Russian oligarchs break silence over Vladimir Putin's invasion
Criticism from billionaires Oleg Deripaska and Mikhail Fridman a blow to Putin, who has long relied on the loyalty of the business elite
Mikhail Fridman, one of Russia’s richest men, has become the first oligarch to speak out against Vladimir Putin’s invasion of Ukraine in a major turning point in public reaction to the war.
Russian celebrities and MPs have added their voices to public condemnation of the invasion, but the intervention of a member of the usually Kremlin-loyal business elite is unusual.
Mr Fridman, the co-founder of Alfa-Bank, one of the country’s largest private banks, said in a message to staff at his London-based private equity firm LetterOne: “War can never be the answer”.
In the message, seen by the Financial Times, he said: “I was born in Western Ukraine and lived there until I was 17. My parents are Ukrainian citizens and live in Lviv, my favourite city.
“But I have also spent much of my life as a citizen of Russia, building and growing businesses. I am deeply attached to Ukrainian and Russian peoples and see the current conflict as a tragedy for them both.”
Fridman continued: “I do not make political statements, I am a businessman with responsibilities to my many thousands of employees in Russia and Ukraine.
“I am convinced however that war can never be the answer. This crisis will cost lives and damage two nations who have been brothers for hundreds of years.
“While a solution seems frighteningly far off, I can only join those whose fervent desire is for the bloodshed to end. I’m sure my partners share my view.”
The Telegraph has contacted the firm for comment.
The message comes as the West announced new sanctions, including cutting off a number of Russian banks from Swift, the main international payment system. The assets of the Russian central bank will also be frozen.
Putin told business leaders at a televised meeting at the Kremlin shortly after the invasion that Russia was prepared for any counter-measures.
Hundreds of people have been arrested at rallies across Russia against the invasion, and the children of top officials and oligarchs have also spoken out against the war.
agree to disagree?
As mentioned in the tweet, that's the wording of the current CIA director who at the time was the U.S. ambassador in Moscow. I would think he's speaking with more authority than almost anyone else is going to have. He's on the ground, not sitting in a boardroom across the ocean. That being said, my point in posting it is that the governments clutching their pearls right now knew this was going to happen, and decided to gamble the Ukrainian people anyways. War is awful and it greatly concerns me that instead of "How do we resolve this as quickly and peacefully as possible?" I'm seeing "How can we fuck Russia and teach them a lesson?"
M
member 1013
Guest
D
Deleted member 1
Guest
NATO didn't break a promise on expansion and even in 2001 Putin had said he's open to NATO expansion.
Around that time there was a major shift due to 9/11. Russia saw it as a chance to get Western support for its ongoing war with Chechnya and both sides seem to view Chechnya and terrorism at large with the same eyes. There were several major NATO speeches by the Secretary general about realigning NATO with Russian support to an defensive force against rogue states and stateless actors which is where everybody seemed to find some common ground with the terrorism issue. A future where Russia might even be part of NATO was on the table... at least in so far as Ukraine ever has been.
Until Crimea we never put NATO troops forward in those countries. But before that we did pull out of the anti-ballistic missile treaty as the US and placed a missile shield in those forward countries. This was supposedly to create a shield for Iran, but of course also makes a shield for Russia, potentially removing Russia's own deterrence against the Wests nukes. The whole thing could also be redone pretty quickly into an offensive array. So where NATO expansion had started becoming one that was palatable on all sides, the anti ballistic missile treaty removal and missiles put it back on the table.
It's very possible that had we not done that, NATO expansion would have continued on a largely political course instead of one so wrapped in escalating military tension.
I personally think it and The associated missile shield stationing represents one of the biggest screw-ups in my entire life and has led to making the world significantly more dangerous. I really think that in the Obama reset with Russia we should have addressed it and fixed it.
This is the tip-over point. Reports are that Russian brass told operational commanders yesterday that they had to take Kyiv by Monday. When Monday comes and the blue and yellow are still flying over Kyiv there will be a run on the banks across Russia. The banks will fail, and Russians will riot. That's how sanctions work, baby.
Putin is done. I'm almost 100% sure he'll order a tactical strike and one of his ministers will refuse. He will be removed from command.
I'm curious if we would have satellite photography of any nuclear ordinance being loaded, and what would happen at that point. NATO can't allow a nuclear strike on European soil.
M
member 1013
Guest
Vladimir “NATO stole my girlfriend” Putin
I think we’re seeing the vast majority of people asking for a peaceful resolution. Surely civilians living in and around Russia/Ukraine don’t want an escalation for obvious reasons. Problem is Putin seems to not give any fucks so how to you reason with an unreasonable man? I mean he’s a habitual line stepper. This recent dialog about a broken promise is very important as that’s been his foot in the door to invade. And this mincing of words is ridiculous. Nobody made any promise in the context of NATO expanding east outside the GDR topic. So to use some vague “assurance” as a justification for war is about as disingenuous as saying Putin isn’t invading he’s just doing a “special military operation”.
M
member 3289
Guest
Chechen or Dagestani?
Trending news: The head of Dagestan announced the death of a Russian soldier in Ukraine - The Moscow Times - Hindustan News Hub
The head of Dagestan announced the death of a Russian soldier in Ukraine - The Moscow Times Hindustan News Hub
hindustannewshub.com
Putin broke a lot of people
I wads referring to this guy:Chechen or Dagestani?
Trending news: The head of Dagestan announced the death of a Russian soldier in Ukraine - The Moscow Times - Hindustan News Hub
The head of Dagestan announced the death of a Russian soldier in Ukraine - The Moscow Times Hindustan News Hub
Who is Magomed Tushaev? Top Chechen general reportedly killed by Ukrainian forces
One of the captured Chechen fighters reportedly confirmed that General Magomed Tushaev was killed by the Ukrainian forces
meaww.com
As I said, it's not confirmed that the video I posted is where he died.
Looks like he’s have some decent take down Defense.I wads referring to this guy:
Who is Magomed Tushaev? Top Chechen general reportedly killed by Ukrainian forces
One of the captured Chechen fighters reportedly confirmed that General Magomed Tushaev was killed by the Ukrainian forces
As I said, it's not confirmed that the video I posted is where he died.
M
member 1013
Guest
Samesies!
M
member 1013
Guest
Anyone have another source?
View: https://twitter.com/nelsonqatlanta/status/1498000439043780616?s=21
View: https://twitter.com/nelsonqatlanta/status/1498000439043780616?s=21
M
member 1013
Guest
That off-centre light fixture is infuriating me. I’m literally shaking.
I’m more annoyed about that shirt tuck in without a belt. Gross.
M
member 1013
Guest
Which newz