With the upcoming U.S. presidential election between Kamala Harris and Donald Trump just days away, questions arise about what’s at stake for Russia and how each candidate’s victory could impact Moscow, especially concerning the ongoing conflict in Ukraine. Russia has once again been accused of attempting to influence the U.S. election, with reports of Russian-linked groups allegedly supplying talking points to American social media influencers with conservative leanings. This adds to suspicions that the Kremlin prefers Trump in the White House.
However, Russia’s outlook on a Trump presidency is nuanced. During Trump’s first term, there were initial hopes in Moscow that the U.S. would adopt policies friendlier to Russian interests. Yet, Trump imposed sanctions on Russia and authorized the sale of Javelin anti-tank missiles to Ukraine, a step his predecessor, Barack Obama, did not take. Under President Joe Biden, U.S. military support for Ukraine increased substantially. Trump, by contrast, has expressed an interest in reducing or even halting aid to Ukraine, which aligns more closely with Russia’s strategic goals. He has also claimed he could end the conflict in Ukraine within a day if elected, a sentiment that resonates with some Russian citizens who are weary of the prolonged war.
Russia’s leaders appear divided in their preferences. At a conference in Vladivostok in September, Russian President Vladimir Putin humorously remarked that he “supports” Harris due to her “infectious” laugh, but the Kremlin has largely maintained a neutral stance publicly. Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov later downplayed Putin’s comment, pointing out that U.S.-Russia relations have soured to a degree that renders the identity of the next U.S. president less relevant; he argued that core decisions in U.S. foreign policy are often made by entrenched institutions rather than the president alone.
Political analysts, however, suggest that the candidates represent distinctly different approaches. A Harris presidency is expected to continue the Biden administration’s support for Ukraine, including ongoing military aid, but may not push for Ukraine’s NATO membership during the conflict. Trump’s outlook is notably different. He has placed partial blame on Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy for the conflict and has suggested he could bring peace rapidly, though he has not provided details on how he would accomplish this. Russian officials, including Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov, see Harris as a “predictable” opponent, in contrast to Trump’s more erratic style. Trump’s previous term showed Moscow that his policy moves can be impulsive and are sometimes at odds with Russian interests, particularly in areas like the Middle East.
Trump’s running mate, J.D. Vance, has proposed a peace plan that could benefit Russia by creating a demilitarized zone along the current front line, effectively legitimizing Russian control over portions of Ukrainian territory and keeping Ukraine out of NATO. Analysts argue that a Trump administration might curtail sanctions on Russia or cease military support for Ukraine, aligning with some of Moscow’s goals. However, Konstantin Sonin, a professor of economics, points out that Trump may struggle to fully halt military aid due to bipartisan support for Ukraine in the U.S. Congress, which controls funding. He notes that Congress has substantial influence and could restrict or delay aid packages, regardless of the president’s stance.
For instance, even if Harris sought to continue aid, a Republican-controlled Congress could obstruct her efforts, as seen in early 2024 when aid was delayed despite the Biden administration’s support. Varnon, an American historian specializing in Soviet studies, warns that a Harris presidency would signal a continuation of the Biden-era support for Ukraine, whereas Trump would introduce more volatility. While Trump’s policy might seem advantageous to Moscow, his unpredictability creates challenges for Russian leaders.
Even if the U.S. under Trump were to reduce aid, it is uncertain whether this would lead to immediate peace negotiations. According to Sonin, Moscow’s objectives in Ukraine are unrealistic, based on a misperception that Ukraine lacks its own identity and that Western nations, such as Poland, may want to claim Ukrainian territory. Putin’s hope that a Trump administration would press Ukraine into a peace deal ignores the complexity of the U.S.-Ukraine alliance and Ukraine’s independent interests. Sonin argues that Ukraine is not simply a “puppet” of the U.S. and would resist any plans imposed by Trump to end the conflict on Russian terms.
In the meantime, many Russians are largely indifferent to the U.S. election. With limited influence over Russia’s domestic policies, they view the American election as a distant event that may have little impact on their daily lives.
