Letter From the Editors

“For of all sad words of tongue or pen, the saddest are these, ‘It might have been!’ ” These words by John Greenleaf Whittier may as well be the writing on the wall during this week’s various leaks and innuendo regarding a possible start to negotiations on Ukraine. First, Trump famously announced he would end the war in 24 hours. Now, a leak of a possible “100-day plan” that would entail a ceasefire by Easter and a peace treaty by May 9 reignited controversy. Ukrainian officials were quick to dismiss the plan as a fake. But Ukrainskaya pravda only added fuel to the fire when it quoted Ukrainian intelligence chief Budanov as saying that Ukraine’s existence would be threatened if “serious negotiations” did not kick off by summer. More denials followed.

As political analyst Dmitry Oreshkin says, the details of a potential negotiation are more than nebulous: Who will sit down at the negotiating table? After all, Putin and Zelensky are unlikely to want to see one another in person. “A lousy compromise for both sides” is the best-case scenario, Oreshkin summarizes.

He’s echoed by Nezavisimaya gazeta editor in chief Konstantin Remchukov, who sums up the current political landscape as “Never admit defeat! Never!” That’s the world that Putin, Zelensky, Trump and Xi inhabit. The latter, in Remchukov’s opinion, is exhibiting enviable restraint. Of course, unlike Russia, which chose to base its political course on ideology, China is interested in one thing only – economic expansion. “China is indifferent to the specifics of the spiritual and moral state of Western societies. It is pragmatically important for China to be present on that market – the market of spiritually bankrupt people.” The West initially embraced that approach, a decision it later regretted, since globalization did not lead to democratization in China, as initially believed.

The rise of China is another sign of the changing landscape in the post-Yalta world. As Fyodor Lukyanov muses on the ramifications of the 80th anniversary of the Yalta Conference, he notes that “states that did not have a decisive voice, to put it mildly, 80 or even 35 years ago are now playing a burgeoning role in world politics and economics.” And the new global architecture, whatever it may be, needs to take that into consideration.

Meanwhile, in Russia, the Communist Party is showing no regret about turning to more modern methods of engaging voters. Just as Lenin called for leveraging technologies considered cutting-edge in 1917 – i.e., the telephone and the telegraph – today’s RFCP is embracing social media at an astonishing rate. It is also launching an information aggregator, the RFCP ID app. This initiative will be handled by Leonid Zyuganov, grandson of Communist Party leader Gennady Zyuganov. But don’t call him a successor just yet, political analyst Aleksei Makarkin warns. Zyuganov, Jr. does not yet have enough influence nationally or within the party. But still, never underestimate the importance of being in the right place at the right time.

Or the wrong place at the wrong time, like boxer-turned-mercenary Armen Sarkisyan. The former gangster and creator of the Arbat (Armenian Battalion) died in a blast this week at an elite Moscow apartment complex. The motives for Sarkisyan’s demise are still unclear – investigators are looking into both a “Ukrainian trail,” since Sarkisyan was on a wanted list for attacks on protesters during the 2014 Independence Square rallies, and a possible “blood feud.” Coming on the heels of the assassination of Gen. Igor Kirillov, the latest demise has experts pointing out the alarming rate at which Russia is losing its top brass. At least 20 generals have been killed since the start of the war in Ukraine – compared to only three during the Soviet Union’s entire stint in Afghanistan. This is due to Ukrainian intelligence smartly leveraging both modern reconnaissance weapons provided by the West, as well as informants inside Russia. No regrets, as the Robbie Williams song goes.