Trump’s personality is unpredictable, the stability and continuity of his policies are far from guaranteed, and the possibility of policy reversals remains ever-present, writes Zhao Huasheng in the second installment of his two-part series analyzing the seismic shifts in US foreign policy. The first part is available here.

       The recent changes in US policy toward Russia have plunged the West into chaos, triggering the most significant internal crisis since the formation of the Western bloc and exposing US-Russia relations to a new and unprecedented environment. While it remains uncertain how far this process will go—and it cannot yet be concluded that these changes are irreversible, as they could still be reversed for various reasons—the shift has undeniably occurred. In the post-Cold War era, US-Russia relations have never before seen a situation where the three major points of contention—NATO’s eastward expansion, security threats, and ideological differences—have been simultaneously alleviated.

       Moreover, the two countries have begun exploring potential areas of cooperation in fields previously marked by competition and conflict, such as the Arctic, energy, and natural gas pipelines. Theoretically, these developments should reduce points of friction between Russia and the United States, lower the risk of conflict, and expand opportunities for collaboration, all of which would benefit the stabilization and improvement of bilateral relations.

       However, this does not mean that US-Russia relations will now progress smoothly and sustainably. Significant obstacles remain.

       The Russia-Ukraine conflict is the first and most critical hurdle. This issue continues to pose serious challenges for US-Russia relations. The core problem lies in the mismatch between Trump’s goals and Russia’s objectives. Trump aims to end the war quickly and secure a peace agreement, regardless of the terms, so he can focus fully on his mission to “make America great again.” Otherwise, his four-year term risks being consumed by this conflict.

       Biden may have harbored similar intentions when he hastily withdrew troops from Afghanistan, but the disastrous retreat became a rallying point for Trump to criticize Biden’s incompetence. Trump is unlikely to repeat Biden’s mistakes. Consequently, anyone obstructing his peace plan will face his ire. If Russia maintains an uncompromising stance and Trump perceives it as the primary obstacle to his proposed peace deal, he may direct his frustration toward Russia, increase military support for Ukraine, and impose even harsher sanctions. Trump and his cabinet members have already made this clear. Such actions would inevitably hinder the normalization of US-Russia relations.

       Another major obstacle is the US military aid to Ukraine and its comprehensive sanctions against Russia. The US is Ukraine’s largest donor, providing heavy weaponry such as aircraft, artillery, tanks, and missiles, as well as satellite reconnaissance intelligence crucial to modern warfare. The US has effectively become an integral part of Ukraine’s military operations, actions that amount to acts of war. Simultaneously, the US has imposed unprecedentedly severe economic sanctions on Russia, aiming to cripple its financial and economic resources.

       The new US Secretary of State, Marco Rubio, has acknowledged that this is a “proxy war” between the United States and Russia. By traditional standards, Russia and the US are effectively in a “quasi-war” or informal state of conflict. Until this “proxy war” ends, US-Russia relations cannot normalize, let alone develop into a friendly partnership. The only way to resolve this is for the US to cease large-scale military support to Ukraine, abandon its economic blockade against Russia, and gradually lift most sanctions. However, this process is unlikely to be quick or easy.

       Trump’s policy toward Russia remains shrouded in mystery. While there has been much speculation and analysis about his motives for reaching out to Russia, his true intentions and the kind of relationship he ultimately envisions remain unclear to outsiders. What is the “grand bargain” he seeks with Russia? What price is he willing to pay? What does he want from Russia? These questions remain unanswered. It is uncertain whether Trump aims to restructure US-Russia relations into a strategic partnership or if his outreach is merely driven by personal admiration for Russia and President Putin, devoid of any strategic goals.

       Trump’s decisions are swift, sudden, and sharp—but so are his reversals. In other words, Trump’s diplomacy is unconventional, defies common sense, is influenced by immediate events and emotions, and is both unpredictable and prone to abrupt changes. Simply put, Trump’s personality is erratic, the stability and continuity of his policies are unreliable, and the possibility of policy reversals is ever-present.

       Domestically, anti-Russian and pro-Ukrainian forces remain strong. Republicans, congressional opposition, elites, and certain interest groups continue to hold their ground, and little has changed since Trump’s inauguration. After the initial shock and dismay subside, these groups will regroup and seek opportunities to counter Trump’s policies. This opposition is a significant constraint on Trump, not only regarding his Russia policy but also his broader foreign policy and even his administration itself. Trump’s approach to Russia is unlikely to gain their support and may even intensify their resistance.

