Owen Matthews

Cries of 'Shame!' rang out in the Rada, Ukraine’s parliament, today as lawmakers from Volodymyr  Zelensky’s Servant of the People Party, backed by most opposition parties, voted to bring key independent anti-corruption agencies under government control. The new law, which was backed by 263 lawmakers with just 26 opposing or abstaining, has sparked widespread condemnation from many politicians and civil society activists who had previously been loyal champions of Zelensky’s. The dismemberment of the National Anti-corruption Bureau (NABU) and the Special Anti-corruption Prosecutor's Office (SAPO) has also caused deep disquiet among Ukraine's leading international backers. Zelensky’s government seems to have seriously miscalculated the mood of ordinary Ukrainian people.

Israel’s assault on Iran represents a double helping of good news for the Kremlin. Years of two-track diplomacy have allowed Vladimir Putin to position himself both as a friend to Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and to the Iranian leadership. That will make Russia an indispensable partner for the US once it embarks on the long process of patching up the new political realities of the Middle East in the wake of this war. Though Israeli planes have so far carefully avoided striking Iran’s oil export infrastructure, the war has inevitably spooked markets and boosted sagging crude oil prices – and with them, Putin’s war chest.

Is the Kremlin on the verge of shifting its red lines on Ukraine? As Russian troops on the ground line up to launch a new summer offensive and more missiles rain down on Kyiv than any point since the beginning of the invasion, Putin’s diplomats are reportedly preparing to step back from some of their hardest-line positions. According to a set of Russian position papers seen by Reuters, the Kremlin appears to step back from its earlier demands for ‘de-militarization’ of Ukraine. Also apparently jettisoned are claims on the areas of Donetsk, Luhansk, Kherson and Zaporizhiye regions still controlled by Ukraine but which Russia had formerly demanded as part of any peace deal.

“Look, are you serious? Are you real about this?” That question, according to US vice president J.D. Vance, was the essence of yesterday’s phone call between his boss Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin. What Vance meant was to question whether Putin was serious about peace. But turning the question on its head would actually be far more revealing. Is Putin serious about winning the war? Absolutely. Is he real about fighting on until he achieves his goal of subjugating Ukraine? Also very much yes. Is Trump serious about pressuring Russia into ending the war? There’s a second way to flip the question, and that’s to ask: is Trump serious about pressuring Russia into ending the war? And the answer to that, sadly for the Ukrainians, seems to be resoundingly negative.

A week of diplomatic manoeuvring, ultimatums and psychological gambits has ended with a sadly predictable result: Vladimir Putin will not be coming to the negotiating table in Istanbul. Nor will he be sending a single cabinet-level negotiator. Instead the Russian delegation will be headed by former culture minister Vladimir Medinsky – the same low-level minion that Putin sent to the last round of talks in Istanbul in March-April 2022. Instead of a breakthrough, the great diplomatic effort led by Zelensky and the combined leaders of Europe have elicited nothing beyond a calculated insult from a defiant Kremlin.

Few career arcs in modern history can be as remarkable as that of Ahmed Hussein al-Sharaa – or Abu Mohammed al-Jolani, to give him the nom de guerre under which he fought American troops in Iraq back when he was a firebrand member of al-Qaeda. Twenty years ago al-Sharaa was languishing in a US military prison in Baghdad, held on suspicion of terrorism. Today, as Syria’s new interim President, he shook hands with Donald Trump posing for photo-calls alongside the de-facto ruler of Saudi Arabia Mohammad bin Salman. Trump was evidently impressed by al-Sharaa, who has swapped the turban and dusty fatigues that he habitually wore before taking Damascus by storm last winter for a plain blue suit and purple tie. “He’s a young attractive guy.

Russia’s Victory Day celebrations on 9 May should mark a triumphal double apotheosis for Vladimir Putin. Not only will it be the 25th Victory parade since the beginning of his presidency, but is also the 80th anniversary of the Soviet defeat of Nazi Germany, which Putin has appropriated as a fundamental ideological pillar of his regime. Yet instead of marking the absolute high point of Putin’s reign, the traditional military parade on Red Square will be shadowed by jeopardy and haunted by the ghosts of future failure.   The Russians are apoplectic that Zelensky has so far ignored the unilateral three day ceasefire around Victory Day that Putin proposed last week For one, many of the world leaders Putin had hoped would attend have chosen to stay away.

The US general Mark Clark knew a thing or two about dealing with Russians. In the aftermath of the defeat of Nazi Germany, Clark commanded the American occupying forces in Austria. His Soviet opposite number, and nominal ally, was Marshal Ivan Konev. The two war heroes were tasked with pacifying the conquered and divided country at the dawn of the Cold War. ‘The Russians were not interested in teamwork,’ recalled Clark in his 1950 memoir, Calculated Risk. ‘They wanted to keep things boiling… They were accustomed to the use of force. They were skilled in exploiting any sign of weakness or uncertainty or appeasement. This was their national policy.’ Two things infuriated Clark more than anything.