SERGEI METLEV ⟩ Flies are caught with a revolver, a noisy bear gets honey. What a faux pas, France!

In Usmanov's case, it was a surprising demand by the French state. In Fridman's case, there was clearly pressure from the publicly pro-Russian Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico and Luxembourg (the latter was intimidated by Fridman's 16-billion euro lawsuit over his frozen assets).

Weak, self-interested, and morally confused governments in Luxembourg and Slovakia behave predictably. But France, a great nuclear power, the leader of European unity and support for Ukraine—why?

In July, France expelled a trivial Kremlin-minded propagandist, Xenia Fedorova, from the country, who operated on television and radio channels. The government accused her of conducting disinformation campaigns and even threatening public order.

Now, however, at Paris's request, Alisher Usmanov, a powerful Russian oligarch close to Putin, has been freed from EU sanctions. Usmanov has significant valuable assets in Europe, particularly in France and Britain.

What a scandal!

It turned out that France's demand was particularly tough and could have turned the entire sanctions policy upside down. This has been linked to the fate of two French citizens detained in Azerbaijan (spies?), one of whom was freed today. Namely, the authorities there had previously lobbied for Usmanov's removal from the sanctions list. It appears the oligarch is making deals with them.

Paris justified its behavior with allegedly vague state security considerations.

In return, Macron's government, as well as Luxembourg and Slovakia, supported setting a three-year validity period for sanctions instead of the previous six months, which previously allowed continuous trading over them and ultimately weakened the sanctions regime. From the Élysée, this was very powerful extortion in a very difficult situation.

Although the three-year validity is one step forward, the removal of sanctions on Usmanov and Fridman is two steps back. In Usmanov's case, for example, this is not simply a billionaire, but a man connected to various media and information technology businesses and who has developed his cooperation networks across Europe. He has been active in sports and culture, supporting various fields and projects. One oligarch in Russia is like a small rich principality.

Now he can use all of this again unimpeded, continue corrupt schemes, and perhaps even indirectly interfere in some country's internal affairs. In the media, Usmanov has been called Putin's business manager.

The question: if the Baltic states had pressed France to the limit on this issue, would the French government really have been willing to become the main culprit in the complete collapse of EU sanctions because of Usmanov?

Did the Baltic states turn out to be too fainthearted, or was there really no other way out than a cynical deal in a situation where sanctions had to be extended somehow quickly? In total, they are set against approximately 3,000 natural and legal persons with connections to Russian aggression.

However, a precedent has been set: if you take someone important hostage and pressure them, press the right buttons, then even Europe's great powers are willing to make concessions on very important issues related to limiting Russia's ability to wage war and its influence. Meanwhile, there is no end in sight to the war in Ukraine and Russia is bombing with increasing brutality.

Seeing such an approach, I can no longer be particularly afraid of Marine Le Pen—previously avoiding criticism before the war—becoming president for the sake of our region's interests. Macron is damaging those interests anyway, pursuing some situational, confused goal.