There were signs of improvement in Russian-American relations when Mr. Putin and Mr. Bush came into office in 2000, but they eventually failed to build up multilateral collaboration because of political frictions.  Now there are similar trends.

Recently elected presidents Barack Obama and Dmitry Medvedev are making efforts to “reset” Russian-American relations. But they have already faced some unexpected problems. American Vice-President Joe Biden’s dubious rhetoric toward Russia this summer, his August visit to Ukraine and Georgia, and his description of Russia as a “junior partner” of the United States in the Wall Street Journal can seriously affect the Russian-American relationship. The U.S.’s attempt to deliver arms and other defense equipment to Georgia has already caused concern at the Kremlin and could be described as a serious obstacle for reassessment of inter-relations. On the other hand, last week, Mr. Obama refused to deploy a U.S. missile system in Eastern Europe, which obviously can be described as a positive sign.

So, will Barack Obama and Dmitry Medvedev succeed? Global stability depends on the answer. The following is a collection of experts’ responses to this question.

Nicolay Zlobin, World Security Institute fellow

“Russia and the U.S. are obviously not going to be strategic partners in the near future, which Mr. Bush and Mr. Putin tried to do in 2000. The domestic and foreign policies of both countries are very different, so the two are hardly likely to be engaged in multilateral collaboration. But it is not ruled out that the countries could succeed in building up a close partnership on concrete problems. If American politicians would not describe Russia as “the major headache” of U.S. foreign policy and the U.S. stops ignoring Russia’s interests in Eurasia, the relations between the two will be significantly improved. Besides, now Moscow has a good opportunity to participate in the multilateral dialogue providing reassessment of U.S. Foreign policy. There seems no reason to avoid this dialogue; it would be rather foolish and might affect Russia’s international heft and authority. If one doesn’t participate in international debate and doesn’t work out the policy that is useful for him, somebody else will do it.

I can describe Russian-American frictions as imminent; the problem is hardly likely to be resolved during two presidential tenures. If we improve our relations a little bit, it will be an achievement. But it sounds naïve [to say] that Russia and the U.S. will become close ideological allies and strategic, political partners. We have to avoid exaggerated expectations and figure out the fact that Russia and the U.S. are still very different countries with different points of view on international events, which might prevent us from close collaboration.”

Eric Rubin, Deputy chief of the U.S. Mission in Moscow, Embassy of the United States of America in Moscow

“The agreements reached at the summit end a period of dangerous drift in U.S.-Russia relations.  While there are many areas where the United States and Russia disagree and will continue to disagree, there are many more areas where our interests coincide. We seek to broaden these areas of cooperation in a way that is mutually beneficial and serves the national interests of both countries. The reset in our bilateral relationship will not come at the expense of our friends and allies in the region.  It is time to leave this zero-sum thinking behind.  A better U.S.-Russia relationship will increase trust and cooperation and ultimately enhance European security.

The two Presidents agreed to create a Bilateral Presidential Commission, which they will chair, and which Secretary of State Clinton and Foreign Minister Lavrov will coordinate.  The Commission will include working with groups on nuclear energy and nuclear security; arms control and international security; foreign policy and fighting terrorism; drug trafficking; business development and economic relations; energy and the environment; agriculture; and civil society.”

Gregory Feifer, the former Moscow correspondent for National Public Radio (American counterpart of BBC) and the current correspondent for Radio Free Europe

“I don’t think that in 2000 and 2003 Russia was really interested in establishing better relations with the U.S. On the other hand, Russia has tried to create confrontation with America and other European countries in order to amplify its role on the world stage. The Bush administration failed Russian policy, if it had any policy at all, and hoped Russia would go away and not be a problem. So, essentially our relations were really dysfunctional. What’s happening now? Well, the Obama administration is trying to restart relations. I think it’s a term of public consumption. In fact, the Obama administration is changing the relations as a long-term strategy that is plotted out and it will pursue over months and years to come.  The summer American-Russian summit is just the beginning. We cannot see any kind of real reset. If Obama’s strategy is ultimately successful it will be long arduous process. I mean it would be a little step. As the new presidential administration says itself Obama’s goal and task during this visit is to state American national interests to the Russians.”

Vsevolod Ovchinnikov, journalist and writer.

“The Russian word ‘perestroika’ raised as many hopes and expectations as the new term ‘perezagruska’ (reset). I'm sure there is a potential to improve our relations and I hope both sides will make it possible at least to repeat what Gorbachev and Reagan did in 1985.”

Andrew Braddel, the head of Associated Press, Russia.

“I think that Mr. Obama and Mr. Medvedev are already taking steps to improve relations that under Bush/Putin had sunk to an all-time low. Obama's readiness to come to Moscow in July shows that the young U.S. president is eager to build the new relations with the Kremlin that he called for back in April. Now the Kremlin needs to make similar gestures, over Iran and a new nuclear arms reduction treaty to replace START.”

Yasen Zassursky, President of the Faculty of Journalism (MSU), famous researcher of American literature and media

“In my opinion, basically it’s possible to have strong subsequent collaboration with the U.S.A. The necessity to make this step towards a normal partnership was concerned with a willingness of U.S. administration to reduce all those misunderstandings of the past. Besides, they have certainly had some economical reasons to launch this “reset.” But the major point of further collaboration should not be only in the political sector, but also contain aspects of cultural contacts and education. For instance, here, at the Faculty of Journalism, we have The Society of American Culture Research which has existed for the period of 60 years and will have its anniversary meeting this December. It means that we will continue to work together with our American colleagues in different fields of social life.”