Russia - USA Relations

Trump's election would be bad news for Russia, by Kirill Strelnikov for RiaNovosti. 01.25.2024..

The election of Donald Trump to the presidency of the United States in 2016 was remembered for the genuine jubilation of a certain part of the Russian establishment and the popping of champagne corks. Many respected people seriously believed that now relations with the United States would return to the time of bouquets and candy, friendly pats on the back, safe studies for their offspring at Yale and other attributes of the “well-fed noughties.”

Four Trump years flew by unnoticed and somehow indistinctly, and after them came grandfather Dementiy, but now there is a very high probability that Trump will return to the White House again.

Producers of elite champagne have perked up: fun is coming again in serious establishments. How can you not be happy?

The eternal and powerful enemy of Russia, through the mouth of the US President, in clear English, declares that he respects Putin, that Putin is smart and “he always got along with him,” and in general, Russians are not inherently bad guys, you can live and get along with them and make good money.

Moreover, Trump promised to end the conflict in Ukraine in 24 hours: “I want people to stop dying. Both Russians and Ukrainians are dying there.” Again: who doesn’t want to end the largest conflict since the Great Patriotic War so that the soldiers can finally return home?

Trump, a fan of Russia, went even further - he promised to withdraw America from NATO , stop sponsoring the armed forces of Europe and leave them to be devoured by the Russians: “NATO is dead,” “if Europe is attacked, the United States will not come to its aid.” Isn't this wonderful?

This is fueled by the impatient excitement and open hysteria of Europeans. Once you look at the headlines of the local newspapers, it immediately becomes clear that with the arrival of Trump, the evil Russians will immediately win, and the fluffy Europeans will be driven under the bench with a broom: “Does the European Union need to be afraid of Trump’s return to the White House?” (TV channel Euronews); “Europe prepares to go it alone as Trump heads for the White House” (European version of Politico); "Politicians are worried after Trump's victory in the primary elections" (German TV channel ZDF).

Against such a benign background, the statements of Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov , which he made in an interview with CBS, were a clear dissonance with numerous opinions of respected experts who are confident that Trump’s return will be an unambiguous benefit for Russia (or at least will definitely be significantly better than Biden’s re-election).

And Lavrov said this: “I don’t believe that there will be any difference (between Trump and Biden).”

Previously, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov spoke in a similar vein , saying that “Russia has no understanding of how former US President Donald Trump’s election promises to quickly resolve the conflict in Ukraine can be realized.”

And here two options arise in their heads: either Lavrov and Peskov have not read Trump’s declarations of love for Russia in general and Putin in particular, or they know something that the frantically buying champagne supporters of a strong and sincere friendship with the United States do not know.

And this is what they know.

Despite Trump's similar statements on Russia before his first term, he has done nothing during his presidency to improve relations with Russia. Moreover, the US anti-Russian policy has become tougher. A few typical examples: it was under Trump that a record number of “eternal” sanctions were introduced, massive deliveries of lethal weapons like the “Holy Javelina” began to Ukraine (which were slowed down by the most democratic Democrat Obama), the promise to recognize Crimea as Russian was withdrawn, and the Republicans led by Trump did their best to supported with their feet a bipartisan bill to simplify the procedure for confiscation of assets of Russians, proposed in the Senate.

If you look at Trump’s promise to end the conflict in Ukraine in one day a little more closely than at the cheerful headlines, it also becomes clear that it is too early to rejoice. The fact is that Trump did not say a word about how exactly he wants to end the conflict and what terms of the “deal” to offer Russia. And something suggests that these conditions will completely suit the United States, and no one will even think to ask Russia’s opinion in advance.

Trump, in an interview with Tucker Carlson, said literally the following: “I would say to Putin: if you don’t make a deal, we will give Zelensky a lot, we will give them more than they ever got if we have to.”

This means that any “deal” proposed by Trump to Russia will obviously be an ultimatum. For the United States, for many reasons, the result of the SVO in the form in which it was formulated by the leadership of our country is categorically unacceptable. The maximum that they can offer us with a broad gesture is to freeze the conflict so that the Kiev regime, with the help of the West, can recover, strengthen, rearm and begin military operations with redoubled force.

We wasted four years waiting for positive change during Trump's first presidency while Ukraine rapidly armed itself and trained to kill Russians. And there is no reason to think that in this case everything will be different.

