Russia war on Ukraine

Could your investment decision help the tragic situation in Ukraine, being invaded by Russia in the first war on European soil since WWII?

Of course companies have to follow governments’ sanctions, but some businesses go even further and sever all ties with Russia (e.g. BP, Apple, and more).
If you own shares in a company, are you sure your investment is not contributing to the survival of Putin’s regime? Would you like the companies you have invested in to do more?
Reaching out is simple, just Google “(company name) + investor relations contact” and get in touch with the company directly.
This is an example of what I shared this morning

“Good morning,
I own 0000 XXX shares (please let me know if I need to provide proof of shareholding in order to get a response to my question below).
After the recent events in Ukraine, I’d like to understand how XXX is reacting to Russia’s invasion of a sovereign country. I understand that XXX is following the international community’s guidance and taking action based on approved sanctions, but I’d like XXX to go further and sever all ties with Russia as other companies (e.g. BP, Apple, and more) have already done.
Looking forward to hearing from you”

Alternatively, if you have a UK pension scheme, you can reach out to the service provider to understand if/how your portfolio is invested in Russia’s businesses, and what actions they are taking following these weeks tragic events.
See most common UK pension schemes contact below:
Legal & General: Adviser Contact for Workplace Pensions | Legal and General
Capita: Service to individuals | Capita
Aviva: Contact us about our pensions and retirement products - Aviva

1 Like

Unless I’m buying shares directly from a Russian company, I fail to see how me owning shares in such a company is actually putting money into it, or financing Putin’s regime.

If anything Russian companies are probably buying up their own shares cheaply, and thus if you sell your shares in these companies you could actually be making Russian oligarchs and Russian companies richer in the long run.

1 Like

I have an easier way to find this out: has the value gone down by two digits percentage points?



It’s interesting how for a very long time presence of western companies in the country was seen as “giving their people a taste of western civilization” and was generally considered to be a good thing, both in terms of revenue and as a promotion of the western way of life.

And now suddenly the best option for Russia is thought to be a complete disengagement.

I am not sure that this is the best strategy to win larger Russian population and over-through the regime.


Your viewing it wrongly…

The western view to Russia has been to drip feed, keep it attached to the West whilst letting it what its controllers wanted. (& look, Oligarchs where made and spread about)

Now that the controllers arent doing what the Western powers want, they have to see what they can do to act like theyre in control.

Did the West react to Georgia? to Crimea?
did it bollocks…

What we’re seeing now is the line in a sand. This is not about changing the ‘russian population’ anymore than it is you taking up arms to fight.
You can continue to munch your greggs sausage roll safe in your daily life.

Looking back at history, we’re taught about the ‘highlights’ - are we currently in those days that arent mentioned?
28th June 2014 was Ferd’z killing with war announced on 28 July.
Ukraine is currently 11 days in…

What we in the West are seeing; is by all accounts; is not what those in Russia are seeing… - complete disengagement may make people question their governance and force a change within (which is where I personally see where the solution is - removal of Putin by his own council ) - whether that is a long term solution or not is a separate question.

1 Like

A tragic situation in Ukraine: Yes.

The first war on European soil since WWII: No.

While I can see the benefits of stopping trade with Russia temporarily, international firms permanently pulling out could well be counterproductive as one would hope that the situation will improve over time…

Former Yugoslavia says :wave:

When Gorbachov invited Coca Cola & McDonald’s to open in the country it was part of opening up the west as part of ‘Perestroika’ with the goal of restarting the USSR economy. Anything much since the mid 1990’s has been a simple capitalism, and the same is happening now. With a devaluing rouble, inability to guarantee safety for employees, difficult managing supply chains & external perceptions all provide an easy decision for many brands.


The West quite often seen this as a solution, however, what do you replace it with???

This was the goal in Iraq and other middle Eastern countries. Remove their dictators then what is replaced is ‘terrorist’ organisation.

Removing Putin could result in someone or something much worse that we don’t even know about.

(I am no supporter of Putin but this is a situation that needs thought and consideration)



Going slightly off the subject, in Gorbachov’s memoirs he stated that it was not Perestroika that destroyed the USSR but Chernobyl. I think that it is worth watching the nuclear power plants in Ukraine as one of those could change the outcome significantly…… that said, by all accounts Tokyo should really have been been evacuated after the Daitchi NPPs went pop, and that didn’t happen.

1 Like

I’ve not read his memoirs but might get a copy I think. From the little I know I would agree - he tried to reform from inside the politburo and was making some progress but he should have in charge from 1982 instead of staling through the old guard. It feels like he was too late and Yeltsin capture the ground of young reformer.

1 Like

There was a quote hundreds of years ago about trading in tough times. Buy when you hear guns and sell on the sound of trumpets.

What we buy and sell will make little or no difference to Ukraine sadly.
My zebras shares are suspended because they sold steel to Russia that might have been used to build tanks. They also sold steel to Ukraine.

The last few weeks have seen banks climb the fall back. The same with oil and mining stocks. Then alternative energy companies have flown before falling back somewhat.

The question is what will the next spike be in?

What does everyone else think?

Tokyo is 300km from Fukushima and has 36 million people living in the area (about 30% the population of JP). Radiation levels in Tokyo were safe after the disaster. Had the disaster been worse then maybe it should have been considered but preemptively trying to evacuate that many people seems like it may not have been such a good idea.

That being said the govt made a ton of stupid decisions before and after the quake including related to evacuation of the area surrounding the plant.


There was an awful lot of highly radioactive “black slime” found around Tokyo, later found to be a novel type of Cyanobacteria if I remember correctly. It was documented on Fukushima Diary and seemed to be concentrating radionuclides. I can’t remember if they carried out gamma spectroscopy of it now but do remember that decay levels in mSieverts were way above safe levels. Of course what is collected by citizen scientists is often at odds with the official line and that is often required to keep populations in place and doing what they are supposed to be doing.

Yes, lots of mistakes and now having lived through the Covid response by government I understand that what is in the public benefit is not always as simple as looking after the immediate health needs of individuals. For the greater good and all that! :angel:

1 Like

Rumoured use of chemical weapons which if confirmed could force Nato into the conflict.

1 Like

I’m not suggesting they have. But logic isn’t necessarily something to be attributed to the invasion. They had no reason to invaded, they lied to their own citizens around why and who was there, they’ve been raping, kidnapping and murdering civilians, they’ve been digging up the ground of the most radioactive site on the planet and sitting in it.

At this point using chemical weapons would be just another day for the Russian army. And it’s not the first time they’ve used chemical weapons on foreign soil. They did in the UK, and no one cared, so what’s stopping them now?


I wonder IF NATO have to get involved IF there are internal conversations with the newer Eastern European members to provide the boots on the ground for peace keeping while the western members provide logistics and air support.

Would also be interesting to see what messaging is being given by NATO give Finland & Sweden. Join now or wait until after this is over? Join now and deploy troops tomorrow?

Purely from a geopolitical angle this is fascinating.

Putin reminding the west to keep out of the conflict while moving missiles towards Finland are rumoured to be happening.
Finland and Sweden are considering asking for Nato membership.


Russian don’t want Finland and Sweden joining Nato.

1 Like

The future is getting grimer every day.