Having a wonderful time reminiscing about all my past travel (and other) adventures. Hope you’ll share them with me in my blog, “All Roads Led to Russia.”
To the surprise of practically no one, this week’s two-day trilateral meeting in Abu Dhabi seems to have yielded little or no progress toward an end to Russia’s war against Ukraine.
Trilateral Meeting at Abu Dhabi – February 4-5, 2026
The one good bit of news was the exchange — agreed to on Wednesday — of 314 prisoners, which was immediately implemented on Thursday. Welcome home to all, on both sides.
But that’s it. As usual, Steve Witkoff posted a rosy forecast on X:
“While significant work remains, steps like this demonstrate that sustained diplomatic engagement is delivering tangible results and advancing efforts to end the war in Ukraine.” [RFE/RL, February 5, 2026.]
Meanwhile, however, Russia continues to launch massive barrages of drones and missiles on various regions of Ukraine, largely targeting its civilian energy infrastructure.
Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov told reporters that Russia’s position has not changed and is “absolutely clear and well understood by both Kyiv and the American negotiators.” [Id.]
Kremlin Spokesman Dmitry Peskov
And Markus Ziener, a former Moscow-based correspondent and now a fellow with the German Marshall Fund — while acknowledging that the prisoner swap was an indication of some progress — said:
“But I’m rather skeptical if we get to the nitty-gritty, actually, of the whole negotiations. So far, there is not really much that gives us hope that a settlement of the war is within reach.” [Id.]
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky said that the next round of talks with Russia is “likely” to take place in the U.S., with no timeline being announced as yet.
But despite the obvious need for Zelensky to remain hopeful, nothing is certain. As stated by Markus Ziener:
“I would put myself in the shoes of the Russian president: if I want to negotiate a peace settlement, I would not hammer Ukraine and pound them the way they do. I would actually try to create a situation where you can reach a settlement. Given all the sacrifices Ukraine has [made] so far, I think it’s very difficult for Ukraine to say, OK, well, we’ll cede to the Russian demands and [then] so many lives have been lost lost in vain. So I believe that it’s difficult really to find a settlement that would ask Ukrainians to make major concessions at this point.” [Id.]
Sadly, given the history of the negotiations thus far, Ziener emerges as the voice of reason.
There are a lot of pages of history between the end of yesterday’s “Introduction” and today’s “Chapter 25.” But talking about my own experiences isn’t the purpose of this exercise. The point of sharing my long-ago thoughts with you is that the tired old adage — “The more things change, the more they stay the same” — like all adages, has stood the test of time because it is true.
As things were in the Soviet Union during the Stalinist years and throughout the decades of the Cold War, so they remain today . . . only with bigger, “badder” weaponry.
So here is the final chapter, offered up as a cautionary tale for today and all of our tomorrows. Please keep in mind that it was written three years ago; Aldrich Ames is no longer in prison, having passed away in January.
And thanks for coming back for Part II.
*. *. *
CHAPTER 25 What’s Next?
Now, after decades spent trying to determine who really helped to put the most destructive American traitor of the 20th Century out of business and behind bars, I have at last come to the conclusion that it no longer matters — not to me, in any event. Was it someone I knew, someone I brought to the United States and delivered into the hands of the FBI? Perhaps. But what if it was? Knowing the truth might be a source of personal satisfaction, but it’s irrelevant in the context of today’s geopolitical turmoil. If someone else deserves the credit, let them have it. Our — mankind’s — overriding concern now is the future of our world, and how to help secure it by heeding the lessons of the past. Do we continue repeating our disastrous mistakes again, and again, and yet again, until it is indeed too late and Armageddon becomes the final reality? Or do we finally open our eyes and our minds and begin to pay attention to the ongoing insidious machinations of the Kremlin and its inner circle of miscreants?
“But what are these lessons of the past?” you may ask. Let me cite just a few:
> In 1917, Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov (renamed Lenin) promised the Russian people a future of “Peace, Land and Bread,” and relief from the yoke of Tsarist hegemony. What did he and his successors deliver instead? Seven years of brutal totalitarianism, complete with a “Big Brother” society and an archipelago of GULAGs stretching across eleven time zones from the Urals to the Pacific.