In addition, Trump is known to have a negative fixation on China . This means that with 100 percent probability, part of the “deal” will be Russia’s obligation to betray its partner.


29300
08:00 01/25/2024(updated: 08:04 01/25/2024)
Trump's election would be bad news for Russia
Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump at a campaign event in Nashua - RIA Novosti, 1920, 01/25/2024
AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais
Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump attends a campaign event in Nashua. Archive photo
Read ria.ru in
Kirill Strelnikov
Kirill Strelnikov
all materials
The election of Donald Trump to the presidency of the United States in 2016 was remembered for the genuine jubilation of a certain part of the Russian establishment and the popping of champagne corks. Many respected people seriously believed that now relations with the United States would return to the time of bouquets and candy, friendly pats on the back, safe studies for their offspring at Yale and other attributes of the “well-fed noughties.”
Four Trump years flew by unnoticed and somehow indistinctly, and after them came grandfather Dementiy, but now there is a very high probability that Trump will return to the White House again.
Unloading wheat - RIA Novosti, 1920, 01/20/2024
The US is preparing to destroy a key Russian industry
January 20, 08:00
Producers of elite champagne have perked up: fun is coming again in serious establishments. How can you not be happy?


crocusfitness.com
ANÚNCIO
Откройте свой Crocus Fitness. Фитнес-клуб под ключ
The eternal and powerful enemy of Russia, through the mouth of the US President, in clear English, declares that he respects Putin, that Putin is smart and “he always got along with him,” and in general, Russians are not inherently bad guys, you can live and get along with them and make good money.
Moreover, Trump promised to end the conflict in Ukraine in 24 hours: “I want people to stop dying. Both Russians and Ukrainians are dying there.” Again: who doesn’t want to end the largest conflict since the Great Patriotic War so that the soldiers can finally return home?
A nurse in an intensive care ward in the suburbs of Paris - RIA Novosti, 1920, 01/19/2024
The West will be terrorized in a proven way
January 19, 08:00
Trump, a fan of Russia, went even further - he promised to withdraw America from NATO , stop sponsoring the armed forces of Europe and leave them to be devoured by the Russians: “NATO is dead,” “if Europe is attacked, the United States will not come to its aid.” Isn't this wonderful?


объясняем.рф
ANÚNCIO SOCIAL
Когда российские космонавты отправятся на Луну?
This is fueled by the impatient excitement and open hysteria of Europeans. Once you look at the headlines of the local newspapers, it immediately becomes clear that with the arrival of Trump, the evil Russians will immediately win, and the fluffy Europeans will be driven under the bench with a broom: “Does the European Union need to be afraid of Trump’s return to the White House?” (TV channel Euronews); “Europe prepares to go it alone as Trump heads for the White House” (European version of Politico); "Politicians are worried after Trump's victory in the primary elections" (German TV channel ZDF).
Against such a benign background, the statements of Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov , which he made in an interview with CBS, were a clear dissonance with numerous opinions of respected experts who are confident that Trump’s return will be an unambiguous benefit for Russia (or at least will definitely be significantly better than Biden’s re-election) .
Assistant to the US President for National Security Jake Sullivan - RIA Novosti, 1920, 01/18/2024
The US recognized the inevitable
January 18, 08:00
And Lavrov said this: “I don’t believe that there will be any difference (between Trump and Biden).”


vbochke.ru
РЕКЛАМА
Главный мясной ресторан с лучшими стейками
Previously, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov spoke in a similar vein , saying that “Russia has no understanding of how former US President Donald Trump’s election promises to quickly resolve the conflict in Ukraine can be realized.”
And here two options arise in their heads: either Lavrov and Peskov have not read Trump’s declarations of love for Russia in general and Putin in particular, or they know something that the frantically buying champagne supporters of a strong and sincere friendship with the United States do not know.
Donald Trump speaks at a campaign rally in Nevada - RIA Novosti, 1920, 01/14/2024
The Vice President will decide the fate of the United States
January 14, 08:00
And this is what they know.


