Moscow had high hopes for Trump in 2016. It's more cautious this time

In November 2016, Russian ultranationalist politician Vladimir Zhirinovsky was so excited by Donald Trump’s victory, and so sure that it would transform 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 surprise White House win, Margarita Simonyan, editor-in-chief of state channel RT, tweeted her intention to drive around Moscow with an American flag in her car window.

And I’ll never forget the moment a Russian official told me she had smoked a cigar and drunk a bottle of champagne (yes, MORE champagne) to toast Trump winning.

In Moscow, expectations were high that Trump would scrap sanctions against Russia; perhaps, even, recognise the Crimean Peninsula, annexed from Ukraine, as part of Russia.

“The value of Trump was that he never preached on human rights in Russia,” explains Konstantin Remchukov, the owner and editor-in-chief of newspaper Nezavisimaya Gazeta.

It didn’t take long for all that fizz to go flat.

“Trump introduced the heaviest sanctions against Russia at that time,” recalls Remchukov.

“By the end of his term, a lot of people were disappointed in his presidency."

Which is why, eight years on - publicly at least - Russian officials are more cautious about the prospect of a second Trump term.

President Vladimir Putin has even come out and backed the Democratic Party candidate, although that "endorsement" was widely interpreted as a Kremlin joke (or Kremlin trolling).

Putin claimed he liked Kamala Harris’s “infectious” laugh.

But you don’t need to be a seasoned political pundit to understand that out on the campaign trail it’s what Trump has been saying, not Harris, that’s guaranteed to put a smile on Putin’s face.

For instance, Trump’s criticism of the scale of US military assistance for Ukraine, his apparent reluctance to blame Putin for Russia’s full-scale invasion and, during the presidential debate, his refusal to say whether he wants Ukraine to win the war.

By contrast, Kamala Harris has argued that support for Ukraine is in America’s “strategic interest” and she has referred to Putin as “a murderous dictator”.

Not that Russian state TV has been particularly complimentary about her either. A few weeks ago one of Russia’s most acerbic news anchors was completely dismissive of Harris’s political abilities. He suggested she would be better off hosting a TV cookery show.

There’s another possible outcome that may well suit the Kremlin - a super tight election, followed by a contested result. An America consumed by post-election chaos, confusion and confrontation would have less time to focus on foreign affairs, 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 ambassador to Washington Anatoly Antonov, they are “falling apart” under Joe Biden.

Washington lays the blame fully on Moscow.

It was just eight months after Putin and Biden met for a summit in Geneva that the Kremlin leader ordered the full-scale Russian invasion of Ukraine.

Not only did the Biden administration send a tsunami of sanctions Russia’s way, but US military aid has been crucial in helping Kyiv survive more than two-and-a-half years of Russia’s war. Amongst the advanced weaponry America has supplied Ukraine are Abrams tanks and HIMARS rocket systems.

It’s hard to believe now that there was a time, not so long ago, when Russia and the US pledged to work as partners to strengthen global security.

In the late 1980s Ronald Reagan and Mikhail Gorbachev formed a geo-political double-act to slash their countries’ respective nuclear arsenals.

If there was one thing Reagan seemed to enjoy as much as nuclear disarmament it was reciting Russian proverbs to Gorbachev in broken Russian (“Never buy 132 bottles of champagne unless you’re certain it’s worth celebrating” would have been a good one).

In 1991 the First Ladies of the USSR and America, Raisa Gorbacheva and Barbara Bush, unveiled an unusual monument in Moscow - a mother duck with eight ducklings.

It was a replica of a sculpture in Boston Public Gardens and was presented to Moscow as a symbol of friendship between Soviet and American children.

It’s still popular with Muscovites today. Russians flock to Novodevichy Park to pose for photos with the bronze birds, although few visitors know the back story of superpower “duck diplomacy”.

Like US-Russian relations themselves, the ducks have taken a few 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 find out what Russians think of America and of the US election.

“I want America to disappear,” says angry angler Igor who’s fishing in a nearby pond. “It has started so many wars in the world. The US was our enemy in Soviet times and it still is. It doesn’t matter who’s president.”

America as Russia’s eternal enemy - that’s a worldview often reflected here in the state media. Is Igor so angry 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 friendship,” says Svetlana. “But my friend in America is scared 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 know.”

“Our countries and our two peoples should be friends,” says Nikita, “without wars and without competing to see who has more missiles. I prefer Trump. When he was president there weren’t any big wars.”

Despite the differences between Russia and America there is one thing the two countries have in common - they have always had male presidents.

Can Russians ever see that changing?

“I think it would be great if a woman became president,” says Marina.

“I would be happy to vote for a woman president here [in Russia]. I’m not saying it would be better or worse. But it would be different.”

-BBC