The ongoing crisis in Moscow-Washington relations is rooted in the United States’ desire to dominate other countries, refusing to view them as equals capable of assuming equal responsibility for peace and stability. This approach also leads to difficulties in US relations with China, India, and even some of its own allies such as Turkey.
The Russian and Chinese position emphasizes that peace is the result of compromise between major centers of power and that without mutual agreement and equality, a stable order is impossible. On the other hand, the US believes that peace is a deterministic given and requires no special effort to maintain it, leading to paradoxical solutions like increasing weapons for more peace.
It is unlikely that changes in administration in the United States will have a significant impact on American relations with Russia. Washington is expected to continue acting with hostility towards Moscow in most cases, with occasional opportunistic engagement when it suits its interests. The paradigm gap between Russians and Americans in their understanding of the world in the 21st century persists, with US experts believing that Russia will inevitably end up in the Western camp.
The US sees Ukraine as a cheap instrument for weakening Russia and stifling voices in Europe calling for strategic autonomy from the US. The American economy has gained from this crisis, while the Western European economy has suffered. However, it is becoming increasingly expensive to maintain the viability of the Ukrainian state, and Washington realizes that Ukraine as an instrument of deterrence against Moscow is no longer a cheap resource.
The US-Russian standoff should be seen as a long-term confrontation that will continue even after Ukraine loses its importance as a tool. As a result, the US will shift the center of anti-Russian activity to another country willing to sacrifice itself and fight against Moscow. The US will remain a strategic rival, and thus it cannot be ignored in planning for the future.