For Russian humanities scholars, any ties to British NGOs have shifted from toxic to criminal. T-invariant has uncovered who became the first to face administrative charges for collaborating with the Oxford Russia Fund. Through the case of a Volgograd professor, the outlet reveals how public trials of philologists—those who “sounded the alarm too late”—are now orchestrated. The story features all the hallmarks of such prosecutions: a department head’s televised repentance on a federal channel and textbooks, published with NGO support, being symbolically dumped outside the British Embassy.
The FSB recently reported that it had identified employees of “leading Russian universities who collaborated with British counterparts to the detriment of Russia’s security.” The case involves the Oxford Russia Fund, which was designated as an “undesirable organization” in Russia back in 2021. Fifteen academics from four Russian regions (Volgograd, Novosibirsk, Chelyabinsk, and Tomsk) received official warnings from the FSB about “the inadmissibility of actions that create conditions for offenses under Articles 275.1 and Part 1 of Article 284.1” of the Criminal Code.
In its press release, the security service also stated that one lecturer faced administrative charges under Article 20.33 of the Administrative Code for collaborating with the Oxford Russia Fund and “maintaining confidential relations with the fund’s representatives.” T-invariant learned that the individual charged was Yevgenia Kislyakova, Doctor of Philology and professor at Volgograd State Socio-Pedagogical University (VGSPU), where she has worked since 1996 – her alma mater.
The ruling by Volgograd’s Central District Court was issued on June 15, 2023. The court found that Kislyakova “participated in the activities of the Oxford Russia Fund, an organization designated as undesirable, throughout 2022-2023 (until April 19, 2023).”
Kislyakova admitted guilt and “expressed remorse for her actions and explained that since 2010, the university had collaborated with the foundation, organizing seminars—including off-site events—and distributing literature stored in the university’s library. This material was offered to students as supplementary reading outside the standard curriculum.”
The court documents further specify that in 2022, Kislyakova “participated in a seminar involving Karen Hewitt and the foundation.” “She was unaware that the foundation had been declared undesirable in Russia,” the ruling states.
The evidence for this offense was deemed by the court to include “email screenshots” and testimonies from numerous colleagues and regular co-authors of Kislyakova (at least four individuals). Testimony in Kislyakova’s case was provided by her department colleague (Lyubov Brovikova), two students (Maria Lisutina and Yevgenia Yeremicheva), and Olga Solovyova, an employee of Volgograd State Technical University: their written statements formed the basis of the charges.
The professor was sentenced to a fine of 5,000 rubles. Interestingly, the university colleagues’ reaction to these events is noteworthy. While the court ruled on Kislyakova’s case in summer, their response came only after the start of the new academic year. The attack on the foundation was immediately joined by faculty members, university union representatives, and students. Olga Skryabina, head of Kislyakova’s department, also noted that “the enemy had penetrated through her domain.”
Employees of the foundation themselves, and through other teachers, attempted to collect intelligence… The first to raise the alarm were the English department faculty,” she stated (quoted from an NTV report). “Our university had participated since 2010 in the Oxford Russia Foundation program, which, in that typically treacherous English manner, exploited the restoration of old academic ties. Initially considered a charitable organization, this foundation was unfortunately revealed – as the investigation showed – to be a front for structures linked to the notorious Khodorkovsky.”
Meanwhile, Ilya Drobyazko, deputy chair of the primary trade union organization of VGSPU students, launched an attack against the “Anglo-Saxons.” On September 30, 2023, he led a group of VGSPU students to Moscow where they dumped books (allegedly published with Oxford Russia Fund involvement) in front of the British Embassy entrance. Patriotic media outlets framed the event as follows: the students “demonstrated vigilance and principle: they determined that the content of literature sent to their alma mater by the so-called Oxford Russia Foundation aimed to distort youth perceptions of family values, reject national identity, and portray patriotic sentiment as an anachronism.”
“Students of VGSPU were deliberately targeted for “processing” by British spies through structures connected to foreign agent and outright enemy of Russia Mikhail KHODORKOVSKY: these future teachers, according to British intelligence designs (the Oxford Russia Fund’s subordination to MI6 has been established), were meant to both “adopt modern views” themselves and subsequently spread harmful ideas among impressionable schoolchildren. The students sought clarification from VGSPU’s Student Trade Union Organization and faculty members, finding full understanding and support.
