrayal of Ukraine’s interests.

Background to the decision

France pushed for the delisting of Alisher Usmanov, a Russian‑Uzbek billionaire, citing “national security concerns.” Luxembourg advocated for the removal of Mikhail Fridman, a Russian‑Israeli businessman currently suing the EU to free frozen assets. Both men were originally sanctioned after Russia’s full‑scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022.

Ukrainian reaction

Ukrainian Foreign Minister Andriy Sybiha called the EU’s move “unacceptable” and warned that it sent the “wrong signal to Moscow.” In a post on X, he said Moscow would celebrate the decision as a sign of impunity and European division. Kyiv has urged each EU member state to impose its own national sanctions on the two individuals, a step Latvia has already pledged to take.

EU internal dynamics

Latvia initially opposed the delisting, reflecting concerns over its own political ties—its former business partner Pyotr Aven was stripped of Latvia’s highest civilian honour for failing to condemn the invasion. However, after a compromise, Latvia changed its vote to an abstention. The agreement also extended sanctions on roughly 3,000 other individuals and entities for three years, shifting from the previous six‑month renewal cycle.

Russian response

Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov welcomed the prospect of the two oligarchs being removed, labeling EU sanctions as illegal and calling for the removal of all Russians from the list.

Implications for EU policy

The episode highlights the tension between member states seeking economic or diplomatic concessions and the broader strategic goal of maintaining pressure on Russia. France’s initiative appears linked to a prospective prisoner‑release deal with Azerbaijan, suggesting that sanctions policy can be leveraged in unrelated negotiations.

Uncertainty and outlook

While the EU has secured a compromise on extending sanctions for thousands of targets, the long‑term impact of delisting Usmanov and Fridman remains unclear. Questions linger about whether national sanctions by individual EU members will offset the perceived weakening of the collective stance, and how Moscow will interpret the mixed signals.

As the EU navigates internal disagreements, the episode underscores the delicate balance between diplomatic pragmatism and the moral imperatives of supporting Ukraine’s sovereignty.