finionpay.ru
ANÚNCIO
Получи паспорт Германии. Без виз в 177 стран! За €80 000
Despite Trump's similar statements on Russia before his first term, he has done nothing during his presidency to improve relations with Russia. Moreover, the US anti-Russian policy has become tougher. A few typical examples: it was under Trump that a record number of “eternal” sanctions were introduced, massive deliveries of lethal weapons like the “Holy Javelina” began to Ukraine (which were slowed down by the most democratic Democrat Obama), the promise to recognize Crimea as Russian was withdrawn, and the Republicans led by Trump did their best to supported with their feet a bipartisan bill to simplify the procedure for confiscation of assets of Russians, proposed in the Senate.
If you look at Trump’s promise to end the conflict in Ukraine in one day a little more closely than at the cheerful headlines, it also becomes clear that it is too early to rejoice. The fact is that Trump did not say a word about how exactly he wants to end the conflict and what terms of the “deal” to offer Russia. And something suggests that these conditions will completely suit the United States, and no one will even think to ask Russia’s opinion in advance.
Russian flag - RIA Novosti, 1920, 01/10/2024
The US wants Gorbachev instead of Putin
January 10, 08:00
Trump, in an interview with Tucker Carlson, said literally the following: “I would say to Putin: if you don’t make a deal, we will give Zelensky a lot, we will give them more than they ever got if we have to.”


crocusfitness.com
ANÚNCIO
Откройте свой Crocus Fitness. Фитнес-клуб под ключ
This means that any “deal” proposed by Trump to Russia will obviously be an ultimatum. For the United States, for many reasons, the result of the SVO in the form in which it was formulated by the leadership of our country is categorically unacceptable. The maximum that they can offer us with a broad gesture is to freeze the conflict so that the Kiev regime, with the help of the West, can recover, strengthen, rearm and begin military operations with redoubled force.
We wasted four years waiting for positive change during Trump's first presidency while Ukraine rapidly armed itself and trained to kill Russians. And there is no reason to think that in this case everything will be different.
USA flag - RIA Novosti, 1920, 01/08/2024
America began to save democracy from democrats
January 8, 08:00
In addition, Trump is known to have a negative fixation on China . This means that with 100 percent probability, part of the “deal” will be Russia’s obligation to betray its partner.

It is clear that we will never agree to either the first or the second, which means there will be no deal, and Trump, who has lost face, can in one second turn from a Russophile into the main Russophobe and surpass all the Bidens, Obamas and Clintons combined.

We must understand that Trump 2.0, even if he verbally wants peace, friendship and chewing gum, will inevitably act in the interests of the American (Atlantic) elites and large transnational capital, since he will be completely paralyzed, as the first time, by an effective system of “checks” and counterbalances", the threat of impeachment, sabotage and pressure from the main sponsor of the Republican Party - the large oil and gas business, which is completely satisfied with the current status quo and squeezing Russia out of the European market. The United States will not leave any NATO; there will be no “reset” buttons.

If we abstract away a little from the comedic aspect associated with Trump, the harsh reality remains:

1) neither the United States nor Russia will change their initial assessments of the causes of the conflict in Ukraine, and therefore a compromise there is impossible in principle;

2) Western financing of Ukraine will continue;

3) the expenditure of economic and human resources by Russia in Ukraine plays into the hands of the Americans, and they will prolong the conflict to the maximum;

4) Russia and the United States have radically opposing geostrategic interests, and there can be no peaceful coexistence, much less cooperation, in the current conditions.

We did everything we could, including numerous steps forward and “gestures of goodwill.” But the West, according to Lavrov, “has a deepening complex of superiority and a complex of impunity,” that is, they do not want to negotiate in an amicable way, cannot and will not, but will only exploit our weaknesses.

The supposedly “friendly” Trump, in fact, could become a Trojan horse to lull our vigilance, slow down the speed of our transformations and reverse the nationalization of the elites, which could ultimately lead to our heavy defeats and losses.

And this means that we should not wave flags with Trump’s portrait, but do our job, grow stronger - and win.

https://ria.ru/20240125/tramp-1923285195.html

Stone in the bosom: Trump is not flirting with Russia for nothing, by Victoria Nikiforova for RiaNovosti. 07.17.2024.

The rumors that Donald Trump wants to hold peace talks with Russia on Ukraine have been pouring in. It would seem that everything is going well for Moscow - the sniper's amazing miss, which practically ensured the ex-president's victory in the elections, and his choice of J.D. Vance as vice president, who is categorically against Ukraine in general and against Zelensky personally. And then there's the idea of ​​peace talks. But isn't everything too idyllic?

