But there is something that worries me more than this. Namely: this article says nothing about how we are to win this war. How we are to defeat "Russia-Putin."The "strategy" that Navalnaya expects must be a strategy for the "post-Putin" era. This is what worries her most: what will happen "after Putin." But I still don't understand how she wants to reach the "post-Putin" point.In her fantasy, it must be some magical pirouette and a leap into the future."But in reality, there is an answer, she just doesn't voice it. And the Russian opposition's answer to this question is: "We can't do anything to get to the 'post-Putin' point. We have to wait. Let's wait a bit—and in the meantime, don't hate all Russians.""For us, every day of such "waiting" means more and more lives lost. But since they feel powerless, they absolve themselves of responsibility for it. And here is the key trap that the "good Russians" are drawing us into: they continue to operate within the "who is to blame" discourse. They want to prove to the whole world that they are not guilty. And we begin to justly resent this and prove that they are indeed guilty—or at least responsible. And so they drag us onto their territory, because in the West, everyone will, of course, sympathize with them, as the West loves to sympathize with victims without delving into details. And since Ukrainians oppose this, many there consider us "too radical."But it seems to me that the key question we should be asking our Western friends about the Russian opposition should be different. Not about the past, but about the future."Namely: how can the "Russian opposition/emigration" help us win the war? And can they at all? Are they helpful or harmful here?"And this is the key question, because by raising the question of "after Putin," the Russian opposition/emigration finds fertile ground in the European way of thinking about "post-war" and "post-history." Hence all these endless conferences on "reconstruction," which conveniently ignore the key question—how do we reach this state of "post-war" (and preferably, victory)?Our Western friends themselves are mostly not ready for this question. Because they still do not feel this war is their own. They still do not feel that victory in this war is an existential task for the West itself. Because only through this victory can the West (which does not exist now) be reborn. "Because there is still a great abyss between "supporting Ukraine" and "becoming an ally of Ukraine in the war." There are a certain number of invisible steps—primarily psychological, collectively psychological—that remain untaken."And in this sense, the Russian opposition/emigration contributes to this Western loss of focus. And we often unconsciously help this loss of focus by allowing ourselves to be drawn into the discussion of "good-bad."But this discussion doesn't make much sense. We need those who will help us win. Whether they are good, bad, angels, demons—it doesn't matter right now.The only question we should be asking is: does this contribute to victory or harm it?Does it contribute to the weakening of Russia and its inability to continue the war or start new ones, or does it hinder this?SourceAbout the author. Volodymyr Yermolenko, writer, head of PEN Ukraine.The editors do not always share the opinions expressed by the authors of the blogs.