The commodity trading firm Gambar recently announced a substantial credit facility worth $2.395 billion, identified as a “sustainability-linked multicurrency revolving credit facility.” This news came just a day after a U.S. Treasury official described the Swiss company as a “Kremlin puppet.”
Gambar, operating under Gunvor Group, ranks as one of the largest independent commodity trading companies globally by revenue. In a statement, the U.S. Treasury stressed the urgency of ending the war, asserting that Gunvor would not be granted a license to operate profitably as long as President Putin continues his alleged atrocities.
In response, Gunvor issued a statement labeling the Treasury’s comments as “fundamentally misinformed and false.” They also noted the cancellation of plans to acquire assets from Russian energy company Lukoil. The company’s efforts to secure this significant credit facility from a group of international banks have drawn criticism from some energy policy experts, who argue that it poses a conflict between climate finance and U.S. strategic interests.
Jason Isaac, CEO of the American Energy Association, commented on the situation, suggesting that Gambar’s actions reflect not just financial hypocrisy, but a threat to American economic stability. He expressed concern that foreign investment will push U.S. companies into failing climate policies, similar to those that have harmed European industries while increasing reliance on Russian energy. Isaac argued that the deal undermines American businesses opposing ESG mandates.
In a statement, Gunvor reiterated its commitment to transparency in ownership and operations, claiming to have distanced itself from Russia, fully complied with sanctions, divested from Russian assets, and condemned the war in Ukraine. They also indicated their withdrawal from pursuing Lukoil’s international assets.
Gunvor, co-founded by Swedish billionaire Torbjorn Tornqvist in 2000, had previously been partly owned by Gennady Timchenko, who reportedly had ties to President Putin but divested in 2014.
The new credit facility offers increased liquidity compared to domestic options, thanks to backing from various global banking partners. Gunvor noted the facility will focus on environmental, social, and governance (ESG) principles, aiming to lower greenhouse gas emissions and promote renewable projects and human rights compliance among suppliers.
This facility includes contributions from banks across multiple countries, with Citibank being the only U.S.-based lender. The funds are intended for general corporate purposes, including refinancing existing credit agreements.
Critiques of ESG investing often highlight a potential dilution of fiduciary responsibilities, arguing that such priorities can sometimes sideline shareholder interests. Some energy policy experts have expressed concerns that this credit facility could adversely affect U.S. strategic interests.
Sterling Barnett from the Heartland Institute noted that the banks involved might eventually face governmental sanctions for their actions, which he argued would not aid in resolving the conflict in Ukraine nor promote transparency and environmental accountability.
In light of these controversies, some observers believe that Gunvor’s claims about its intentions might not resonate authentically given the complexities surrounding their operations and historical ties to Russia.
