New Eastern Europe Magazine

As we are well into the fifth year of Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, old questions are beginning to stir from beneath the surface, particularly: how should the West engage with Russia, if at all? Yet beneath the daily headlines lies a deeper question, one that the West has faced before and may soon face again: what should its relationship with Russia look like when the guns eventually fall silent? This issue of New Eastern Europe explores that question. Not because peace is at hand, but because history suggests that the moment after a war can be consequential.
The temptation grows to treat peace as a destination rather than a process. After years of destruction, societies long for normality and governments seek predictability. Yet the path back to business as usual can sometimes become a road back to old illusions. Thus, in whatever form peace comes, Europe cannot be naïve in ignoring Russia’s past behaviour and recognize how fragile any peace may prove to be, as depicted on the cover of this issue.
In this issue, our contributors examine this dilemma from different angles. Alexandra Polivanova argues that a durable peace cannot be built merely on signatures and ceasefires; it requires profound changes within Russia itself. Callum Fraser turns the lens towards Europe, suggesting that the central challenge is not designing the perfect Russia policy, but cultivating the civic resilience needed to sustain it. Nina Rozhanovskaya warns against allowing pragmatism to eclipse principle. James C. Pearce, meanwhile, questions expectations of imminent change from within Russia, urging readers to confront realities rather than hopes. A series of expert inputs further reflects on the dilemma Europe faces and offers guidance should a ceasefire ever be agreed.