by A proposal to divert Roman Abramovich’s £2.34 billion Chelsea sale fund to Israel rather than Ukraine has been mooted following the Hamas terror attack, Telegraph Sport can reveal.
It is understood that the UK rejected the high-level proposal, with ministers believing that it was planned by the approved oligarch to avoid criticism in Russia.
Abramovich first pledged proceeds to “all victims of the Ukrainian war” after putting Chelsea up for sale on March 2 last year, eight days before sanctions were imposed over alleged links to Vladimir Putin.
However, with the huge fund not involved in a frozen account amid UK-European demands to spend it solely within Ukraine’s borders, alternative proposals for its assets have been raised privately.
Sources close to the talks offer conflicting views on whether Abramovich himself or the country where he was granted citizenship in 2018 raised the idea of spending the money on Israel.
An insider with close knowledge of the UK’s position says that a possible disapproval in Moscow explains why the fund remains unrestricted in a frozen bank account in London after 18 months. “Abramovich doesn’t want the opprobrium in Russia to spend in Ukraine,” the insider said of the current impasse. In addition to raising the prospect that the money would be used for humanitarian causes in Israel after October 7, Abramovich also demanded the option table to help the victims of the February earthquake in Turkey, where there were recent ties by Abramovich too.
Other sources say there were discussions under Israeli leadership, but claim Abramovich had no knowledge. “There are no such formal requests,” said another figure close to the talks.
That person, speaking on condition of anonymity, said: “I know that Israelis have asked the United Kingdom during state visits, because the Romanian is such a big donor in Israel, would they consider giving a license to any assets of his, not just Chelsea. , to donate to rebuilding in Israel.”
The funds would have been earmarked for spending on humanitarian causes in southern Israel. “My understanding is that the UK Government told Israel no business,” the source said.
Before it was approved last year, Abramovich’s relationship with Israel was growing closer. One project that was canceled before Russia’s war on Ukraine was to finance a forest in Southern Israel dedicated to Lithuanian Jews who were victims of the Holocaust.
The reports in Lithuania are conflicting but it is known that Abramovich’s parents and relatives are from the country but were exiled to Siberia during the Soviet occupation in 1941.
The largest single humanitarian donation in history
The sudden proposal to use Chelsea funds for reasons unrelated to Ukraine shows how far the government is still from signing the largest single humanitarian donation in history.
Despite the club being sold entirely under UK jurisdiction, ministers signed a unilateral declaration in May with the European Commission saying the money would be spent “exclusively” within Ukraine. The move shocked the humanitarian sector when Mike Penrose, the former chief executive of Unicef UK, was brought in to create an independent foundation on the basis that it would be devoted to “Ukraine and its consequences”.
Penrose has made legal commitments to ensure the money cannot fall back into Abramovich’s hands. The Government will have board input and Jan Egeland, a senior diplomat from Norway who once advised Kofi Annan at the United Nations, has joined as interim chairman.
Lord Cameron’s recent appointment as Foreign Secretary, however, has led to renewed efforts to release the funds in line with Penrose’s original plan. “The unilateral declaration can be withdrawn at any time,” Penrose explained. “This is a former Prime Minister who increased Britain’s position in terms of humanitarian work. Because of its past partnerships, Britain is probably the leading humanitarian nation on the planet. I look forward to speaking with him when he returns from his first tour, and I am hopeful that he will have the vision to make this work.”
That call was backed by James Deneslow, head of conflict team at Save the Children, who told Telegraph Sport: “With a new Foreign Secretary in place, we will continue to advocate for this massive amount of approved funding to be used to support the humanitarian impact the war in Ukraine.
“As we have seen, the funds must be released and should be made available to all victims of the war in Ukraine – be it within the geographical borders of Ukraine, supporting Ukrainian refugees in Europe or funding food programs in East Africa, where there is food insecurity. made worse by the war.”
The license granted by the UK government which sets out the next step in this process will expire on 30 November. This has been extended by mutual agreement in the past and is all but certain to be extended again.
Penrose says he has yet to deal directly with Cameron since he became Foreign Secretary, but a meeting will be arranged in the coming weeks.
The difference of opinion regarding the foundation’s objectives stems back to before the sale of Chelsea to a consortium led by American businessman Todd Boehly was completed on May 30 last year. Sources close to the process said Abramovich had signed a deed of commitment to the Government stating that the charity would be for “Ukraine and the consequences of Ukraine”.
However, in a unilateral declaration, the Government said last year: “The Treasury will only issue a license ensuring that such proceeds are used for humanitarian purposes only in Ukraine.” Saleh Saeed, from the Disaster Emergency Committee, also supported Penrose’s position that the humanitarian need extends beyond Ukraine’s borders.
Kate Cavalier, 44, who has hosted a Ukrainian family for 15 months in her home in England, also appealed to Cameron to intervene.
The Government rejects any suggestion it is sitting on the money, and multiple sources have told Telegraph Sport they believe it was agreed from the start to only spend the money inside Ukraine. An insider with knowledge of talks said they thought Cameron was unlikely to take a new Government position, arguing that “this money was always meant for Ukraine”.
