(Eastern Post – London, October 2025)

Rockefeller legal firm Sullivan & Cromwell LLP on October 29, 2025, published another “clarification” under the cover of legal analytics: Russia Sanctions – EU Approves 19th Sanctions Package; UK Targets Lukoil and Rosneft. The document outwardly looks like a consultative notice for clients, but in reality represents a directive of American capital to European allies.

The meaning of the publication is simple: the United States, through the legal channels of the City and Brussels, consolidates the transition from classical sanctions to direct management of foreign assets.
In this lies the essence of the 19th package.

New System of Control Over Capital

Outwardly it is presented as a “clarification of terms.”

In practice — the introduction of a new system of control over capital. Amendments to EU Regulation No. 269/2014 for the first time give legal force to the concepts of owning and controlling — “ownership” and “control.” These words are now not just terms, but instruments of expropriation. Previously, companies could hide behind chains of intermediaries, Cypriot holdings, and trusts. Now it is enough to have a hint of a connection — and the asset is considered to be under the “control” of Russia.

The key in the document is the opinion of the Advocate General of the European Court, Richard de la Tour, who proposed to interpret “freezing of funds” as widely as possible. Under “freezing” is now understood not only the blocking of money, but also the deprivation of votes, the right to participate in meetings, and to receive dividends. This is a legal decapitation of property. The owner formally remains, but turns into a shadow: he does not vote, does not dispose, does not receive income. His company lives, but he in it is dead.

Thus is created a new model of ownership without an owner — useful for monopolies, which now can manage foreign enterprises without acquiring them.

Sullivan & Cromwell traditionally acts not as a law firm, but as a political headquarters of the Rockefeller group, connected with JPMorgan Chase and ExxonMobil. It was precisely this firm that at one time carried out the deals on the division of German assets after the Second World War, and now — through the structure of the EU — formalizes the redistribution of Eastern European industry. In conjunction with it act Clifford Chance, Herbert Smith Freehills, and Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer, providing synchronization between London, Brussels, and New York.

Formally, the package mentions “Lukoil” and “Rosneft.”
In reality, it is not about them, but about access to their pipeline and logistic infrastructure.

Britain introduces sanctions not for blocking, but for legal substitution: if an asset is “frozen,” a British company receives the right to operational management “in the interests of preservation.” This is a classical British scheme of “guardianship,” applied to another’s business — in other words — robbery.
The real manager is not Russia and not Britain, but a bank. Management passes into the hands of a financial trustee — usually this is HSBC Trustee or J.P. Morgan Europe Ltd. Thus a new form of ownership is built: the oil is Russian, the pipes are Russian, the control is Anglo-American.

Consider the courts.

The case C-465/24 SBK Art is a touchstone. Through it the formula is being worked out: freezing = deprivation of rights. Next C-802/24 Reibel is being prepared — where the question is decided: can arbitration in general consider disputes under sanctioned contracts.
This is not a technical discussion, but the destruction of neutral justice. If the decision is taken by the Grand Chamber, private arbitration will no longer be able to protect companies acting against the line of the EU. All disputes will automatically be subordinated to political decisions of Brussels. That is, a legal vertical of sanctions is being created, where the economy becomes a continuation of NATO’s strategy.

Behind the form of legal norms stands a system of influence. Sullivan & Cromwell itself is part of a group that includes BlackRock Legal Council, Morgan Stanley Compliance, and committees of American regulators forming the global architecture of the sanctions regime. Through them goes the unification of the concepts of property.
The phrase “to provide legal certainty to operators” in reality means — to force all companies of the world to recognize the priority of the Western interpretation of law. This is the new form of dependence.

Financial control is carried out by a trio:
— the European Central Bank ensures coordination of sanction payments and control of capital movement;
— the Bank of England conducts currency intermediation and the arrangement of “clean settlements”;
— the Federal Reserve Bank of New York holds the common center of information exchange on frozen assets.
From a technical point of view — this is the creation of a single register of the property of the East under the management of the West.

Thus, the “19th sanctions package” is not about oil and not about law. This is an operation for the seizure of managerial rights over the economy of the opponent. Russia here is only the first case.
Next will be neutral participants — Kazakhstan, Azerbaijan, Turkey, Georgia, then — China. It is enough only to conduct an “expanded interpretation of control” and to declare that a company is “affiliated” with Moscow. After that its accounts are blocked, votes at meetings are lost, and control is transferred to “temporary trustees.”