Vladimir Lenin: “Peace, Land and Bread”
> In August of 1939, the eponymous Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact — a treaty of non-aggression guaranteeing, among other things, that the Soviet Union and Germany would remain allies and would never invade one another’s territories — was negotiated and signed by the respective emissaries of Joseph Stalin and Adolph Hitler. As the dogs of war snapped at the heels of Europe, Stalin chose to place his trust in his friend Hitler, and turned his attention to annexing parts of Finland and Romania, and all of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania. Hitler, meanwhile, was busy invading Poland and beyond; yet he managed to find time to plan what would become Operation Barbarossa: the invasion of his professed ally, the Soviet Union, on June 22, 1941. So much for friendship and trust.
Hitler and Stalin: Two of a Kind
> On November 9, 1989, the Berlin Wall was breached, and three weeks later, at the Malta Summit meeting between Presidents George H.W. Bush and Mikhail Gorbachev, the Cold War was declared kaput. Two years after that, on December 26, 1991, the fifteen Soviet republics gained their respective sovereignties, and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics ceased to exist as a political entity. Russia, we were assured, was now our friend. The march toward democracy and capitalism had begun; we could take a deep breath and relax.
Presidents Bush and Gorbachev at Malta
So why, in the face of all of this more recent peace, good will, and back-slapping brotherhood, have we continued — throughout the remainder of the 20th Century and now well into the 21st — to spy on, undermine, and threaten one another as though all of our earlier peace initiatives had never occurred? Why have the Aldrich Ames, Bob Hanssens, and countless others been ignored until their irreparable damage has been done? Why do we still need the American CIA, FBI, NSA, and the rest of the Washington alphabet soup, to counter Russia’s still-threatening FSB, SVR, GRU, et al.?
Because, after thirty years of relative peace and quiet, we find ourselves confronted by the uncomfortable fact that we are now in a new Cold War — or, more accurately, that the old one never really ended, but has merely risen again from its own ashes.
Russia rode out the 1990s under the more-or-less benign presidency of Boris Yeltsin in an atmosphere of hope and increasing prosperity. And then, while the rest of the world was focused on the burgeoning problems in the Far East and Middle East, along came Vladimir Putin, slithering his way into Yeltsin’s chair before anyone in the West even knew who he was.
Well, we know who he is now, don’t we? He is the individual who has rolled back the Russian calendar to the Stalinist era: banning dissent, shutting down all independent media outlets; imprisoning or simply assassinating those who do not comply with his new, ever-more-draconian laws; and — to ensure that the world gets his message — invading Ukraine in a blatantly obvious war of attrition that he stubbornly insists on labelling a “special military operation.”
Launching a “Special Military Operation”
And for those who would wish Vladimir Putin gone with the wave of a magic wand or the twitch of a genie’s nose, a word of warning: Be careful what you wish for. Because standing behind him is a bevy of sycophants ready to vie for the job, each more treacherous than the last. An internecine battle in the halls of the Kremlin would truly be an historic event of apocalyptic proportions.
How have we let it come to this? I shudder as I recall those months of living in Moscow, in what were supposed to be times of peace and freedom, and slowly coming to realize then that nothing had changed in the government but the names on the doors. And the longer period of two years when I lived and worked amongst the FBI, CIA, KGB, a pair of Russian defectors, and several ancillary players who may or may not have been who or what they professed to be.
I shudder . . . not from any remembrance of long-ago events, but from the realization that, however much things may seem to progress, in reality we continue to allow them to stay the same.”
To quote the fictional Professor Henry Higgins when he realized he’d grown unexpectedly fond of Eliza Dolittle:
“DAMN! DAMN! DAMN! DAMN!”
When U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio announced last week that Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner would not be joining bilateral Ukraine-Russia meetings in Abu Dhabi scheduled for February 4-5, I had high hopes that a new, more qualified, team of negotiators was about to be appointed to carry on the continuing peace talks.
