Follow us on social

Victoria-nuland-scaled

Ice breaking? Russia waives ban on Victoria Nuland

Along with the bad, there seems to be a number of goodwill gestures on both sides in hopes of building trust.

Analysis | Europe

In a surprise move earlier this month, the Russian Federation waived a targeted sanction on Victoria Nuland — the current Undersecretary of State for Political Affairs — in exchange for a reciprocal move from the U.S., which issued a visa for Russian diplomat Konstantin Vorontsov. 

Nuland, who was previously President Obama’s Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs, is a household name amongst Russia’s political class. Known for her influence over Obama’s Russia-policy in his second term and most infamously for her public support of the Ukrainian Euromaidan protests that deposed the sitting president in 2014, Nuland became the “personification of Washington’s foreign policy in the region” in the words of Fyodor Lukyanov, one of Russia’s premier foreign policy commentators and Editor-in-Chief of Russia in Global Affairs.

The reason for this diplomatic quid-pro-quo was a three-day trip Nuland took last week to Moscow for meetings with high-ranking officials in the Russian Foreign Ministry, Defense Ministry, and the Presidential Executive Office. As some have inferred from the Biden Administration’s official statements and actions vis-à-vis Russia these past 10 months, there has been a realization in the White House that a dual confrontation with both Moscow and Beijing is not ideal and must be avoided. 

These actions can be seen in the relatively pragmatic statements emanating from the administration following four-years of rather hysterical Democratic fear mongering over Russia’s purported interference in the 2016 elections. Although, it must be said, there still exists a penchant for the aimless use of sanctions against Russia, as well as a continuing diplomatic breakdown between the two countries — not to mention Biden’s rather undiplomatic depiction of Putin earlier this year.

Additionally, the continued use of Manichean language regarding ‘Democracies’ vs. ‘Autocracies’ are not at all helpful in rebalancing relations. However, Biden’s statements on seeking a ‘predictable’ and ‘stable’ relationship with Russia suggest a moderate, yet indicative, assessment by the White House of the dangerously frayed relations that exist between Washington and Moscow. The Geneva meeting between Presidents Biden and Putin in June, although bizarrely covered as a boxing match between the two leaders by the Press, was significant in the release of a joint resolution restating the words of Gorbachev and Reagan that a “nuclear war cannot be won and must never be fought.”

It now appears Nuland was dispatched to Moscow to follow up on the Summit and continue dialogue through these most recent meetings. Although no groundbreaking agreements were reached (something we should not be expecting in the short-term), the meetings were productive in the sense that they appeared to advance the vision of a stable and predictable approach to US-Russia relations — even if severe disagreements persist. 

Nuland’s meeting with Dmitry Kozak, Deputy Chief of Staff to President Putin and top negotiator regarding Ukraine, seemed to reaffirm the understanding between both nations that the only remaining solution to the situation in eastern Ukraine lies in the Minsk Agreements. There appears to be a tacit realization in Washington that the policy pursued vis-à-vis Ukraine since 2014 has not resulted in a more secure Eastern Europe. However, the White House has yet to use any of their available leverage to pressure an increasingly illiberal Ukrainian President Zelensky into accepting the Minsk Agreements and implementing provisions regarding an autonomous special status for the Donbass region.

The White House likely now sees a maintenance of the status-quo in Ukraine to be the most ideal situation to stall any unforeseen flare ups in the European theatre — although unpredictable escalations will continue to lurk until the Minsk Agreements have been thoroughly implemented. 

Unfortunately, however, Defense Secretary Austin this week pronounced yet again Washington’s policy of an ‘open door to NATO’ for both Ukraine and Georgia. Although this is in line with official U.S. policy, it does relations between Moscow and Washington no favors, especially given the unlikelihood of such acceptance by the entire NATO bloc of the former-Soviet states.

On the whole, of course, Nuland’s trip is a most welcome development, however, it must be understood in the context of broader international developments — namely the growing hostility between Washington and Beijing. As most practitioners of realism and restraint have argued for years now, the growing antagonism between the US and Russia is most useless, and needlessly causes security crises in otherwise generally stable regions of the world.