In the 1940s the Anglo-Americans seized factories with tanks and bombers. Today they no longer need armies — they have “their” capitalists sworn to the dollar. Through court rulings, the concept of “ownership” and the norms of corporate law, American bosses placed under control of their vassals in Russia and other former Soviet republics entire governments. Now they hold them like a dog on a short leash — they feed them with credits and strangle them with law. Sanctions have ceased to be a means of pressure — they have become a method of global redistribution of property. In other words — of the taking away of this property. And while the people of Europe think that they are waging war with Russia, in reality both they and the European economy are governed by the lawyers of the Rockefellers.

In the world oil trade after 2022 there arose a new system of distribution of influence. Formally — chaos, in fact — an ordered network under the supervision of the banks of the USA and Great Britain.

Triumvirate

Three trading operators — Vitol, Trafigura, Mercuria — form not competition but a closed triumvirate of the Western intermediary monopoly, controlling the greater part of the flows of oil and oil products from Russia, Kazakhstan and the Near East.

1. VITOL

Legally — a Dutch company with headquarters in Geneva.
In fact — an instrument of the old Rockefeller group. The main curator banks are JPMorgan Chase and Citigroup. The main lawyers are Sullivan & Cromwell and White & Case. The first company serves the interests of the Rockefellers, the second — of the Morgans.
The company works through the offshores Nord Axis Ltd (Cyprus) and Coral Energy DMCC (Dubai).
These structures are formally registered as independent, but in practice — are subsidiaries of the same capital. Nord Axis receives insurance from Zurich Insurance, Coral — a credit line through Emirates NBD, controlled by HSBC.
That is, the chain closes: Vitol is a client of JPMorgan, its deals are provided through the Swiss-British system, and the final beneficiaries are hidden in the trusts of the Rockefellers and of the London City.
Until 2022 Vitol controlled up to 40 % of the Russian oil export. After the introduction of sanctions the company changed only the documents: the cargo is registered as Central Asian blend, legally — Kazakh or Azerbaijani oil, in fact — the same Russian mixture with an admixture of Caspian.
The scheme is simple: freight is registered to Cypriot or Maltese companies, the vessels change flags, and the insurance is carried out by Lloyd’s through branches in Singapore and Dubai.

2. TRAFIGURA

The second branch of the same capital. It is known for partnership with “Rosneft” by the contract of 10 million tons per year. Formally Trafigura “exited” from the project “Vostok Oil,” having sold the share to the Turkish Esas Holding.
In reality Esas is a fictitious intermediary, controlled by the trusted persons of Trafigura and Rosneft Trading SA (Geneva).
The key function of Trafigura is masking of sanction flows through trade of raw materials of third countries.
Bank support: BNP Paribas, ING, Société Générale — the same structures that serviced the deliveries of Russian diesel to Europe under the guise of “Mediterranean fuel.”
All this is built on the old mechanism letter of indemnity — an insurance letter which allows to insure prohibited cargo with the formal indication of another country of origin.
Technically all is legal, financially — this is direct trade of sanctioned raw materials with altered HS codes.

3. MERCURIA

The third part of the scheme — the company which grew out of the internal split of Trafigura.
Founders — Marco Dunand and Daniel Jaeger, former top-managers of Trafigura, connected with Glencore and the Swiss banking dynasty Lombard Odier.
Official jurisdiction — Bermuda, real control — through London and Geneva.
MERCURIA took under itself the main volume of the “Kazakhstani” oil, in fact renamed Russian. The company officially reports Central Asian origin, but 60 % of the deliveries go from Novorossiysk and Primorsk.
Legal protection — through Allen & Overy (London), insurance — Swiss Re, settlement — through UBS and Credit Suisse (up to 2023).
Actual consultants — former specialists of Gazprom Neft Trading and Lukoil Europe. This is not a leakage of personnel but a structured integration, in which a part of the Russian specialists works under a Western signboard for preservation of supply channels.

4. HIDDEN BENEFICIARIES

All the trio serves one and the same group of persons.
Formal shareholders — Western funds and trusts, but inside are hidden the shares:
— Timchenko (through the Cypriot Volga Resources and the Swiss Gunvor Heritage Fund),
— Rotenberg (through the offshores Eastbridge Capital Ltd and Oliven Holding),
— Melnichenko (through Fiducia Management and a chain in Liechtenstein),
— Abramovich (through Millesime Trust, registered in Guernsey),
— Kovalchuk (through investment funds on the Isle of Man).
These shares are not registered as property but are executed in the form of “logistics fees” — fees for transportation and “consulting royalties.”
This is a system of hidden rent participation: formally they do not own, in fact they receive a stable percentage from turnover.

