Why France Joined Slovakia in Seeking Alisher Usmanov’s Removal From EU Sanctions

Quick Answer

• France and Slovakia reached the same position on Alisher Usmanov, but apparently for different reasons.
• Slovakia has repeatedly used EU sanctions renewals to demand the removal of Usmanov and Mikhail Fridman.
• France initially presented Usmanov’s removal as a political compromise that could secure Slovakia’s support for renewing the wider sanctions regime.
• French diplomatic sources later said Paris had a separate national-security interest and wanted to respond to requests from international partners.
• Reporting by the Financial Times linked that French interest to efforts to secure the release of French nationals detained in Azerbaijan.

France's decision to join Slovakia in seeking the removal of Alisher Usmanov from the European Union's Russia sanctions list looked surprising because Paris has otherwise remained one of the stronger European supporters of sanctions pressure on Moscow.

The apparent contradiction becomes easier to understand once the two countries' motives are separated. Slovakia had been pressing for Usmanov's delisting for months. France appears to have arrived at the same demand later, partly as a way to unblock sanctions negotiations and, according to subsequent reporting, partly because of a separate French national-security interest.

So this was not necessarily a new French judgment that the sanctions against Usmanov were fundamentally wrong. It was a case in which EU unanimity rules, bilateral diplomacy and national interests collided inside the sanctions process.

1. Slovakia Had Been Pushing for Usmanov’s Delisting for Months

Slovakia's position was not new. Bratislava had repeatedly sought the removal of Alisher Usmanov and Mikhail Fridman from the EU sanctions list and used renewal negotiations as leverage.

EU sanctions against individuals connected to Russia's war in Ukraine require unanimous agreement among member states to be renewed. That gives every national government considerable bargaining power when the renewal deadline approaches.

Slovakia had already used that leverage in earlier negotiations. In March 2026, Bratislava pushed for Usmanov and Fridman to be removed before eventually allowing the sanctions renewal to proceed.

In September, Slovakia again opposed a straightforward renewal. It sought the removal of both businessmen and also resisted moving individual sanctions from six-month renewals to a proposed 12-month cycle.

That meant the rest of the EU faced an uncomfortable choice: negotiate over individual names or risk allowing a much broader sanctions regime to lapse.

2. France Initially Treated Usmanov as a Possible Compromise

Early reporting suggested Paris saw Usmanov's removal as the price of obtaining Slovakia's agreement to preserve the broader EU sanctions package.

Euronews reported that France presented the removal of Usmanov as a political compromise. The apparent calculation was that Slovakia might refuse to abandon both of its delisting demands again, as it had done during the previous sanctions renewal.

From that perspective, France was not necessarily endorsing Bratislava's broader approach toward Russian oligarch sanctions. It was attempting to solve a unanimity problem.

The logic is politically uncomfortable but easy to understand. If one member state can block sanctions affecting thousands of individuals and entities, sacrificing one contested listing may appear preferable to losing the entire renewal.

Other EU governments were reportedly frustrated by the idea because conceding on a high-profile oligarch could encourage additional states to attach national demands to future sanctions renewals.

3. France Later Cited a Separate National-Security Interest

French diplomatic sources later indicated that Paris had its own reason for wanting Usmanov delisted, describing it as a national-security matter connected to requests from international partners.

French diplomats publicly insisted that France remained strongly committed to increasing pressure on Russia and supporting Ukraine. At the same time, they acknowledged what they described as a separate national-security issue involving Usmanov.

One French diplomatic explanation said Paris wanted to respond positively to international partners who had approached France concerning Usmanov. The French side did not initially disclose the full details publicly.

Subsequent Financial Times reporting supplied more of that missing context. It reported that France was seeking sanctions relief for Usmanov in connection with efforts to secure the release of several French nationals detained in Azerbaijan.

If that account is correct, France's motivation was considerably more specific than general economic sympathy toward Usmanov. Delisting became a bargaining instrument in a separate diplomatic problem involving French citizens.