But, alas! It was not to be. On the first day of talks on Wednesday,lead Ukrainian negotiator Rustem Umerov posted on X:
“Another round of negotiations has begun in Abu Dhabi. The negotiation process started in a trilateral format – Ukraine, the United States, and Russia. Next comes work in separate groups by specific tracks, after which a follow-up joint synchronization of positions is planned.” [RFE/RL, February 4, 2026.]
Following the first day’s session on Wednesday, no details were offered; but Umerov’s spokeswoman, Diana Davitian, told journalists that a second day of talks was planned to be held on Thursday. [Id.]
And then I read that “US President Donald Trump’s special envoy, Steve Witkoff, along with Trump’s son-in-law, Jared Kushner, are representing the United States at the negotiations with Ukraine and Russia.” [Id.]
One brief, shining moment of hope, and then . . .
I’ve said it before: Two more hapless victims of Vladimir Putin’s duplicitous political machinations would be difficult to find . . . and he knows it. As long as Witkoff and Kushner continue as Donald Trump’s messengers, and Trump continues to control the U.S. and European narrative, this war will drag on, because that is what Putin wants.
Of course, I could be wrong. But we’ll see what happens in Thursday’s second-round meeting.
The name of someone with whom I was acquainted many years ago just popped up in the Epstein files.
I will not identify him, because there is no indication that he was involved in any of Epstein’s despicable, odious, heinous — not to mention, illegal — activities. Nor do I have any reason to believe he was.
But what struck me was how small this world really is, and how easy it is for someone like me — or you — to be just one or two degrees of separation from an abomination like Jeffrey Epstein.
And I see in this a lesson for those who would rush to judgment on the thousands of people named in those files: Mere interaction with someone — being introduced at a social gathering, or involved in a legitimate business transaction — does not make you part of their inner circle. Nor do you “catch” another person’s worst character traits by being in their presence; it’s not a virus.
In these days when most of us spend at least some time on social media, it is too easy to make a snap judgment based on partial information. We need to be careful not to do that . . . because you never know when someone you once met, perhaps a long time ago, might drag you down with them.
This is clearly taken out of context; but it so perfectly sums up what the entire northern hemisphere has been experiencing lately, I just couldn’t resist borrowing it:
“Now is the winter of our discontent . . .” – William Shakespeare, Richard III, Act I, Scene 1
I’m sure if old Will had witnessed this, he would have agreed with me:
Take heart, everyone . . . spring is only six weeks away.
I wrote this story more than three years ago and never published it, out of what was probably an excess of caution. But a man died last month in prison at the age of 84, presumably of natural causes . . . likely taking a number of secrets with him to the grave.
Now his demise has inspired me to retrieve my earlier writing, and to share parts of it with you. It doesn’t change anything; but my readers may find it historically interesting. And if nothing else, perhaps sending my words out to the universe may serve as a catharsis to me, after more than 30 years.
So, without further ado or explanation — and without updates to the timeline from three years ago to the present — here is Part 1 of 2:
*. *. *
INTRODUCTION
On April 16, 1985, an American man walked into the Soviet Embassy on 16th Street in the northwest quadrant of Washington, DC, and asked the guard at the glass-protected desk if he might speak with an Embassy diplomat, Sergei Chuvakhin. When the guard called Chuvakhin to the front entry, the American handed him an envelope addressed to Stanislav Androsov, then the KGB rezident (chief of station) at the Embassy. Unknown to Chuvakhin, the envelope contained a few documents and an offer to procure and provide more of the same in exchange for the sum of $50,000. The American then left the Embassy and returned to his office in suburban Langley, Virginia.
Upon receiving and opening the envelope and reviewing its contents, Androsov summoned his deputy, Viktor Cherkashin, then the head of counterintelligence at the Embassy, to discuss the significance of the unexpected and unconventional communique. [Viktor Cherkashin, “Spy Handler,” Basic Books 2005, p. 19.]
