When one practices a martial art long enough, one can occasionally feel a surge of invincibility that is both a reality and an illusion. A reality because you experience moments of pure cohesion, when you’re so efficient in thought and action that it’s almost an out-of-body experience. The illusion is that this experience last longer than it does, that controlling it is easier than it is, and that it can be summoned at will. The result of the illusion is believing you’re the deadliest martial artists on the planet. For most of us, this is part of what a friend of mind called “The Invincible Shodan” syndrome. It usually gets beaten out of you by a sempai pretty quick. Then there are those for whom they never out grow it. So here, I’ll tell you who the deadliest martial artist is on the planet–Vladimir Putin.
I don’t say this meaning to praise him. I’m not going to get into his actual martial arts credentials (which he does have), or his KGB past. I’m merely stating a fact. He has the ability (through his military) to kill millions. The rest of us can’t. So until he’s out of power, just remember, he’s the deadliest martial artist alive and that’s the end of it.
Yes, I’m being a bit facetious.
Maya's and Sam's Dad 
Just a bit facetious 😉
It’s an interesting thought: Would like to hear your thoughts about the differences between judo, which I believe is Putin’s training and aikido. I think there is a study to be done about the personal practices of leaders and their ways of handling conflict. Of course, there’s room for a lot of loose reasoning in such an endeavor, but it would be worthwhile to seek rigor in drawing the connections from personal practice to negotiation and conflict resolution.
Yes, Putin’s training is in judo and evidently he’s won some regional tournaments in the past. My experience (because I did judo when I was a teenager) is that the differences are, at the highest levels, variations on a theme in their respective approaches to conflict. One of the biggest difference is in the use of competition, which does change a lot of how and why one trains and the strategies one employs. Another difference is the use of randori, which in judo is one-on-one sparring and in aikido is (usually) a multi-attacker scenario. Again, it changes how one thinks about the training and the strategies involved. How this cycles up into the mind of practitioner who becomes a leader (political or otherwise), in my experience has a lot to do with the individual. But a study on this would be interesting, especially if it involved interviews with these leaders on their philosophy of conflict management and compare/contrast with an objective analysis of their conflict-related decisions.