First, we must understand that Donald Trump couldn't care less about Ukraine or Russia. It's not that he suddenly felt sorry for the children of Donetsk and Belgorod who died from American missiles. It's just that at this stage, many Republicans believe that the conflict in the Eastern European theater has stopped bringing the Americans the profits it used to bring, and it should be urgently dumped on the balance sheet of the Europeans, and they themselves should move on to war with China.

And so the long-planned escalation with the PRC had to be shifted to the right many times, and all because all resources - financial, military and propaganda - were spent on servicing the Ukrainian front.

Trump is feared in Europe precisely because they understand that he is capable of pushing the Old World into the Ukrainian meat grinder until its complete destruction in earnest. They are afraid not because he will abandon Ukraine, but because he will abandon it specifically to the Europeans. He will blackmail them with his nuclear umbrella, put pressure on them during negotiations, yell, bang his fist on the table - this is not the mumbling Biden or Blinken.

As an experienced negotiator, Trump will come to the negotiations with Russia with this trump card - either make peace with Kiev , or I will hand over the conflict to the care of the Europeans and supply them with weapons against you. He has openly threatened to supply weapons, and this must be taken seriously.

Secondly, Trump needs negotiations with Russia not for charitable reasons like "peace throughout the world", he is not Gorbachev, mind you, he has his own specific goal here. The Republicans promised their voters in advance to take up arms against China - under this it will be possible to promote the military-industrial complex, reindustrialize the "rust belt", strangle imports with tariffs and sponsor their own manufacturers, take away markets from the Chinese and take them for themselves. The profits are expected to be huge, but the risk is also great.

It is absolutely impossible to enter into an open conflict with Beijing if Moscow is looming behind it, capable of providing its Chinese comrades with resources and logistics, and also providing considerable military assistance. This means that the Republicans must tear Moscow away from Beijing. Trump urgently needs to reduce the degree of confrontation with Russia, hence all these attractions of unheard-of generosity - promises to "end the war in 24 hours", criticism of Ukraine, attacks on Zelensky.

This rhetoric sounds pleasant to us, let's be honest, but let's ask ourselves: why does an American politician, who is simply obsessed with restoring America's greatness, suddenly have such love for us ? It seems that Trump is simply crudely flattering, trying to secure Moscow's favor: he desperately needs, if not Russia's support, then at least its neutrality, when the Americans begin a full-scale offensive against China with a deployed front.

And the clock is ticking, American strategists don't have much time, a few more years, and only a suicide would risk acting against China. On the other hand, this is the last attempt to somehow revive American industry and save its "rust belt" from extinction. The US will not have another chance: they have already bled Europe dry, and their "backyard" in Latin America even more so. China is the last fat piece of the world market, and if Washington does not seize it, the States will only be left to rot and fall apart.

By the way, we are not necessarily talking about a big hot war with China. No, the Republicans want to try out the same scheme on this country that the Democrats tried on Russia: a limited military conflict in the Taiwan area , "hellish sanctions" with the aim of depriving the PRC of markets and sources of resources, an attempt to demoralize and ruin the population, stir it up to rebellion and thus weaken the country to the point that it will go under American control simply to stop this whole nightmare.

But getting involved in this adventure without Russia is like death. Therefore, Trump does not have to present himself as a benefactor - he and his party need reconciliation with Moscow in order to get away with another neocolonialist adventure that can at least slightly improve the lives of the rapidly impoverished population of the United States. Because otherwise his country will simply fly to pieces - the very attempt on Trump's life shows that the States have frankly gone haywire.

As much as we would like to think that the new old US president will be a little smarter than the old old one, this is not so. Both are financed by the same military-industrial corporations that benefit from starting wars all over the world. It is the interests of these corporations that all American politicians, regardless of their political orientation, diligently serve.

Therefore, all ideas about "peace talks" will come down to Trump trying to trade improved relations between Russia and the US in exchange for a break in relations between Moscow and Beijing. Is this beneficial for us in the long term? The answer is obvious.

https://ria.ru/20240717/tramp-1960064947.html

It would seem that everything is going well for Moscow - the sniper's amazing miss,

and it should be urgently dumped on the balance sheet of the Europeans, and they themselves should move on to war with China.

