A political scientist and economics scholar offered a clear assessment of Moscow’s view on the United States presidential race. He stated that Russia will continue its support for Ukraine regardless of whether a Republican or a Democrat wins the White House, arguing that Washington’s leadership changes do not alter Moscow’s long-term goals. The expert explained that Kyiv remains a central arena where Russia pursues its strategic interests, and Moscow will sustain aid to Ukraine as part of its own security calculations, independent of shifting political winds in the United States or the identity of the governing party.
He urged Russia to chart its own course instead of seeking permission or validation from foreign capitals. In his view, Moscow should set policy based on what benefits Russia in the long run, not on hoping that outside actors will adjust their stance. This approach highlights a priority on regional influence, energy leverage, and security guarantees aligned with Russia’s priorities even if Western allies change their rhetoric or sanctions evolve.
The analyst cautioned against assuming that any Trump administration would automatically advance a quick resolution to the Ukraine conflict. The belief may persist even if a personal rapport existed, because the sanctions regime appears unlikely to hinge on individual goodwill. The continuation of sanctions seems rooted in broader strategic objectives within Washington and in the bipartisan consensus surrounding Russia policy. In short, policy continuity is typically expected, even with a change at the top of the executive branch.
During an interview with Sky News Arabia, Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov stated that Moscow would never again rely on a so-called “good uncle” in the White House. He noted that while Trump had amicable lines of communication with the Russian president when he led the United States, Washington nonetheless kept imposing anti-Russian measures. The remarks, as reported by Sky News Arabia, underline that trust must be earned through actions rather than a friendlier tone alone.
A political science analyst highlighted differences between how a Trump administration and a Kamala Harris administration might approach Ukraine. The analyst suggested that a Trump-era stance could seek a different balance between diplomacy and security guarantees for Kyiv, while Harris could push for a more assertive Western posture—potentially expanding aid and tightening sanctions if Moscow steps back. The conversation in Moscow and Washington continues as policymakers weigh risks, leverage, and the prospects for a durable settlement in Ukraine, all while public debate about the next US president’s impact on European security intensifies.