       The smoother Trump’s Russia policy progresses and the more US-Russia relations develop, the more intense the criticism may become. Conversely, any setbacks in the relationship will invite mockery and increase pressure to alter the policy.

       In other words, regardless of whether US-Russia relations flourish or falter, Trump’s Russia policy will face attacks.

       To counter domestic political losses, Trump may adopt a tougher stance toward Russia to demonstrate that he is not pro-Russian. In fact, Trump has often justified himself by claiming he has been the toughest on Russia.

       From a broader perspective, one of the major obstacles to developing a strategic partnership between Russia and the US is the deeply negative perceptions each holds of the other. This is a heavy burden accumulated over 30 years of post-Cold War relations, leaving both nations with a poor image of one another and a lack of basic trust. These perceptions, formed over decades, are difficult to change quickly. Negative perceptions act as an invisible barrier to forming high-level state relations and undermine confidence in long-term, stable cooperation.

       Although Trump’s overtures toward Russia have caused an uproar in the US and Europe, Russia’s leadership and elites have remained calm, showing little euphoria and maintaining caution about the prospects for bilateral relations. This stands in stark contrast to the optimism seen during past warming periods in US-Russia relations. This does not mean Russia is uninterested in improving ties with the US, but painful historical lessons have made Russia wary of placing too much confidence or trust in the United States.

       Assuming the issues of Ukraine’s NATO accession and a peace agreement can be resolved, US-Russia relations will still face a significant challenge: their fundamental differences over the construction of the international order. Trump’s “America First” policy is essentially a more self-centered form of hegemony, which clashes with Russia’s vision of a multipolar world order. This raises the question of what the foundation of US-Russia relations would be—equality or subordination.

       In Trump’s hegemonic worldview, Russia cannot be granted equal status with the US, as that would undermine the very concept of hegemony. Russia’s foreign policy, however, is rooted in maintaining independence, sovereignty, and equal status among great powers, rejecting subordination to any nation or group. Neither the US hegemonic system nor a subordinate role is acceptable to Russia, making it unlikely that Russia will seek a place in Trump’s hegemonic world. While Trump shows a desire to cooperate with Russia, his approach is condescending and US-centric, with little room for multipolarity, multilateralism, or mutual benefit. By seeking cooperation with Russia aimed at countering China, the Trump administration is also using Russia as a tool, often at Russia’s expense.

       From a longer-term perspective, even if Trump’s pro-Russia policy overcomes various obstacles, withstands domestic pressure, and persists until the end of his term, the future of US-Russia relations will depend on the policies of his successor. Trump’s Russia policy carries a strong personal imprint, and whether the next administration will continue it remains uncertain.

       Today’s US-Russia relations, like much of international politics, are fraught with uncertainties, contingencies, and unpredictable “black swan” events, as the global community has repeatedly experienced in recent years. Predicting the future of US-Russia relations can only be speculative rather than definitive, and any conclusions must be made with this in mind.

       The future of US-Russia relations can be roughly divided into four levels, from low to high: resumption of contact, selective cooperation, normalization, and strategic partnership.

       In the context of the Russia-Ukraine conflict and the near-total suspension of diplomatic ties, the resumption of contact itself represents a significant foreign policy shift with important political implications. US-Russia relations are currently in this phase, though it remains incomplete, with interactions still preliminary and limited. A planned meeting between the Russian and US presidents could mark the completion of this stage.

       Selective cooperation refers to collaboration between the two countries in specific areas or projects, even without full normalization of relations. Given the ongoing “proxy war” between the US and Russia, normal relations are unlikely, but cooperation in certain areas could still occur if both sides see mutual benefit. Selective cooperation is the most probable form of US-Russia relations in the near term and may persist for some time.

       Normal diplomatic relations, while typical for most countries, remain a lofty goal for US-Russia relations at this stage. However, given the changes brought about by Trump’s foreign policy, normalization is a realistic possibility if his approach succeeds.

       A strategic partnership represents the highest conceivable level of US-Russia relations. This stage is currently unattainable due to the lack of shared strategic goals and the presence of significant obstacles. Even if progress is made, its sustainability will depend on developments after Trump’s presidency.

       Views expressed are of individual Members and Contributors, rather than the Club's, unless explicitly stated otherwise.