As a result, all contaminated printed matter was removed from the university library and delivered to the entrance of the British Embassy in Moscow, whose staff were shocked by this development. Refusing to engage with the outraged students or federal media, they hastily began drafting reports to London, to 85 Albert Embankment.”
The ideological offensive by the Volgograd activists has been thoroughly documented.
T-invariant has not yet managed to reach Kislyakova for comment. The email address listed in her academic publications is inactive and returns a 540 error. Most of her co-authors did not respond to the outlet’s inquiries, though one foreign collaborator offered a brief remark: “In difficult times—and Russia’s relations with Western Europe are certainly strained now—there’s a saying I’ve heard: “Find the person, and the charges will follow.”” A request for comment was also sent to Ilya Drobyazko; T-invariant awaits his response.
The case of collaboration with the Oxford Russia Fund involves another, more prominent defendant: Volgograd State University (VolSU). However, details remain scarce. “Kommersant” reports the following: “Security services circulated to media outlets a video interview with Dmitry Ilyin, deputy rector of Volgograd State University. He claims university staff attended a 2017 seminar organized by the Oxford Russia Fund, where they were given literary works promoting values “which were not socially accepted even back then” in Russian society. “Those instructors no longer work here,” Ilyin stated.”
T-invariant has found no other media coverage featuring Ilyin’s remarks on the matter, nor independent confirmation of the alleged video’s existence. One of Ilyin’s former colleagues, when asked about potential repercussions, observed: “I wouldn’t want to be in his shoes now.” The editorial team has been unable to contact Ilyin directly.
Interestingly, the FSB announced the “exposure of intelligence and subversive operations” by the Oxford Russia Fund in a press release coinciding with the designation of the “British Council“ NGO as “undesirable” in Russia. The lengthy document detailed the security service’s grievances against British NGOs as a whole. According to the FSB, the British Council and Oxford Russia Fund:
– Expand London’s influence;
– Exploit educational, cultural, and artistic programs for covert projects aimed at undermining sovereignty;
– Participate in clandestine operations by British intelligence services, disguised as conflict resolution assistance, promotion of young political leaders, and advocacy of Western “non-traditional values”;
– Distribute pro-LGBT literature and textbooks in universities through Russian academics, acting on orders from foreign operatives;
– Shape desired narratives by indoctrinating a “new generation” of Russian citizens aligned with London’s agenda.
The British Council is the administrator of IELTS (International English Language Testing System), one of the two most widely recognized English proficiency exams globally. Independent outlet “Groza” (Storm) notes that IELTS is commonly required for studying, working, or immigrating to English-speaking countries. Established in 1989 by the British Council, IDP: IELTS Australia, and Cambridge English, the test is accepted in over 140 countries. However, as of June 5, 2025, any payment made for the IELTS exam in Russia could result in administrative or even criminal charges—under Russian law, financing an “undesirable” organization carries penalties of up to five years in prison.
The sanctions against these foundations represent yet another assault on the English language in Russia, according to English faculty members at Russian universities interviewed by T-invariant.
“Being completely cut off from modern English would be a real disaster for us. But we’re not there yet, fortunately. Of course, it’s a great shame that we’ve lost access to an entire layer of literary works—that’s what we’re missing the most. To be honest, our department has plenty of strong, engaging teaching materials of our own. But foreign textbooks were incredibly helpful in keeping us connected to contemporary English usage. I never noticed any LGBT-related content in those materials, personally. There’s an interesting shift happening in our country’s attitude toward English. Like it or not, it remains the global lingua franca of science. Yet lately, I’ve been hearing that Russia only needs Chinese and Russian—that English can be ignored. But those opinions come from people outside academia. Our students and graduate researchers—at least for now—still firmly believe English is essential,” explains an English instructor at Novosibirsk State University.
Amid growing spy paranoia in academic circles and expanding repressive measures, yet another minefield has emerged – any engagement with “English-language entities” and artifacts of their intellectual output. This influence cannot be fully eradicated from every linguistics department or foreign language faculty. While students worry whether language exams taken in previous years might now raise suspicions, professors are likely already scrutinizing all teaching materials – both print and digital – to identify any Western funding or publishing support.