5. BANKS AND INSURERS

Behind the whole system stand four centers of management:
— UBS (Zurich) — settlement schemes and credit lines;
— HSBC (London–Hong Kong) — insurance and currency operations in yuans;
— J.P. Morgan (New York) — derivatives and hedging;
— Credit Suisse (before the crash) — clearing and masking of assets.
After the absorption of Credit Suisse its functions passed to UBS, having created a unified Swiss financial contour through which passes up to 70 % of all “gray” energy payments of Europe.

The Swiss call it “self-regulation.”
In essence — state-permitted non-transparency.
Not one regulator can demand disclosure of data without a diplomatic conflict.

6. CONTROL SCHEME

1. The oil leaves Novorossiysk as “Mixed Caspian blend.”
2. In Dubai a fictitious consignment note from Coral Energy is created.
3. Freight is registered by the Cypriot Vitol Shipping Ltd.
4. Payment passes through HSBC Hong Kong in yuans.
5. UBS Zurich converts yuans into francs under the guise of insurance hedge.
6. The means return to Europe as income from an “investment fund.”
7. No sanctions, no formal violations. Everything by the letter of the bourgeois law, but against its spirit.

7. ESSENCE OF THE SYSTEM

These three traders are not private business but a cover for the banking capital of the USA and Great Britain, managing energy through fictitious contracts.
They act not against sanctions but through sanctions, turning restrictions into a mechanism of monopolistic redistribution of the market.
Every new embargo gives them the right “to clear competitors” and to fix control over logistics.

And if one looks deeper, it is seen that behind Vitol stands Rockefeller Capital Management, behind Trafigura — Morgan Stanley, behind Mercuria — BlackRock Energy Transition Fund.
All of them are serviced by the lawyers Sullivan & Cromwell.
This is not a coincidence — this is a vertical.

Outwardly it seems that the matter concerns different spheres — the lawyers from Sullivan & Cromwell write about law, the traders from Vitol, Trafigura and Mercuria carry oil, the banks from Zurich and London give credits. In reality this is one and the same phenomenon: redistribution of power over energy under the cover of sanction law.

1. Legal block — Sullivan & Cromwell.
The task — to create a normative base by which it is possible to deprive an owner of control without seizing his property formally. This is the very meaning of the amendments to the EU Regulation No 269/2014.
The legal term owning and controlling has been turned into a weapon: if capital is connected with Russia or is “suspected” of affiliation — it is frozen. But under “freezing” there is now understood not blocking, but temporary transfer of management to trustees.
That is, not confiscation, but managed isolation, after which the asset begins to work in the interests of the creditor.
Thus Sullivan & Cromwell forms a lawful shell of colonial management, making sanctions not a punitive but a regulating mechanism.

2. Financial block — Vitol, Trafigura, Mercuria.
These are not violators of sanctions, but operators of the new system. They do not oppose the regulations of the EU — they are its final users.
When an asset is “frozen,” its product (oil, gas, metal) does not stop — it is simply redirected under other brands.
Vitol registers as Central Asian blend, Trafigura — as Mediterranean mix, Mercuria — as Kazakh origin. Everything is legal, everything within the amendments of the EU.
The money passes through UBS and HSBC under the guise of hedging or insurance, and the profit settles in the same structures which formed the legal norms.

3. Organizational center.
The top of the chain — the Rockefeller–JPMorgan complex, where Sullivan & Cromwell is the legal superstructure, and the banks and traders are the operational instruments.
They are united by a common principle — to own without owning.
The property remains with the “sanctioned persons,” but the management, credits, transport, trade, logistics and insurance pass under the control of the West.
Formally all is honest, in fact — it is a system of external protectorate over the economy of the East.

4. Technology of management.
The lawyers of Sullivan & Cromwell write the norms which make possible the “freezing of rights.”
The European Court (CJEU) approves precedents: freezing = loss of votes and corporate rights.
After that the banks UBS and HSBC receive the lawful right to manage the assets “in order to ensure preservation.”
The traders Vitol, Trafigura, Mercuria are included as operators supporting the movement of goods and financing.
The whole scheme acts as a single system of distributed control, where each element covers another.

