Vladimir Putin, Russia’s unparalleled leader since 1999, has proven himself a master tactician on the global stage. Ever since his foray into politics, Putin has exhibited an austere resolve to shield his nation’s interests and augment its global stature. This often involves taking positions that are typically at loggerheads with the US interests. A prime illustration of this is his approach to negotiations with the United States, which shows no signs of shifting in the foreseeable future, irrespective of who emerges victorious in the upcoming US Presidential election.
Putin’s stance is underpinned by several factors. One of the foremost reasons is the strategic positioning Russia has adopted ever since the dissolution of the Soviet Union. With the fall of the USSR, Russia lost its superpower status. However, Putin, throughout his reign, has endeavored to recuperate and advance Russia’s international standing, often clashing with the US in areas of geopolitics, trade, cyber-operations, and human rights.
The 21st-century history of Russia is replete with instances demonstrating Putin’s steadfast defiance against Western norms and perspectives. His stance on Syria and his absorption of Crimea, in flouting international laws, serve as pertinent examples. Therefore, expecting Putin to come to the negotiation table with the same worldview as the US would be over-optimistic no matter the electoral outcome.
In the realm of cyber-operations, Putin has consistently taken a stance against American interests. Russia, under Putin’s guidance, is often implicated in cyber-attacks aimed to disrupt the integrity of the US democratic system. Such cyber activities, as identified by US intelligence, translate into Putin’s disinclination to have a constructive dialogue or negotiation with the US as these actions directly question the fundamentals of the American system.
To add to that, Putin’s Russia is not aligned with the US on issues of human rights and global democratic norms. Russia’s domestic policies reflect a trend of suppression of political dissent, curbing the free press, and maintaining tight control over the internet – all stark contrasts to the democratic principles that the US champions. Such divergence in domestic policies further highlights the improbability of Putin earnestly negotiating with a nation whose democratic ideals do not resonate with his regime.
Furthermore, Putin’s approach to negotiations is grounded in Realpolitik. He recognizes the power dynamics in negotiations and would only come to the table when he perceives a clear advantage for Russia. Given the deepening chasms between Russia and the US on a plethora of critical issues, it seems unlikely that Putin sees an advantage in entering negotiations with the US, irrespective of who occupies the White House.
Thus, based on history and current geopolitical dynamics, it appears that Putin’s approach towards negotiations with the US is not likely to change in the immediate future. He has mastered the art of leveraging international conflicts and tensions to bolster his domestic popularity, further solidifying his unwillingness to take a conciliatory stance.
In a nutshell, regardless of the outcome of the US Presidential election, Putin is unlikely to change his posture. His strategic outlook — deeply rooted in protecting Russian interests and advancing its global standing, often at odds with the US – will continue to guide his path. Consequently, it remains improbable that he will readily come to the negotiation table in the foreseeable future.