The American waited nervously until a month later, when he finally received a call inviting him to meet again with Sergei Chuvakhin at the Embassy on May 17th. On the American’s arrival, Mr. Chuvakhin greeted him, showed him into a small fourth-floor meeting room, and withdrew as he had been instructed. In a few moments, a different gentleman entered the room and introduced himself as Viktor Cherkashin. Their meeting was brief but productive, culminating in an agreement by the KGB to the payment of $50,000 in exchange for additional documents from the American. [Id.]
Cherkashin and the American next met on June 13, 1985, at Chadwick’s Restaurant, a popular watering hole in the historic Georgetown neighborhood of Washington. The American brought with him a larger package of classified CIA files, which he exchanged with Cherkashin for the agreed amount of $50,000. [Id., at p. 149.]
Thus began the career of Aldrich Ames as a mole for the Soviet KGB inside the CIA — a career that lasted for nine years, until his eventual arrest on February 21, 1994. Nine years, during which a troubling number of U.S. human assets in Russia were lost, engendering the beginning of a years-long mole hunt within the CIA’s ranks.
Nine years, during which Ames evaded detection despite internal CIA investigations, lie detector tests, routine vetting, and his own reckless extravagance and general carelessness.
Nine years, until — with Ames already at or near the top of the CIA’s short list of suspects — a recently-arrived former KGB officer talked to the FBI and revealed, either knowingly or inadvertently, a key bit of information that allowed the FBI to make its airtight case of espionage against Aldrich Ames.
Aldrich Ames (C. 1994)
Without the CIA task force’s relentless, top-secret internal search for a mole, Ames might never have become a suspect. But the CIA has no law enforcement authority in the United States, and so they finally had no choice but to enlist the help of the FBI. It was the joint effort of the two agencies — a rather exceptional collaboration at the time — that brought down the man who still, nearly thirty years later, is described by many as perhaps the most destructive U.S. traitor of the 20th Century.
Much has since been revealed about the extent of the damage done by Aldrich Ames and the lives lost as a result of his betrayal, including details elicited by Pete Earley, a former reporter for the Washington Post and noted author who was given unprecedented access to Ames in prison. [Pete Earley, “Confessions of a Spy,” G.P. Putnam’s Sons, 1997.] But still, nearly thirty years later — as he continues to live out his life sentence in the Federal Correctional Institution at Terre Haute, Indiana — Ames claims to have additional information yet to be shared with U.S. intelligence authorities.
And still — thirty years after the fact — the identity of the Russian defector who provided that last vital piece of the puzzle also continues to be protected, presumably for his own safety. A few names have been posited by various sources and, not surprisingly, vehemently denied or simply not commented upon.
It happens to most people now and then: that random thought that flashes through your mind for no apparent reason, and then becomes reality a short time later. Like thinking about someone you haven’t seen in ages, who then suddenly calls because they’re going to be in your area and would like to get together. Or you have a dream about dogs, and the next day your spouse comes home with a stray puppy.
It doesn’t mean you have supernatural powers; but it feels eerie enough to make you wonder if you might.
I haven’t been following the saga of the Epstein Files in detail because, as I said some time ago, I don’t do smut. But in an article I posted yesterday (“When You’e On a Losing Streak, It Never Seems to End”), I joked that I could imagine Donald Trump scouring the files for any mentions of foreign officials he might use as leverage to settle disputed political issues. It honestly had not occurred to me that Jeffrey Epstein’s reach extended that far — with the exception of the former Prince Andrew, that is.
Then as I was perusing the evening news, I came across two articles that made me ask myself, once again, whether there might be something to this ESP thing after all. The articles were about two very prominent Europeans whose names had appeared in the Epstein files.
The first, rather shockingly, involved Crown Princess Mette-Marit of Norway: a commoner with a four-year-old son when she married Crown Prince Haakon, and now in line to become queen when her husband accedes to the throne.