5. Political meaning.
This is not an economic struggle, but the creation of a new form of external management.
Sanctions are not a restriction of trade, but a filter through which capital must pass in order to enter the orbit of the Western system.
Those who adapt through the Dubai and Swiss schemes preserve business but lose independence.
Those who do not adapt lose everything.

6. Interconnection of blocks.
Sullivan & Cromwell creates the legal possibility of seizure.
The European courts secure it by their decisions.
UBS, HSBC and J. P. Morgan realize it through credit and clearing.
Vitol, Trafigura, Mercuria provide logistics and masking.
As a result, oil, metal, grain and money go by the same routes as before, but under the control of new managers.
Russia and the CIS countries become raw material branches without property: their capital — under control, their law — under foreign interpretation, their export — under foreign insurance.

The pseudo-autocracy of Putin became the last link of this system.
The juridical form of dependence, created by the West, found in him an executor ready to preserve personal power at the price of national subordination.
He accepted the rules of the game of the Rockefellers and other masters of world capital, because he knew: the loss of their favor is equal to the loss of the throne.
Thus the autocracy, outwardly formidable and “patriotic,” turned out to be built into the Western contour of property.

Sanctions became not a blow against him, but a bridle: their mechanism gave the West the right to govern without confiscation, and to the Russian upper stratum — a pretext to justify dependence as “forced measures.”
Traders, banks, trust managers — all of them became intermediaries of this new order, where the Kremlin plays the role of a viceregency, not of a center of power.

Russia is now governed not by decrees but by contracts.
Its economic nerves are connected to the Western system through banks, raw-material chains and juridical constructions.
Oligarchs and ministers are not masters but servants, placed to see that the tribute arrives on time.

Thus the transformation of the regime was completed: from imperial pretence — to neo-colonial content.
Without occupation, without an army, but with full transfer of control over the country to those who hold in their hands its gold, oil and accounts.

Such was the true meaning of the meeting of the Russian pseudo-autocratic vassal and the American president in Alaska.
It was not a personal agreement of two men — it was a collective act of capitulation of an entire class, a caste if you wish, of owners and administrators, who for the sake of preserving their privileges voluntarily handed over the country to the enemies under external control.

They were offered a choice, clothed in the form of a deal: either they open access to the management of raw materials, currency and industrial flows — and receive the right to exist in the role of hired administrators of the world system, or they have their oxygen cut off — finance, export, legalization of wealth — and then the regime sinks into isolation, being drawn into war with Europe. They chose the first.

The decision was taken not by one man. It was a coordinated step of an entire stratum — ministers, bankers, owners of corporations, heads of state concerns and others. They understood that it was possible to retain power only at the price of subordination. They preferred the role of vassals under the protection of the Rockefellers and their banks instead of the risk of being left without access to capital.

Thus sovereignty turned into a form of servicing of foreign interests.
The country is left with a facade of statehood, but the economic nerves — accounts, logistics, contracts — are connected to the Western system.
Henceforth payment is an act of submission, and every permission for export is a form of pardon.

“The Deal in Alaska” fixed not an alliance but dependence.
The regime became a managing administration of the world financial empire.
Those who called themselves an elite chose not the defense of the country but the preservation of personal status inside the system to which they serve.
And therefore not one man, but the whole ruling class surrendered Russia — quietly, juridically, finally.
Russia as a bourgeois state did not capitulate — it simply fulfilled the law of its nature: it strengthened the Anglo-American metropolis, of which its bourgeoisie had always been a part.

As For China

As for China, in this system it is not an alternative to the West but its second hand.

It does not destroy the imperialist center — it is built into it as an industrial appendage and an instrument of raw-material processing, controlled through the dollar, logistics, and export insurance structures.

Thus the East and the West, dividing between themselves the market and the surplus value, in fact formed a single contour of world capital, where national distinctions are reduced to functions: some own, others produce, the third obey.

But if someone thinks that he has enslaved the Russian working man, having put on him a heap of loops of religious-moral prohibitions, frightening him with militant pan-Islamism, at the same time bringing discord among the Slavic peoples, and will reap fruits and “eat the elephant piece by piece,” — he is deeply and naively mistaken: the Russian working man is far from the English one, compliant, accustomed for centuries to guard the sleep of the crown at the price of the life of his children, absorbing with the mother’s milk bourgeois respectability.

The Russian worker, united with the soldier, the same worker, in the foreseeable future which can almost be calculated, will show to the “almighty managers” of Wall Street and to the “sons of heaven” what is the payment in the final account for the adventures into which the American capital and the Asiatic “wisdom of the bourgeoisie” have rushed.