As an experienced negotiator, Trump will come to the negotiations with Russia with this trump card - either make peace with Kiev , or I will hand over the conflict to the care of the Europeans and supply them with weapons against you. He has openly threatened to supply weapons, and this must be taken seriously.

This means that the Republicans must tear Moscow away from Beijing. Trump urgently needs to reduce the degree of confrontation with Russia, hence all these attractions of unheard-of generosity - promises to "end the war in 24 hours", criticism of Ukraine, attacks on Zelensky.

No, the Republicans want to try out the same scheme on this country that the Democrats tried on Russia: a limited military conflict in the Taiwan area , "hellish sanctions" with the aim of depriving the PRC of markets and sources of resources, an attempt to demoralize and ruin the population, stir it up to rebellion and thus weaken the country to the point that it will go under American control simply to stop this whole nightmare.

As much as we would like to think that the new old US president will be a little smarter than the old old one, this is not so. Both are financed by the same military-industrial corporations that benefit from starting wars all over the world. It is the interests of these corporations that all American politicians, regardless of their political orientation, diligently serve.

Moscow managed to scare Washington for at least two weeks, by Dmitry Bavyrin for VZGLYAD. 09.17.2024.

The fact that the US has once again deceived Volodymyr Zelensky's hopes and has not allowed the Ukrainian Armed Forces to use long-range missiles to strike deep into Russian territory threatens to be not a cancellation of the escalation, but only a delay. In Kyiv, they hope that the events of next week at the UN will break the stubbornness of Joe Biden, who is still frightened by the prospect of a third world war.

"There are no changes today." With these words, State Department spokesman Matthew Miller made it clear that Washington still prohibits the Ukrainian Armed Forces from using their long-range missiles to strike regions of the Russian Federation far from the front line. The meeting between US President Joe Biden and British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, contrary to expectations , did not change anything in this regard: Starmer is for, and Biden is still against, and Volodymyr Zelensky failed to convince him otherwise.

Journalists are now grilling the White House, the State Department, and Matthew Miller personally about why expectations were not met, but to no avail: there are no specifics either. However, the most obvious version is that Washington got scared and did not dare to step over the “red line,” although they raised their foot over it.

It is worth emphasizing that the suspicion that the conflict was seemingly reaching a new level, and that Zelensky would get what he had been begging for over a year, was not empty hysteria or an information “bubble” inflated by the press. The point is not that sources from the most influential Western media outlets unanimously announced a change in Washington’s position on long-range missiles. But that such a development of events was confirmed by officials.

On the US side, it was Mike McCaul, Chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee. He is a Republican, is in opposition to Biden and has long lobbied to lift restrictions on the Ukrainian Armed Forces, but due to his position, he is present at closed briefings, has access to classified information, and, most importantly, referred to a conversation with Secretary of State Anthony Blinken before his visit to Kyiv last week.

On the Russian side, Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov gave a revealing comment, in whose opinion the West has already made a decision on missiles, and now they are only trying to “formalize it more elegantly.”

Smolenskaya Square also confirmed that they are in constant contact with Washington on this issue. But it was generally accepted that the last channels of communication with the Americans that were still working were embassies (for the most formal communication through the transmission of notes) and periodic meetings of the heads of the SVR and the CIA.

In general, Moscow's position and the severity of its possible reaction have been accurately conveyed to the US authorities. And Russian President Vladimir Putin has publicly outlined it:

"If the decision (to lift restrictions for the Ukrainian Armed Forces – Vzglyad note) is made, it will mean nothing less than the direct participation of NATO countries, the US, and European countries in the war in Ukraine. This is their direct participation, and this, of course, significantly changes the very essence, the very nature of the conflict. This will mean that NATO countries – the US, European countries – are fighting Russia. And if this is so, then, bearing in mind the change in the very essence of this conflict, we will make appropriate decisions based on the threats that will be created for us."

It was after this statement that the world media sources began to change their testimony abruptly, and the stakes were lowered right before our eyes. Even from the “compromise option,” according to which the US would allow Kyiv to use only British missiles (this would also require US permission) or “at least” expand the geography of permitted strikes, they moved in less than a day to the current one – “no changes.”

Unfortunately, this lack of change is going along the lines of "we don't relax, we fix it." In the long run, Sergey Lavrov will most likely be right: the decision has indeed been made. For the US, this is one of the upcoming rounds of raising the stakes, which will follow a critical deterioration in the position of the Ukrainian Armed Forces on the battlefield.