Crown Princess Mette-Marit
The latest files released by the U.S. Department of Justice contain hundreds of mentions of the Crown Princess, including emails that, while not necessarily indicative of any illegal or improper action on her part, clearly demonstrate a friendly relationship with Epstein, which she now acknowledges constituted “poor judgment.”
The Princess has issued a statement saying, “I showed poor judgement [sic] and regret having any contact with Epstein at all. It is simply embarrassing.” She further expressed her “deep sympathy and solidarity with the victims of the abuses committed by Jeffrey Epstein.” [Paul Kirby, BBC, February 2, 2026.]
In a world where the rich and powerful are almost certain to run into one another at some point, and to find common ground in business or social spheres, it should not surprise us to see virtually anyone’s name in those files. That cannot possibly mean that they were all involved in his sordid, criminal activities.
*. *. *
The second story involves the national security adviser to Robert Fico — Slovakia’s Putin-friendly, hardliner prime minister.
The man in question is Miroslav Lajcak, 62, who submitted his resignation on Saturday in the wake of the release of three million new files by the U.S. Justice Department. Again, while the files reportedly do not show any wrongdoing on Lajcak’s part, they do call into question his suitability for the position of national security adviser.
Miroslav Lajcak
In one text exchange — sounding more like a conversation between two seriously hormonal teenage boys — Lajcak and Epstein have this titillating discussion about a forthcoming meeting between Lajcak and Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, and about some females in an image sent by Epstein (not visible in the record):
Lajcak: “Why don’t you invite me for these games? I would take the ‘MI’ girl.”
Epstein: “Who wouldn’t. You can have them both, I am not possessive. And their sisters.”
Epstein then requests that Lajcak ask Lavrov to get him a tee shirt featuring Lavrov with Vitali Churkin, a Russian ambassador to the UN who had died the year before:
Epstein: “You get the tee shirt. Then you get the girls.” [Lajcak agrees.] “No kidding, their sisters are both swimming in the pool.”
Lajcak: “That’s not fair!”
Epstein: “Though they’re all under 30. So. Probably too young for you. Or should I say under 50.”
Lajcak:“Don’t be mean. You don’t know me in action.” [Aleks Phillips, BBC, February 1, 2026.]
Lajcak initially denied discussing women with Epstein, but later said he had decided to resign to avoid damaging Fico’s position. And Fico, while accepting the resignation, described Lajcak as “an incredible source of experience in diplomacy and foreign policy,” He further said that the outrage expressed by Slovakia’s citizens over the revelations was “an attack against me. I have not seen so much hypocrisy in his criticism for a long time, and from all sides.” [Id.]
Which makes one wonder about Robert Fico’s standards of appropriate behavior. But that’s a whole other issue.
Robert Fico
*. *. *
Well, enough wading in the slime of the so-called “upper classes.” Having been bombarded with this Epstein sh*t for so many weeks now, I am happier than ever to be just plain me.
Alexei Navalny was Russia’s best-known, and best-loved, 21st-century political dissident. His unflagging effort to bring down the corruption of the Putin regime earned him a place in history . . . and ultimately in a Siberian penal colony, where he died under mysterious circumstances two years ago this month, on February 16, 2024.
Alexei Navalny (1976-2024)
But his work, and his words, live on. Although he was speaking of Vladimir Putin, his meaning clearly applies to every tyrant and every would-be autocrat, regardless of nationality:
“We must do what they fear — tell the truth, spread the truth. This is the most powerful weapon against this regime of liars, thieves, and hypocrites. Everyone has this weapon. So make use of it.”
Navalny was right. And if we fail to listen to him, we will become the instruments of our own downfall.
It was announced yesterday that the United States would reduce tariffs on Indian goods from 50% to 18% in exchange for, “among other things,” a promise from India’s Prime Minister, Narendra Modi, that his country would stop buying Russian oil. [David Goldman and Matt Egan, CNN, February 2, 2026.]
Hugging It Out: Narendra Modi and Donald Trump
On its face, that sounds like an excellent move on Trump’s part, designed to put further pressure on the Russian economy with a view toward reaching a settlement of the Ukraine conflict.
