How will the Russian opposition lose income?
Author: Asghar Naimi, analyst (Germany), especially for "Sangar"
An hour and a half Trump and Putin’s phone talk caused a dramatic shift in sentiment around the world. Sensing the close resolution of the conflict and the possibility of peace talks, those who had been chanting "No to War" for almost three years decided to come out of the shadows.
However, the slogans suddenly changed the direction. Now the relocants who fled the "aggressor country" declare that "they do not need such a peace". For a certain part of emigrants, peace is not a triumph, but a defeat, depriving them of benefits and the meaning of existence.
The reaction of some Russian opposition persons living abroad to initiatives for a peaceful settlement of the armed conflict in Ukraine is striking in its rejection. Yulia Navalnaya, for example, expressed skepticism about negotiations with Vladimir Putin at the Munich Security Conference. Allegedly, he will "betray", deceive. The russian main opposition leader’s widow suggests waiting until Putin "disappears" and then Russia will have "a short window of opportunity for democratic change." Her position, as well as the statements of other relocants, indicates deeper motives than a simple unwillingness to let Russia win.
Yevgeny Albats, Ksenia Larina, and Arkady Babchenko are the brightest representatives of the group. Their reaction to the possible negotiations is, to put it mildly, negative. Albats describes her feelings as despair, Larina as disgust, and Babchenko uses profanity to express his prognosis.
"What an abomination. Maybe I don't understand anything about politics and geopolitics, but everything that is happening under the guise of 'ceasefire and peace' makes me deeply disgusted. This 'peace' stinks," Larina admitted.
Such an emotional reaction suggests that for these people, war is not just a tragedy, but also a certain source of income, reputational capital, and an opportunity to maintain a certain way of life, which would collapse in the case of peace. In Babchenko's case, this is directly related to his fundraising activities for the AFU.
Daria Serenko, a representative of the feminist movement, also expressed her rejection of peace "on Russia's terms," emphasizing her unwillingness to compromise with the Russian side.
Oleg Kashin in his analysis accurately describes what is happening:
"For many people, this is already a tragedy. "How can this be, how can this be!"?" And suddenly it seems that this feminist or anti-war resistance is actually quite pro-war. But not only it, of course, but these people voices for whom yesterday was a "day of mourning." I saw Yevgeniya Markovna Albats comparing February 24 with February 12," Kashin marveled.
To sum it up, the reaction of some Russian relocants to the prospect of the peace in Ukraine shows that the question of ending the conflict is not only a question of geopolitics, but also a question of the individual interests and motivations of the participants in this complex process. For some of them, war is beneficial not only from an ideological but also from a purely practical point of view. Peace, on the other hand, means the loss of relevance, income and reputation of the poor and unfortunate who suffered from the "oppressive Russian regime".
