Comparison of the United States president's actions on the international scene with a rollercoaster ride (in America they are called Russian slides) established itself as something immediately. It promises to bring a new level of relations with Russia, the sharp peak down the Russian announcement "a problem" and even a "threat" to the United States. Then again rise, but not to the previous height after reaching a number of agreements during a visit to Moscow by Secretary of State R. Tillerson. And what lies ahead? New fall? Tight cornering with lifting unexpectedly difficult? Questions.
And the general cause such differences - market conditions, lack of a new US administration's foreign policy strategy, or "brand" Trump style? Or maybe really lost the election "system" quickly took its revenge and forcing the winner to submit to his will? It seems that, as always, a little mixed up everything.
The US president's environment believes that by toughening rhetoric in the Russian direction and hitting Moscow's interests in Syria, it was possible to blunt the point of criticism directed against the new team about "suspicious connections" with Russia. In addition, the strategic line of the new administration in the international arena has not emerged. First, Trump still looks at international affairs, and, secondly, because of business experience and personal properties, he feels much more confident not as a strategist, but as a tactician. This, however, does not mean that he abandoned plans to make America "again great." And it will be wrong who thinks that the old Trump is no more, for he, like the Sultai-Boltai fallen from the wall, has already disintegrated.
Russians expect from the new US president significant changes for the better in bilateral relations, of course, unpleasant surprise of sudden changes in the statements and actions of the new administration. the impression has emerged that the final break and the new "cold", and can be, and "hot" war is not far off. However, if we recall that Trump spoke about China more recently and what he says about this country right now, it is possible to look at the situation differently.
And on the eve of the elections, and immediately after Trump's victory, Beijing was designated as America's main enemy, he was definitely promised a trade war. The accusations were even higher than the level reached in the last days of Trump's rhetoric towards Russia. Moreover, denoting the readiness to normalize relations with Russia, Washington drew a "perspective" of such "normalization" on an anti-Chinese basis. In any case, some Chinese experts began to express concern about this. Then suddenly a sudden turn, all reproaches to Beijing are forgotten, and Xi Jinping turns out to be a big "personal friend" of Trump (who would have thought ?!). Now a combination with hints of the sort that the US-China rapprochement can occur on an anti-Russian basis is already being played out. It is noted, for example, that China did not support Russia's veto in the UN Security Council for an American draft resolution on the use of chemical weapons in Syria, but abstained in the vote. It's time, they say, to worry about Moscow. In general, Washington is very pleased with the results of the talks with the Chinese leader, believing that they received more concessions from him than did themselves. This, of course, is a controversial issue, but in contacts with Moscow and Beijing Trump equally used the "roller-coaster ride", starting in the first case with the top point, and in the second with the bottom one. In addition to this, there have been attempts by the American side to instil distrust between China and Russia.
It is entirely possible, however, that Trump does not rush at all, but prefers in the spirit of the "business approach" to keep all the cards on the table, alternately choosing those that seem to him at one time or another to be the most successful. And if possible, as long as possible to leave the competitor or opponent in the dark about their actual plans. Trump himself constantly boasts of this skill. In this, so to speak, the personal style of the current owner of the White House. Can this be considered a lack of strategy? It's not clear yet. How much does this style bring success to Trump-president? The future will show.
To the peculiarities of the style of Donald Trump, one can also include a pronounced personification of relations with the leading world powers. The American president, in particular, even sharply criticizing in certain aspects the policy of Russia or the PRC, always avoids statements about their leaders. Just as in the harshest competitive struggle between corporations it is not customary to switch to the identity of their owners. Suddenly, still have to negotiate. There should not be anything personal, only business. While Trump holds to this rule and continues, for example, to approvingly respond to the personality of the Russian president. "It would be a fantastic thing if we get on with Putin and if we get on with Russia," he told 12 at a press conference with NATO Secretary General Stoltenberg.
Many were puzzled by Trump's "beautiful" record in "Twitter": say, stop worrying, "America's relations with Russia will ultimately be beautiful." Well, the replica quite corresponds to the "style". The "smile of the Sphinx" is behind it: they say, I do not want confrontation with Russia, but I will try to "tame" it by rolling on a roller coaster. What can I say? If this is true, then the knowledge of Russia and its people, this approach, alas, does not shine. Russians do not get used to the "roller coaster", but only restoration of the destroyed trust in the dialogue with Moscow will not help.
It is interesting that on the eve of Tillerson's visit to Moscow, speculation emerged that Washington is allegedly prepared to offer the Russian side a deal "Syria in exchange for Ukraine." The basis for such assumptions was a replica of the US Secretary of State, the meaning of which was that Ukraine lies beyond the interests of the United States. The thesis is understandable, but in Kiev they got agitated from Tillerson's words to the point that President Poroshenko even specifically called the head of the State Department on this matter. The latter promised the Ukrainian president that everything would be okay, and Kiev, of course, presented this as his next "helper".
World politics, however, is not a commodity exchange. From its positions in Syria, Moscow has not moved away and has achieved a clear promise of the Americans not to use unilaterally force against the government troops, which is crucially important (if the promises are worth something). But the Ukrainian president has no grounds for optimism. He did not receive approval from anybody to change the Minsk agreements. Unlike the former US administration, whose representatives encouraged the revisionism of Kiev, Tillerson in Moscow unequivocally stated Washington's adherence to existing agreements, although he called for their implementation, first of all, the Russian side. The call is superfluous: Moscow has never refused its obligations, but it is important that the document should work in principle, and in what order specific items should be followed, it is clearly stated in the document itself.
The most ambiguous position in the White House remains, perhaps, the question of the notorious Russian intervention in American elections. It is difficult to understand what logic is guided by Trump, if it is willing to accept in the absence of any "interference" of evidence.
Let us take the liberty to suggest that Trump feud with Moscow really is not going to (be it contradicted his "business approach" to politics); he simply has not left a naive, to say the least hope to get Moscow and Beijing to play on his own, Trump rules.
US president has yet to accept the fact that the mechanisms of world politics a lot more difficult to ride a roller coaster ride. Ride the rails are too narrow, running on them cars are admitted at excess speed may be broken.
And besides, addicted to such attractions, as well as a desire to "ride" is not shared by all.