My suspicions about Mr Fridman’s "crisis management" campaign against the nationalisation of Kyivstar have proved correct 

A few days ago, I wrote about a strange phone call. A woman introduced herself as Oleksandra from "Global Consult" and pressed me at length: how would the nationalisation of the Russian stake in Kyivstar affect the investment climate, could it trigger lawsuits, and who exactly was pushing the issue? At the time, I suspected that selected fragments of our conversation would be used to defend Mr Fridman. I encounter situations like this from time to time.

And now the stories have appeared, with the lies starting right in the headlines: supposedly, I "admitted" that nationalisation would damage the investment climate and that Ukraine would face litigation. In fact, the word "admitted" appears four times in the article, which tells you everything you need to know about this particular pathology.

Then certain bloggers joined in, attacking my "position" as distorted by the media, repeating precisely the same talking points: seizing the Russian stake in Kyivstar is supposedly ill-timed, and we "shouldn’t rock the boat". We should apparently be worrying about the investment climate and not exposing the country to the risk of international arbitration.

As far as I can see, Mr Fridman must have completely lost his mind if he is commissioning things like this. The calibre of the people devising and executing this farce is truly impressive. What are they counting on? That I will be too frightened to speak out? No, gentlemen. Don’t count on it.

Let me state my position unequivocally once again – the same position I expressed to "Oleksandra" during our conversation.

We must cut off all direct and indirect ties with Russian business for the next several decades. This applies both to trade and, even more importantly, to investment in Ukraine. A Russian presence in any Ukrainian company, however small – let alone in a national telecommunications operator – is a direct threat to national security. Every Russian businessman is an instrument of Kremlin influence. Full stop.

Yes, we must be prepared for international lawsuits. But Ukraine must use lawful means to eliminate the Russian ownership interest in Kyivstar.

I do not know who was behind the phone call and the subsequent media attacks. I hope Kyivstar’s Ukrainian management had nothing to do with this disgrace.

As for the investors who buy and hold shares in Kyivstar Group listed on Nasdaq, I have a separate observation. Perhaps they do not care that Fridman’s Alfa Group finances the production of weapons used to kill Ukrainians, as well as Russian state telecommunications services used by the occupying forces and intelligence agencies. But since we are talking about protecting investors’ rights, take a look at how Alfa makes its money in Russia itself. At your expense, dear Western investors.

Here is a recent development: Alfa-Bank, A1 and Alfa Capital have set up a fund that has already raised money and begun investing. Among its priorities are businesses left behind by Western companies after their withdrawal from Russia. And Moscow has made the exit terms for companies from "unfriendly" countries perfectly clear: sell your assets at a discount of at least 60% from their appraised value, and pay a contribution to the Russian budget of no less than another 35% of that amount. So much for a "voluntary" sale – and for Mikhail Fridman, the "saviour".

So the next time someone tries to convince you that Ukraine’s investment climate depends on leaving Mr Fridman’s interests in Kyivstar untouched, remember what that climate looks like for a Western owner when Alfa is sitting on the other side of the table. And just live with that knowledge.