4. Why Usmanov Is Such a Controversial Person to Use as a Bargaining Chip

Usmanov is not a marginal sanctions case. The EU sanctioned him after Russia's full-scale invasion and has described him as a leading businessman with close ties to Vladimir Putin and significant interests in sectors generating revenue for the Russian government.

The EU's sanctions rationale has cited Usmanov's business interests in areas including metals, mining, telecommunications and technology, as well as what the Council describes as his close ties to the Russian leadership.

Usmanov has contested those allegations and challenged his continued listing before the EU courts. In September 2025, the EU General Court rejected his action seeking annulment of measures maintaining him on the sanctions list.

That legal history makes the French request especially sensitive. Paris was not simply proposing to remove someone whose listing had quietly collapsed under judicial scrutiny. The EU courts had upheld the Council's decision to keep him sanctioned.

For countries favoring maximum pressure on Russia, removing him for diplomatic bargaining reasons risks weakening the distinction between sanctions imposed for policy reasons and sanctions available for negotiation over unrelated disputes.

5. The Dispute Exposes a Structural Weakness in EU Sanctions Policy

The Usmanov dispute shows how the EU's unanimity requirement can transform individual sanctions listings into bargaining chips for unrelated national priorities.

EU foreign-policy sanctions are particularly vulnerable to national bargaining because renewals require unanimous approval. A government does not need majority support for its objection. It merely needs to refuse consent.

That structure gives small and large states alike substantial leverage. Slovakia could make two individual delistings part of negotiations over thousands of Russia-related sanctions. France could then decide that conceding on one individual served both the wider sanctions package and a separate diplomatic interest.

The obvious danger is precedent. Once sanctions relief becomes openly exchangeable for concessions in unrelated disputes, every renewal can become an auction of national priorities. Foreign policy by hostage negotiation is not exactly the institutional elegance Brussels brochures tend to advertise.

The counterargument is that sanctions are instruments of foreign policy rather than permanent criminal sentences. Governments impose them to change behavior and can legitimately trade sanctions relief when doing so advances broader strategic objectives.

Key Takeaways at a Glance

• Slovakia had repeatedly demanded that Alisher Usmanov and Mikhail Fridman be removed from EU sanctions.
• France initially appeared to support Usmanov's delisting as a compromise capable of preserving the wider sanctions renewal.
• French diplomats later cited a separate national-security interest and requests from international partners.
• Financial Times reporting linked the French position to efforts involving French nationals detained in Azerbaijan.
• The dispute illustrates how the EU unanimity rule allows individual sanctions cases to become leverage in wider diplomatic negotiations.

Actor	Position	Apparent Motivation
Slovakia	Remove Usmanov and Fridman	Long-running national demand tied to sanctions-renewal negotiations.
France	Remove Usmanov	Compromise with Slovakia plus a separate reported national-security interest.
Other EU states	Mostly resist delisting	Protect sanctions pressure and avoid creating a bargaining precedent.
Usmanov	Challenges EU sanctions	Rejects the basis for continued restrictive measures against him.

France and Slovakia Arrived at the Same Demand by Different Routes

The simplest explanation is not that France suddenly adopted Slovakia's broader view of Russian sanctions. Slovakia had its own longstanding campaign to remove Usmanov and Fridman. France joined only on Usmanov and continued to say that it supported maintaining pressure on Russia.

Paris appears to have seen Usmanov's delisting first as a possible compromise capable of keeping the wider EU sanctions regime intact. Later disclosures indicated that France also had its own national-security and diplomatic reasons for seeking the change.

The broader significance is therefore bigger than one oligarch. The episode demonstrates how sanctions designed collectively at EU level can become entangled with bilateral diplomacy whenever all 27 governments retain a veto over renewal.

Sources

Euronews • France Joins Slovakia in Asking to Delist Russian Oligarch Usmanov

Financial Times • France Pushes to Lift EU Sanctions on Alisher Usmanov

Ukrainska Pravda • France Explains Why It Wants EU Sanctions on Usmanov Lifted

Court of Justice of the European Union • Usmanov v Council, Case T-1117/23