However, this isn’t the last step and both nations must continue working towards a more cooperative relationship. The recent joint resolution at the UN by the U.S. and Russia on the issue of cyber security is another small, yet positive, move in this direction. Let’s hope that relations continue developing in a more stable direction.

In the words of Mikhail Gorbachev: “History is not determined by fate. There is always an alternative.


Kiev, December 11, 2013: U.S. Undersecretary of State Victoria Nuland distributes sandwiches to "allied" Ukranian soldiers. (shutterstock/Roman Mikhailiuk)
Analysis | Europe
Somalia
Top image credit: U.S. forces host a range day with the Danab Brigade in Somalia, May 9, 2021. Special Operations Command Africa remains engaged with partner forces in Somalia in order to promote safety and stability across the Horn of Africa. (U.S. Air Force photo by Staff Sgt. Zoe Russell)

Why the US can't beat al-Shabaab in Somalia

Africa

The New York Times reported earlier this month that recent gains by al-Shabaab Islamist militants in central and southern Somalia has prompted a debate within the State Department about closing the U.S. Embassy in Mogadishu and withdrawing most American personnel. At the forefront of some officials’ minds, according to the Times, are memories of recent foreign policy fiascos, such as the fall of the Afghan government amid a hasty American withdrawal in 2021.

There are good reasons to question why the U.S. has been unable to defeat al-Shabaab despite nearly 20 years of U.S. military involvement in the country. But the scale of the U.S. role is drastically different than that of Afghanistan, and the U.S. cannot necessarily be described as the most significant external security actor on the ground. At the same time, the Trump administration has given no indication that it will scale down drone strikes — meaning that the U.S. will continue to privilege military solutions.

keep readingShow less
Hegseth Guam
Top photo credit: Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth departs Andersen Air Force Base, Guam, March 27, 2025. (DOD photo by U.S. Air Force Madelyn Keech)

Hegseth goes to 'spear point' Guam to prep for war with China

Asia-Pacific

The Guam headlines from the recent visit of the U.S. secretary of defense are only part of Secretary Hegseth’s maiden visit to the Pacific. It is Guam’s place in the larger picture - where the island fits into U.S. strategy - that helps us understand how the “tip of the spear” is being positioned. Perhaps overlooked, the arrangement of the “Guam piece” gives us a better sense not only of Guam’s importance to the United States, but also of how the U.S. sees the larger geopolitical competition taking shape.

Before he landed on Guam, the secretary of defense circulated a secret memo that prioritized U.S. readiness for a potential conflict with China over Taiwan. At the same time, it was reported that U.S. intelligence assessed that Guam would be “a major target of Chinese missile strikes” if China launched an invasion of Taiwan.

keep readingShow less
Pope Francis' legacy of inter-faith diplomacy
Top image credit: Pope Francis met with Grand Ayatollah Ali Al-Sistani, one of the Muslim world's leading authorities on March 6, 2021 in Najaf, Iraq. (Vatican Media via REUTERS)

Pope Francis' legacy of inter-faith diplomacy

Global Crises

One of the most enduring tributes to Pope Francis, who passed away this Easter, would be the appreciation for his legacy of inter-religious diplomacy, a vision rooted in his humility, compassion, and a commitment to bridging divides — between faiths, cultures, and ideologies — from a standpoint of mutual respect and tolerance.

Among his most profound contributions is his historic meeting with Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani in Najaf, Iraq, on March 6, 2021. What made this meeting a true landmark in inter-faith dialogue was the fact it brought together, for the first time, the spiritual leader of the world’s 1.2 billion Roman Catholics and one of the most revered figures in Shia Islam, with influence on tens of millions of Shia Muslims globally. In a humble, yet moving ceremony, the meeting took place in al-Sistani’s modest home in Najaf. A frail al-Sistani, who rarely receives visitors and typically remains seated, stood to greet the 84-year-old Pope and held his hand, in a gesture that underscored mutual respect.

keep readingShow less

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.