But what about those “other things”?
For starters, Modi — whom Trump called “one of my greatest friends” — agreed to reduce India’s tariffs on U.S. goods to zero, and to remove unspecified non-tariff barriers.
In addition, Trump said that India pledged to invest in American goods “at a much higher level,” in addition to a $500 billion investment in U.S. energy, technology, agriculture and coal, among other products. [Id.]
So maybe this wasn’t entirely about helping Ukraine. Maybe it was also about offsetting the EU’s recent signing of a free trade agreement with India. As Trump said:
“If India gives preferential access to the EU, US business is affected. There has been a domino effect.” [Id.]
Ever the pragmatist.
But the real kicker is how India will replace the oil it has been importing from Russia — around 1.5 million barrels per day. And the answer, to Trump, was clear: Venezuelan oil, which happens to be of the same heavy quality as Russian oil and is compatible with India’s existing refineries.
It also happens to be under Donald Trump’s control at the present time, along with the revenue from its sales.
According to a White House “Fact Sheet” titled:
“President Donald J. Trump Safeguards Venezuelan Oil Revenue for the Good of the American and Venezuelan People.
“Today, President Donald J. Trump signed an Executive Order [No. 14373] declaring a national emergency to safeguard Venezuelan oil revenue held in U.S. Treasury accounts from attachment or judicial process, ensuring these funds are preserved to advance U.S. foreign policy objectives. … The Order prohibits transfers or dealings in these funds except as authorized, superseding any prior Orders that might block or regulate them.” [Whitehouse.gov, January 9, 2026.] [Bold emphasis is mine.]
*. *. *
India doesn’t really need to worry about where the money goes once they have paid it, as long as they receive the oil they need. But will they get it? Venezuela’s oil industry is reportedly a shambles, and will require a decade of work and tens of billions of investment dollars to return it to full production capacity. And thus far, the U.S. oil industry has been hesitant to invest in what one oil executive called “uninvestable” Venezuela.
So India may be facing a serious shortfall, unless Trump has a workable plan to get that Venezuelan oil flowing at a sufficient rate to meet India’s needs. According to the White House — and Secretary of State Marco Rubio’s testimony before the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations on January 28th — he does.
On January 29th, the Treasury Department issued General License Number 46, carving out an exception from U.S. sanctions on the Venezuelan oil sector, allowing U.S. companies o engage in certain oil-related transactions with the Government of Venezuela — provided the payments are channeled through the U.S.-based mechanism established by Executive Order 14373. [Scott R. Anderson and Alex Zerden, Lawfare, February 2, 2026.]
Marco Rubio Testifying Before Congress – January 28, 2026
Legal experts, as well as some in Congress, have raised serious concerns . . . for obvious reasons. According to Lawfare:
“To many, Trump’s own past rhetoric about ‘tak[ing] the oil’ and his administration’s history of self-dealing — not to mention the involvement of energy trading companies with political ties to Trump and past problems with corruption, as well as a Middle Eastern country that recently courted Trump’s favor by gifting him a luxury jet — makes this scheme suspect.“ [Id.]
On the other hand, Lawfare continues:
“But a closer examination of the legal context shows that there is more to the Trump administration’s plan than it may seem at first blush. The main purpose of the mechanism set up by Executive Order 14373 is to protect Venezuelan oil revenue from legal process, something that is likely necessary if Venezuela wishes to reengage with the global oil economy. Working through Qatar, meanwhile, is a reasonable short-term solution to genuine legal challenges that Executive Order 14373 cannot address and are likely to take the Trump administration more time to resolve — some (but not all) of which reflect internal tensions within the Trump administration’s own broader policies toward Venezuela.” [Id.]
*. *. *
So there are a number of unknown factors to be resolved before anyone can be sure how this will play out for India. But one thing I would be willing to bet on: somewhere along the line, Trump’s balance sheet will be a little heavier in the Assets column.
The Blog About Everything … and Sometimes Nothing 