Source · Select Committees · Foreign Affairs Committee
Recommendation 20
20
Accepted
Paragraph: 61
Committee compiles public Wagner-linked names to aid government understanding of the network.
Conclusion
In the public interest, we have compiled Wagner-linked names that are already a matter of public record, as identified via our commissioned open-source research (see Appendix 2). In doing so, we hope to challenge the mystique that the Wagner Network cultivated in many countries, make it as difficult as possible for it to operate, create a deterrent effect, and enable the Government to improve its apparently limited understanding of the network.
Government Response Summary
The government acknowledges the committee's compilation of Wagner-linked names, stating they already use sanctions policy to deter and disrupt malign Wagner activity, having designated the Wagner Group in its entirety and recently sanctioned 13 additional individuals and businesses.
Paragraph Reference:
61
Government Response
Accepted
HM Government
Accepted
Partially agree. 12. The Wagner Group was designated in its entirety under the Russia (Sanctions) (EU Exit) Regulations 2019 in March 2022. Yevgeny Prigozhin, its then leader, was designated under The Libya (Sanctions) (EU Exit) Regulations 2020 in December 2020. 13. We continue to use sanctions policy to deter and disrupt malign Wagner activity. On 20 July, the UK designated 13 individuals and businesses involved with the Wagner Group in Mali, Central African Republic (CAR) and Sudan. They include Konstantin Pikalov, Prigozhin’s ‘right hand man’, as well as Al-Solag mining, a Wagner front company not designated by the EU or US. The designations limit their financial freedom by preventing UK citizens, companies and banks from dealing with them, alongside freezing any assets held in the UK, and imposing travel bans on the individuals. 14. The Government’s ability to sanction individuals and entities depends on being able to build individual cases in line with the statutory requirements of the relevant geographic or thematic sanctions regime. These may differ from the grounds available to the United States and the European Union. Each country’s sanctions regimes are different, and each country uses them for different purposes and has different approaches in applying sanctions. For example, the UK relies on ‘ownership and control’ provisions, which means that subsidiaries are not designated separately. 15. The Government welcomes the analysis provided in Appendices 1 and 2 of the FAC’s report and will consider this in detail when considering further action.