But for now, Washington does not want to play this trump card – not so much powerful as dangerous. At least, they do not want to do it after Joe Biden has been replaced.

It all looks as if the issue really rests on the outgoing US president, who has decided to show consistent intransigence. And that seems to be true, given some of Biden’s personal characteristics.

It is now common to talk about him as a lame duck who has lost his ability to work and never gets out of vacation. This is mostly true, but in age-related dementia, professional skills are the last to fail.

Biden's profession, no matter how you feel about him, is foreign policy and negotiations with great powers, and his personal political credo is to contain the US's adversaries while preventing a third world war. He has devoted half a century to this, and now, a few months before his final retirement, he is unlikely to be eager to jump into an uncontrollable crisis, exchanging it for an acute, but more or less controllable crisis.

Much of Biden's presidency has been a game of fire and escalation for Washington, but it hasn't come to the worst – that same Third World War.

His strategic challenge now is to choose a design solution for a library in Delaware, rather than to nullify his own half-century of diplomatic practice by engaging in direct military conflict with a nuclear power. Biden would obviously prefer that this raising of the stakes occurs after he leaves the White House.

I don't want to take responsibility for starting a nuclear apocalypse right before retirement.

Alas, Biden has another way to, if not avoid this responsibility completely, then share it with an unspecified circle of people.

Next Tuesday, September 24, the so-called high week with the participation of top officials will begin at the already opened session of the UN General Assembly in New York. Zelensky will also fly there. He hopes not only to convince Biden during a personal meeting, having a specific scenario for long-range missile strikes on Russia, but also to present a certain “peace plan” to the whole world.

It has already been announced that lifting restrictions on the use of American missiles in the Ukrainian Armed Forces is a key part of the plan, without which it is not viable. Zelensky's stated goal is also to sharply worsen the lives of Russians ("so that they live in danger, live without comfort, without energy") so that they "begin to put pressure on Putin."

There is nothing new in this part of the "plan": most of the sanctions imposed on Russia were aimed at worsening the lives of Russians. But against the backdrop of the discussion about the use of long-range missiles, it sounded like an announcement of strikes on the civilian infrastructure of the Russian Federation.

It seems that the pressure that the Russians could exert in this case would not concern capitulation, but the use of ballistic missiles at Bankova Street in Kyiv, where Zelensky has an office.

It does not yet seem that Biden is ready to meet Zelensky halfway, despite the dire situation of the Ukrainian Armed Forces. This entire geopolitical adventure was initially started to weaken Russia, and not to ensure a victory for Ukraine. Ukraine is just a tool that will eventually break anyway.

However, many in the elite, not only in the US but also in the EU, are making it clear that they want to take a risk and cross Russia’s “red line.” This means that the possibility of a sharp change in “missile policy” remains. Zelensky’s standup in the General Assembly could become a “gathering point” for some international coalition of supporters of strikes against Russia, which will allow Washington to share responsibility for the consequences with all its participants.

True, Biden, due to his diplomatic experience, should understand that such “international coalitions” are perceived by Moscow as an alliance of Washington’s vassals, where the United States is the only sovereign, so the responsibility for the consequences on them and Biden personally will be full, not partial.

And what exactly the consequences will be is a question with several possible answers, the correctness of any of which I would not like to test in practice.

https://vz.ru/world/2024/9/17/1287665.html

[b]Peskov explained why Putin bet on Harris
Peskov spoke about the predictability of Harris and Biden and their position.

MOSCOW, November 10 - RIA Novosti. US President Joe Biden and former presidential candidate Kamala Harris, as well as their positions, were predictable, while Donald Trump, who won the election, is less predictable in comparison, said Russian presidential press secretary Dmitry Peskov. A video of the comment was published on the journalist's Telegram channel .
"It's one thing to bet on predictability; in terms of Ms. Harris and Mr. Biden, everything is quite predictable, and the line they will take until they leave the White House. Mr. Trump is less predictable in this regard," Peskov told journalist Pavel Zarubin , who said that Russian President Vladimir Putin's bet on Harris did not work.

Putin, speaking at the WEF plenary session in September, said Moscow would support Harris on the advice of current US President Joe Biden. The Russian leader noted that Harris has an infectious laugh, which shows that she is doing well.

https://ria.ru/20241110/putin-1982924215.html