Author: Volodymyr Soniuk, journalist, political analyst (Ukraine)
Robert Amsterdam presents himself as a “human rights defender”. The international lawyer, who has law firms with offices in London and Washington, takes on the defense of clients who are criminally persecuted by a number of countries, and in his own words defends “freedom of religion”. In recent years, however, a recurring pattern has emerged in this activity. Twice - first in Ukraine, and then in Armenia - attorney Amsterdam represented a billionaire against whom criminal proceedings are underway, and the interests of both coincide in certain aspects with Russian positions. In both cases, he takes a similar approach to his client's case: the dispute over seized funds, assets and ties to Moscow is presented as a story of "persecution of Christians".
This strategy has a completely practical goal - to achieve the return of confiscated assets to the client. But the public narrative of the campaigns is usually not focused on the assets themselves, but on religion: thus, a property dispute involving a wealthy person acquires a language through which it can be heard in Washington and Brussels. According to critics of this line, defending a church presented as persecuted can also be used to weaken Western support for the country in which the dispute is being fought. This includes US military aid to Ukraine and Armenia's rapprochement with the European Union (EU).
Ukraine: the church - in the foreground, the oligarch - in the shadows
The first case is that of Vadim Novinsky - a Ukrainian billionaire and protodeacon of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church (UOC) of the Moscow Patriarchate of the Russian Orthodox Church (ROC). Novinsky amassed his fortune in the oil trade in St. Petersburg in the 1990s - according to The Washington Post, in partnership with a person close to the President of the Russian Federation Vladimir Putin. Later, he transferred his business to Ukraine, became one of the main secular patrons of the UOC and was repeatedly photographed alongside Russian Patriarch Kirill.
By August 2023, when he hired the firm of attorney Amsterdam, Novinsky is already under sanctions by the Ukrainian National Security and Defense Council and is wanted on a treason case - according to the Ukrainian authorities, he was the “curator of the Russian Orthodox Church in Ukraine”. Assets worth over 10 billion hryvnias have been confiscated. At the same time, his family business in the Russian-occupied Crimean Autonomous Republic of Ukraine, according to Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, continued to “function and supply the Russian army”.
Initially, Amsterdam was leading Novinsky's personal case - challenging the sanctions and demanding the return of his confiscated property. Only two months later, however, the firm announced that it was no longer representing the oligarch himself, but the church itself. Thus, according to the description of the campaign, a change in focus took place: the “persecuted” church, while the billionaire who financed its defense remained in the background.
A set of tools was then developed, which two years later would be used in a similar way in Armenia. A separate campaign website was created - savetheuoc.com, and the company did not hide its involvement: its own address was indicated in the contact section. Two “white papers“ were also published - a term used for government reports presented as an impartial analysis of a given issue and usually containing references to international law and recommendations. The peculiarity of this format is precisely its apparent impartiality: the document can look like an independent expert opinion, although it was prepared and financed by a party to the dispute, with its conclusions predetermined. The white papers were published in the appropriate section of the Amsterdam company's website.
The campaign then reached American institutions. The firm is filing a petition with the US Commission on International Religious Freedom, requesting that Ukraine be included in the list of countries where “religious freedom is under particular threat”. On Capitol Hill, lobbyists are working for the cause – according to The Washington Post, this is the firm Nelson Mullins, together with former Congressman Ron Klink, as well as law professor William Burke-White, who registered as a foreign agent in the interests of the UOC and received, according to the media, fees of $1,400 per hour.
According to three US Congressional staffers, the message they sent to lawmakers was to demand that future military aid to Ukraine be made “dependent on the fate of the church.” It is the religious framework that is necessary for such an argument – a dispute over church communities and property, which would otherwise seem distant to the American public, becomes an argument against providing weapons to a country at war.
All this time, Amsterdam described his work for the church as charitable and his services as free. In September 2024, however, in an interview with The Washington Post, he admitted that part of the costs “were borne by Novinsky,” refusing to specify who financed the rest.
Armenia: Same Scheme, Different Church
Two years later, Amsterdam arrived in Yerevan – this time with Samvel Karapetyan, an Armenian-Russian billionaire from the Russian Forbes magazine ranking, who appeared in the so-called “Kremlin report“ of the US Treasury Department in 2018 and a long-time partner of “Gazprom“.
His political party “Strong Armenia“ has been described in a number of journalistic investigations – from the Reuters agency to the Swedish Blankspot – as a “potential tool of Moscow” in the 2026 parliamentary elections. Samvel Karapetyan was arrested on charges of public calls for seizing power in Armenia. After his arrest, the state announced the nationalization of his energy networks – the company that supplies electricity to the entire country – the motive given by the authorities is the existence of “serious irregularities in the activity“.
Then the construction is repeated – with the same details and in the same sequence. The client is of the same type: a billionaire with Russian connections; the face of the campaign is a “persecuted“ church. The website freekarapetyan.com is created, with Amsterdam's law firm again listed in the contacts, and two “white papers“ have also been published.
One small screen, one narrative
Another tool used in both campaigns is the television airwaves. Within two years, Amsterdam and its clients have appeared on Tucker Carlson's show at least five times – American TV host, blogger and podcaster, whose comments are often described as favorable to Moscow's positions.
According to the available recordings, the conversations follow a similar line: a distant country, financed with American funds, "persecuted" Christians. Such an approach causes concern among both lawmakers and religious organizations. According to The Washington Post (WP), concerns have been expressed in the US Congress about the extent to which Amsterdam's campaign has influenced sentiment among the Republican electorate, especially after his appearances on Tucker Carlson's show. The Orthodox advocacy organization OPAC previously publicly accused Carlson of "spreading Russian propaganda" related to allegations of "the so-called persecution of Christians in Ukraine."
According to the authors of the material, these concerns are not without foundation. WP compares Amsterdam's arguments with internal documents of Russian political technologists from 2023, obtained as part of a set of documents acquired by European intelligence agencies. According to the publication, these materials recommend that Ukraine "be presented as a state that has become an anti-Christian society". And the entourage of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky - as acting "like the Nazis".
The formulations used by Amsterdam himself - for example, the claim that such events have not happened "since the time of the Nazis", as well as their definition as a "full-scale crime against humanity" - according to WP fit into a similar framework.
On the other side
Two decades ago, Robert Amsterdam's name was associated with an almost opposite role. He was the lawyer for billionaire and one of the current leaders of the Russian opposition, Mikhail Khodorkovsky. He had a reputation as a lawyer who was detained in Moscow, expelled from Russia and declared persona non grata after defending the oligarch against whom the Kremlin was prosecuting him.
At the time, Amsterdam represented a man who was being persecuted by the Russian state. His reputation as a Kremlin critic - an awkward and principled lawyer - became part of his professional reputational capital.
Today, this capital, according to the authors of the material, is directed in a different direction. Amsterdam's clients are billionaires with connections in Moscow. Accordingly, the campaigns he leads are directed against countries that oppose Russia. And the theses he presents from the podium of one of the most influential American shows critical of Ukraine, in certain cases coincide with those described as part of Russian propaganda supports.
The man who once gained fame for defending a world-famous Kremlin victim such as Mikhail Khodorkovsky can hardly be suspected of serving Russian interests now. And this is precisely what, according to the authors, may be part of the “capital” of such a professional intermediary. It is not so much his biography that has changed. It is the country on whose behalf he operates that has changed.