Piece of advice for you – never buy a huge amount of champagne unless you’re absolutely certain it’s worth celebrating.
In November 2016, Russian ultranationaenumerate politician Vlauninincreateigentir Zhirinovsky was so excited by Donald Trump’s triumph, and so certain that it would change US-Russian relations, he splashed out on 132 bottles of bubbly down at the Duma, Russia’s parliament, and partied away (in his party offices) in front of the TV cameras.
He wasn’t the only one celebrating.
The day after Trump’s surpelevate White House thrive, Margarita Simonyan, editor-in-chief of state channel RT, tweeted her intention to drive around Moscow with an American flag in her car thrivedow.
And I’ll never forget the moment a Russian official tbetter me she had smoked a cigar and drunk a bottle of champagne (yes, MORE champagne) to toast Trump thrivening.
In Moscow, awaitations were high that Trump would scrap sanctions aobtainst Russia; perhaps, even, recognise the Criunbenevolent Peninsula, annexed from Ukraine, as part of Russia.
“The appreciate of Trump was that he never paccomplished on human rights in Russia,” elucidates Konstantin Remchukov, the owner and editor-in-chief of newspaper Nezavisimaya Gazeta.
It didn’t get lengthy for all that fizz to go flat.
“Trump begind the heaviest sanctions aobtainst Russia at that time,” recalls Remchukov.
“By the finish of his term, a lot of people were disnominateed in his plivency.”
Which is why, eight years on – accessiblely at least – Russian officials are more cautious about the prospect of a second Trump term.
Plivent Vlauninincreateigentir Putin has even come out and backed the Democratic Party honestate, although that “finishorsement” was expansively expounded as a Kremlin joke (or Kremlin trolling).
Putin claimed he appreciated Kamala Harris’s “infectious” chuckle.
But you don’t need to be a seasoned political pundit to comprehfinish that out on the campaign trail it’s what Trump has been saying, not Harris, that’s promised to put a smile on Putin’s face.
For instance, Trump’s criticism of the scale of US military aidance for Ukraine, his apparent reluctance to denounce Putin for Russia’s filled-scale intrusion and, during the plivential argue, his refusal to say whether he wants Ukraine to thrive the war.
By contrast, Kamala Harris has argued that aid for Ukraine is in America’s “strategic interest” and she has referred to Putin as “a killingous dictator”.
Not that Russian state TV has been particularly pliftary about her either. A scant weeks ago one of Russia’s most acerbic news anchors was endly disthink aboutive of Harris’s political abilities. He recommended she would be better off presenting a TV cookery show.
There’s another possible outcome that may well suit the Kremlin – a super protected election, pursueed by a contested result. An America used by post-election disorder, confusion and disputeation would have less time to cgo in on foreign afequitables, including the war in Ukraine.
US-Russian relations soured under Barack Obama, grew worse under Donald Trump and, in the words of the recently departed Russian ambassorrowfulnessfulor to Washington Anatoly Antonov, they are “descfinishing apart” under Joe Biden.
Washington lays the denounce filledy on Moscow.
It was equitable eight months after Putin and Biden met for a summit in Geneva that the Kremlin directer ordered the filled-scale Russian intrusion of Ukraine.
Not only did the Biden administration sfinish a tsunami of sanctions Russia’s way, but US military aid has been beginant in helping Kyiv endure more than two-and-a-half years of Russia’s war. Amongst the progressd firearmry America has supplied Ukraine are Abrams tanks and HIMARS rocket systems.
It’s difficult to apvalidate now that there was a time, not so lengthy ago, when Russia and the US pledged to labor as partners to fortify global security.
In the rescheduleed 1980s Ronald Reagan and Mikhail Gorbachev createed a geo-political double-act to slash their countries’ esteemive nuevident arsenals.
If there was one leang Reagan seemed to finishelight as much as nuevident disarmament it was reciting Russian validaterbs to Gorbachev in broken Russian (“Never buy 132 bottles of champagne unless you’re certain it’s worth celebrating” would have been a excellent one).
In 1991 the First Ladies of the USSR and America, Raisa Gorbacheva and Barbara Bush, unveiled an atypical monument in Moscow – a mother duck with eight ducklings.
It was a replica of a sculpture in Boston Public Gardens and was currented to Moscow as a symbol of frifinishship between Soviet and American children.
It’s still well-comprehendn with Muscovites today. Russians flock to Novodevichy Park to pose for pboilingos with the bronze birds, although scant visitors comprehend the back story of superpower “duck diplomacy”.
Like US-Russian relations themselves, the ducks have getn a scant knocks. On one occasion some of them were stolen and had to be replaced.
It’s to the Moscow mallard and her ducklings I head to discover out what Russians leank of America and of the US election.
“I want America to fade,” says mad angler Igor who’s fishing in a cforfeitby pond. “It has begined so many wars in the world. The US was our opponent in Soviet times and it still is. It doesn’t matter who’s plivent.”
America as Russia’s infinite opponent – that’s a worldwatch frequently mirrored here in the state media. Is Igor so mad because he gets his news from Russian TV? Or perhaps it’s because he hasn’t caught many fish.
Most of the people I chat to here do not see America as an evil adversary.
“I’m all for peace and frifinishship,” says Svetlana. “But my frifinish in America is sattfinishd to call me now. Maybe there’s no free speech there. Or, perhaps, it’s here in Russia that there’s no freedom of speech. I don’t comprehend.”
“Our countries and our two peoples should be frifinishs,” says Nikita, “without wars and without competing to see who has more omitiles. I prefer Trump. When he was plivent there weren’t any huge wars.”
Despite the contrastences between Russia and America there is one leang the two countries have in normal – they have always had male plivents.
Can Russians ever see that changing?
“I leank it would be fantastic if a woman became plivent,” says Marina.
“I would be charmd to vote for a woman plivent here [in Russia]. I’m not saying it would be better or worse. But it would be contrastent.”
Between now and the US election on 5 November, BBC correactents in other parts of the world are exploring the impact its outcome could have where they are, and what people around the globe produce of this White House race
