Western sanctions pushes Russian philanthropy closer into Kremlin arms

Shafi Musaddique

Two years on since Russia launched a full-scale invasion of Ukraine, President Vladimir Putin’s grip has tightened across society. The recent death of opposition leader Alexei Navalny, held in an Arctic prison camp, is a timely reminder of suppression at large. For Russian philanthropy, these are testing times.

Foundations and NGOs operate under extremely authoritarian conditions, much worse than before the Ukraine War. ‘Anything ‘wrong’ people say can be used against them and endanger their safety,’ warns a Russian practitioner in philanthropy, formerly connected to a large Russian foundation. They speak to Alliance on the condition of anonymity, for fear of endangering the safety of ex-colleagues and family in Russia.  

Such fear is palpable in the voices and communication Alliance receives. Those who do openly speak live abroad for relative safety, beyond the reach of authorities.  

Russian dissident, Alexei Navalny, died mid-February

Russian dissident, Alexei Navalny, died mid-February

Philanthropic organisations are under severe pressure from authorities because of a foreign agent law, branding those who work internationally as traitors, spies or criminals. Since the outbreak of the Ukraine war, the Russian state has ramped its persecution of those working with Europeans and Americans. Every Friday, the Kremlin announces a new foreign agent it deems antithetical to its values.   

For philanthropists, its cagey work in a climate where ‘some leaders and staff of non-profit organizations have been forced to remain silent to avoid endangering themselves and their non-profit organizations’, disrupting the activities of human rights organizations in, warns the anonymous philanthropic practitioner.  

‘Moreover, a recent law has been enacted allowing for the confiscation of assets for disseminating knowingly false information about the Russian army and for calls to undertake actions against the country’s security. This applies to individuals both within Russia and those who have left the country.’ 

‘Banking sanctions have altered how payments flow to Russia, with donations unable to be made from abroad – with Russia disconnected from the SWIFT banking system since its invasion of Ukraine. It has meant private donations have decreased, not just because many wealthy Russian donors have left Russia, but that they also cannot donate from abroad’

The withdrawal of Western philanthropic players has hit the finances of Russian philanthropy hard since the onset of the Ukraine War. Both Western withdrawal and Putin’s foreign agents’ crackdown has had a double-edged impact, pushing some to the brink. 

Alliance understands that CAF Russia was hit from both sides. It was declared a ‘foreign agent’ by Russia after the Ukraine invasion. Meanwhile, CAF in the UK – the umbrella body for CAFs global network – terminated connections with CAF Russia. Bereft of connections, CAF Russia is now in the process of winding down its operation. 

The single biggest donor to Russian charities since 2022 has been the government. A presidential grants fund is widely available, but with strings attached – no criticism and follow an agenda shaped, indirectly, from the top.  

‘It’s the single most important funding source for the majority of the Russian philanthropic sector,’ says Miroslav*, an insider within the Russian community philanthropy. 

Hit by Western sanctions, philanthropy buckled and, according to some estimates, decreased by up to 90 per cent at the start of the war.  

Banking sanctions have altered how payments flow to Russia, with donations unable to be made from abroad – with Russia disconnected from the SWIFT banking system since its invasion of Ukraine. It has meant private donations have decreased, not just because many wealthy Russian donors have left Russia, but that they also cannot donate from abroad. Or, as the practitioner insider tells Alliance, they ‘do not want to jeopardise non-profit organizations (as they would then receive foreign funding)’. 

Russia’s limited private grantmaking poses problems. Some corporate funding is available, but the big hit has been international companies no longer providing funds, ‘which is a direct consequence of the war and sanctions,’ says Miroslav. Bereft of corporate backing, ‘it’s mostly individual giving from the general public that keeps the sector going.’ 

Throughout 2022, there was a big drop in contributions from the public.  

Donations recovered in 2023, with the volume of giving back to pre-war levels, despite the collapse of giving channels such as Facebook and Instagram which applied restrictions. 

Russia’s position in the CAF World Giving Index has sharply declined, as a result, from 30th place in 2022 to 102nd place in the 2023 index. 

Amidst such a backdrop, some Russian foundations reportedly close to Putin have thrived.  

‘Successful and huge foundations, that support social causes such as child reparations, have a good practice of receiving private donations from corporations and businessmen, like Vladimir Potanin (head of the Potanin Foundation). The amount he received, in return for support, was in the billions of rubles,’ says Sergey Lukashevskiy, editor in chief of Radio Sakharov, part of the independent investigative German-based publisher Correctiv known for its recent expose of the German far-right.

‘For Boris Zimin, born into the old Soviet Union, philanthropy is a form of dissent. Zimin openly funded Alexei Navalny, the fierce political opponent to Putin, announced dead by the Kremlin last week. His Zimin Foundation funds projects aimed at sowing the seeds of ‘critical thinking’ both inside and outside Russia.’  

But all this financing means you cannot be critical of authorities,’ he adds. 

Lukashevskiy believes philanthropic freedom has worsened since the annexation of Crimea in 2014. The outspoken critic says he cannot return to his homeland. A climate of fear since Crimea plunged the confidence of private donors years before the full-scale invasion. 

‘The sanctions became a problem for a small number of NGOs receiving money from abroad. Now they need to establish entities in Armenia or Kazakhstan which have as close to normal relations as possible with Russian Federation,’ he says.  

For Boris Zimin, born into the old Soviet Union, philanthropy is a form of dissent. Zimin openly funded Alexei Navalny, the fierce political opponent to Putin, announced dead by the Kremlin last week. His Zimin Foundation funds projects aimed at sowing the seeds of ‘critical thinking’ both inside and outside Russia.  

‘As citizens of Russia, we bear a responsibility of what happens [to Ukrainians],’ Zimins tells Alliance from an undisclosed location. Zimin’s foundation helps fund Ukrainian education projects, in the Ukrainian language, and funds progressive media such as Re;Russia housing dissident voices, self-described as pushing back ‘against the growing insularity of the state’. Zimin says that though Ukrainians may view him as the enemy’, because of his Russian passport, he is undeterred. For Zimin, philanthropy is a means of toppling Putin. 

‘I see quite a lot of people dedicating their efforts and life for public benefit. Not just rich people like me, but many people dedicating their lives to invest in a better life in Russia and Europe,’ he says. 

*name changed for protection and anonymity of source 

 Shafi Musaddique is the news editor at Alliance 


Comments (2)

Nick Deychakiwsky

The headline is misleading. It implies cause and effect, that the fault of Russian philanthropy doing more of the Kremlin’s bidding lies with Western sanctions. That is just plain wrong -- it is the Kremlin which causes Russian philanthropy to do more of the Kremlin's bidding, not Western sanctions. "Undesirable organizations" and "foreign agents" were tools that preceded any sanctions. Granted, Western sanctions may have served to additionally reduce the flow of outside money coming to Russian nonprofits, but that should not be equated to Russian philanthropy. The latter is properly defined as philanthropy (giving of time, talent, treasure) by Russians. That is not the same as money coming to Russian NGOs (especially money from outside of Russia that probably more than not was from non-Russians).


info37

The author collects plenty of valid arguments on how the Russian government reduces constantly the playground for NGOs and foundations in Russia. For many years now (also before the war in Ukraine) the work of independent and critical actors was made impossible in Putin’s Russia. So why is the title offering this perspective that the “Western sanctions are pushing Russian philanthropy closer into Kremlin arms”? There is no free philanthropy in Russia as there are no free civil society organizations and no critical media in Russia.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *



 
Next Analysis to read

The realities of social movement legitimacy and resourcing

Rachael Mwikali Mueni