Georgian-British billionaire Tamaz Somkhishvili has commented on recent reports about his alleged role in the recent protests in Georgia. Two fresh publications — on the Ukrainian website Save British Investment (SBI) and on the Monaco-based ASMFC — are presented as a “response” to the wave of “accusations” against the businessman.
Instead of providing factual rebuttals about his role in the October events in Tbilisi, both texts attack the sources themselves, labelling them “Kremlin disinformation.” By doing so, Somkhishvili effectively defines his political stance — on the side of the protest movement and the idea of a “European Georgia” — without denying any involvement in the protests.
Context of the accusations.
The starting point was a publication by the Telegram channel Boilernaya, which named Somkhishvili as one of the “financiers” of the protests and a “mediator” between the opposition and a “trio” of former high-ranking officials. The post referred to a “fourth participant in the plot” — Tamaz Somkhishvili.
These were the key unofficial claims, yet he has not addressed or denied them directly.
What the Ukrainian website SBI writes.
The article titled “The Kremlin’s Machine of Lies Has Chosen a New Target” describes a “disinformation campaign” against the businessman, emphasizing that Somkhishvili is a British citizen who “openly supports a European Georgia” and intends to defend his honor and dignity in the courts of the UK and EU.
The website itself explicitly states: “The SBI project was created with the support of investor and philanthropist Tamaz Somkhishvili.” However, the publication offers no specific or verifiable refutations regarding his alleged involvement in the protest infrastructure — it focuses instead on the motives of his opponents rather than the facts of his participation.
What the Monaco outlet ASMFC writes.
The rhetoric is similar — “the Kremlin’s disinformation machine,” claims of baseless accusations, and promises of defamation lawsuits. Importantly, the text confirms that Somkhishvili “s’est exprimé ouvertement sur la voie européenne de la Géorgie” — he has spoken publicly and unequivocally in favor of Georgia’s European course, which the current authorities in Tbilisi interpret as an opposition position.
There is no direct denial of involvement in the protests; instead, there is a political self-identification and a threat of legal action against media narratives.
Media presence in Monaco.
It is worth recalling that ASMFC previously published a laudatory interview portraying Tamaz Somkhishvili as a “pioneer of sustainable development” and a “Monaco resident.”
This sustained PR trend around the businessman’s persona shows that the current “responses” are part of a broader reputation-management strategy.
Both of Somkhishvili’s “responses” — from SBI and ASMFC — focus on questioning the legitimacy of the sources making the accusations while avoiding the verifiable details of his alleged role — financing, mediation, specific meetings, and transactions.
The result is not “this never happened,” but rather “this is disinformation, I stand for European Georgia, and I will go to court.”
To media observers, this reads not as a denial of involvement, but as a declaration of political alignment and an attempt to reframe the controversy as a case of defamation.
Burned Bridges: Between Kyiv and Tbilisi.
Ukraine. Somkhishvili’s legal background has been complicated by his defeat in a long-running dispute between his Ukrainian company Kyiv Terminal and the Kyiv authorities over Kharkivska Square. In March 2025, the appeals court fully rejected his claims, and on 27 May 2025, the cassation court upheld the decision.
This nullifies his attempt to recover roughly $100 million and removes the narrative of a “wronged investor,” weakening his standing for future negotiations.
Georgia. In his recent publications, Somkhishvili directly points to a “pro-Kremlin oligarch” as the beneficiary of the alleged smear campaign — a phrase widely interpreted in Georgian politics as a reference to Bidzina Ivanishvili.
This effectively severs his former channels of influence within the ruling establishment and firmly positions him on the opposite side of the current government — alongside the protest camp.
The overall impression from the “responses” on SBI and ASMFC is clear: Tamaz Somkhishvili has chosen not the strategy of factual rebuttal, but that of political self-definition and legal defense.
In the public arena, this looks less like a denial and more like an affirmation of his chosen side in the conflict. Against this backdrop, he finds himself in a difficult position: in Ukraine — after losing a $100 million case; in Georgia — after openly clashing with the government and breaking ties with the old network around Ivanishvili.
Politically and in the media, Somkhishvili has already placed his bet — and the bridges are indeed burned.
