Letter From the Editors

The inauguration of a new US president is always a newsworthy international event. Countries throughout the world wonder how a new US administration’s policies will affect their economies, security and aid packages. And while these policies can vary depending on the victor’s party, no one ever expects that they will completely upend the established world order. The same cannot be said of Donald Trump, who took the oath of office on Jan. 20.

The most infamous foreign policy statement Trump made in the run-up to his inauguration was, arguably, that he would end the war in Ukraine in 24 hours. While he hasn’t achieved that (at least, not as yet), he has taken to his microblogging service Truth Social, calling on Putin to “Settle now and STOP this ridiculous war! IT’S ONLY GOING TO GET WORSE.” While analysts are skeptical of the steps Trump is taking to find a peace settlement, American journalist David Satter tells Republic that Trump is on the “right track” and understands that “there will be no results without pressure on Russia.” And in a column for Kholod, Ivan Filippov agrees, saying, “We can safely assume that the US president is sufficiently briefed on the recent goings-on.” The real problem, he says, is that Putin is so ignorant about the situation on the ground, the territory that Russia actually controls and the equipment that Russian troops lack that he is in no position to negotiate a proper peace deal.

However, as Sergei Strokan writes, “Donald Trump has already made it clear that finding a solution for Ukraine will not be his administration’s chief raison d’être,” adding that it is difficult for many people in Russia to understand this. And according to Dmitry Novikov, the real problem is that “Ukraine is considered a matter of vital interest for Russia, but to the US it is considered a tool and an opportunity to deal a strategic blow to Moscow.” He goes on to state that Trump’s failure to mention Ukraine in his inaugural address (except in the context of the Panama Canal) is proof that the US will keep the focus on its own dominance. His conclusion is that “Trump’s ascension does not change the objective balance of forces or the US’s main strategic policies, which are based on the idea of continued American dominance in most key sectors (the economy, the military, technology) and the possibility of increasing this gap.”

To do this, Trump will have to have to keep his eye on what Strokan calls the numerous “chess games” taking place on boards across all the continents. According to Meduza, one of these games is being played in Iran. As expert Nicole Grajewski tells the publication, it will be “incredibly difficult” for the US to deal with Iran’s nuclear program without Russia’s support, especially after Russia and Iran signed a comprehensive partnership agreement on Jan. 17. However, as expert Grigory Lukyanov tells NG, a “ceiling for economic cooperation” between Iran and Russia has already been reached, so the value of the partnership agreement should not be “overestimated.”

Meanwhile, global luminaries at the World Economic Forum in Davos have been discussing how to “develop effective forms of cooperation with the new US administration.” But according to Tatyana Rybakova, such discussions appear futile: While they were taking place, Trump, whom she calls “the world’s troublemaker in chief,” was busy in Washington “signing orders that were unlikely to promote” collaboration, including orders to raise tariffs, exit the World Health Organization and wipe out DEI programs. There is, however, a different troublemaker in chief who seems to be taking Trump’s inauguration in stride: Aleksandr Lukashenko, who is poised to cruise to victory in his seventh presidential election. As he put it, “We don’t need an American show where they shoot you in the ear or the head.” Let’s hope for his sake that the upcoming Belarussian election doesn’t devolve to that level.