Shootout at Wildberries: A Throwback to 1990s Chaos
- A shootout in central Moscow linked to a corporate dispute at Wildberries left two dead and seven injured.
- Tatyana Bakalchuk, the company's majority owner, is embroiled in a conflict with her ex-husband, who has enlisted Chechen leader Ramzan Kadyrov's support.
- The Kremlin has chosen not to comment on the incident, highlighting the complexities of corporate governance and law enforcement in Russia.
A recent shootout in central Moscow resulted in two fatalities and seven injuries, echoing the violent struggles of the 1990s in Russia. The incident is linked to a corporate dispute involving Wildberries, an e-retailer owned by Tatyana Bakalchuk, who is now the wealthiest woman in Russia. Her ex-husband, Vladimir Bakalchuk, has contested a merger deal approved by President Putin, enlisting the support of Chechen leader Ramzan Kadyrov, who claims the merger is an illegal seizure of assets. The Kremlin has refrained from commenting on the shootout, with spokesman Dmitry Peskov stating that law enforcement is handling the investigation. The situation has escalated, leading to the arrest of at least two dozen individuals, including a Chechen mixed martial arts fighter, suspected of involvement in the violence. The tensions surrounding the merger and the corporate power struggle have drawn significant attention, highlighting the ongoing issues of law and order in Russia. Tatyana Bakalchuk, who owns 99% of Wildberries, filed for divorce from her husband in July, further complicating the corporate landscape. The couple's personal and business disputes have intertwined, leading to a chaotic environment reminiscent of the post-Soviet era. The Kremlin's silence on the matter raises questions about the government's role in corporate affairs and the influence of regional strongmen in business disputes. As the investigation unfolds, the implications of this shootout extend beyond the immediate violence, reflecting deeper issues within Russian society regarding power, wealth, and the intersection of personal and corporate interests. The outcome of this conflict may set a precedent for future corporate governance and law enforcement in the country.