A short history of US/Russia relations and the potential for peace with Russia
Populist Talk, Populist Message, Substack, 5/29/25
History of early US Russia relations
The Revolutionary War –1775-1783—Catherine the Great significantly affected the outcome of the American Revolution through her diplomacy. Catherine’s diplomacy helped the US gain independence. Catherine, though her foreign advisor, Nikita Ivanovich Panin, remained officially neutral during the war. Russia refused to assist Great Britain militarily and insisted on peace talks that linked a resolution of the American Revolution with the settlement of separate European conflicts. Catherine’s insistence on diplomacy, at least indirectly, helped the Americans win the Revolution and gain independence.
The Civil War–1861-1865–Russia supported the Union during the Civil War believing that a unified US could act as a counter force to Europe–especially Great Britian. In 1863, the Russian Navy‘s Baltic and Pacific fleets wintered in the American ports of New York and San Francisco, discouraging outside interference and preventing sudden attacks on Union port cities. To Tsar Alexander II, the main reason to support the Union was clear and it was that they were fighting on the side of emancipation and freedom. Tsar Alexander II was the Tsar that abolished serfdom in the Russian Empire and he believed that Lincoln shared his similar beliefs and championed the side of emancipation. This was one of the main reasons why the Russian Empire continued its support of the Union throughout the American Civil War.
The Bolshevik Revolution 1917-1991— The communist takeover of Russia was opposed by the US and by most Russians. The philosophy of Communism was not indigenous to Russia, and Christian Russians were not aligned with the Bolsheviks. Communism extracted an enormous toll on Russia where an estimated 61 million Russians died from the various efforts to create a communist society. The USSR was peacefully dissolved on December 26, 1991. This marked the first time in history that an empire surrendered its empire without firing a shot. It also marked the end of communism.
The continuation of US militarism. The capture of Russia by communism, along with the occupation of Eastern Europe by the USSR after WW2, gave rise not only to the Cold War, but to many of the current tensions as well. The US did not disarm after World War 2 instead; the Cold War began, and US militarism was born. The old Cold War ended in 1991, but a new cold war began sometime after 2001 as the US, NATO and the CIA became more involved in Ukraine, but especially after the US backed coup in Ukraine in 2014. Meanwhile, US militarism continued even after the dissolution of the USSR in 1991.
Russia is no longer a communist country. Russia is a mixed economy that is primarily capitalist in orientation. The Russian people suffered during the long and brutal transition from communism to capitalism that took place during the 1990’s. At least 7 million Russians died, but this disgraceful period is beyond the scope of this essay. For those interested, please see The Harvard Boys Do Russia. Since 2000 Russia has regained her footing economically and, on a purchasing power parity basis, is the 4th largest economy in the world.
The second World War–The US and the then USSR were allies. The German defeat, and the destruction of the German Army by the USSR, in Operation Barbarossa, essentially won the war. Over 27 million Russians died in World War 2 including almost 9 million military personnel. Today, the entire west refuses to acknowledge Russia’s sacrifice and Russia is not even invited to attend memorials to this horrid war. Increasingly, historical references discount or eliminate the contribution of the USSR to the Nazi defeat.
Two of the largest military campaigns in history were fought on Russian soil. In both cases, the invaders were defeated, and the capital of the invading country was captured
Napolean invades Russia—In 1812 Napolean sent his “Grande Armee” of 651,000 men and arms to invade Russia. The idea was to force Russia to comply with Napolean’s demand of a continental blockade of the United Kingdom.. That army perished in Russia along with hundreds of thousands of Russia civilians. In 1814 a coalition, including Russia, defeated Napolean in the Battle of Paris, conquering Paris, and forcing Napolean to abdicate.
Hitler invades Russia–On June 22, 1941, Hitler sent the flower of the German military to conquer the Soviet Union in Operation Barbarossa. For this campaign, the Germans allotted almost 150 divisions of about three million men. This included, 19 panzer divisions, about 3,000 tanks, 7,000 artillery pieces, and 2,500 aircraft. It was the largest and most powerful invasion force in human history. The Germans’ strength was further increased by more than 30 divisions of Finnish and Romanian troops. This entire force was destroyed, crippling German’s war fighting power. The Soviet Army marched across Eastern Europe and from April 16-May 2, 1945 fought the Battle of Berlin in revenge for the suffering of the Soviet people. The city fell to the Soviets, and the Soviet flag was raised above the Reichstag.
What is the value of Russia’s resources?
Russia’s natural resources are estimated to be worth a staggering $75 trillion. Russia’s vast wealth is composed of a wide array of commodities, including crude oil, natural gas, coal, and rare earth metals. Russia also leads in developing the Artic and has vast timber and freshwater resources. This positions Russia as a major global player in the energy and resources sector. The scale of Russia’s resources impacts both the global energy markets and geopolitical dynamics. These resources are also unencumbered as Russia has very little debt. These facts also make Russia a target by highly leveraged economies searching for resources and assets.
The USSR (Russia) was promised that NATO would not expand eastward one inch
The promise of US Secretary of State James Baker that NATO would expand “not one inch eastward” has been documented by declassified U.S., Soviet, German, British and French documents posted by the National Security Archive at George Washington University (http://nsarchive.gwu.edu).
The documents reinforce former CIA Director Robert Gates’s criticism of “pressing ahead with expansion of NATO eastward [in the 1990s], when Gorbachev and others were led to believe that wouldn’t happen.” President George H.W. Bush had assured Gorbachev during the Malta summit in December 1989 that the U.S. would not take advantage of the revolutions in Eastern Europe to harm Soviet interests.
Despite these promises NATO expanded. This is the history of NATO expansion: in 1999 NATO was expanded into The Czech Republic (formerly Czechoslovakia), Hungary, and Poland. 2004 saw the largest increase in NATO members since the Alliance’s foundation. Perhaps even more notable, though, is that republics of the former Soviet Union were now joining (Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania). Bulgaria (formerly of the Warsaw Pact) Estonia Latvia Lithuania Romania (formerly of the Warsaw Pact) Slovakia Slovenia (successor to Yugoslavia) In 2009, NATO’s foothold in East Europe grew firmer: with the addition of Albania (formerly of the Warsaw Pact), and Croatia (successor to Yugoslavia). The additions to NATO in 2017 and 2020 are successor states to Yugoslavia: Montenegro (in 2017) North Macedonia (in 2020). NATO was now at Russia’s doorstep, all that remained was Ukraine and Georgia and NATO would border Russia, including the areas that had been used in the past by European countries to invade Russia.
NATO and the US begins to conduct “exercises” with Ukraine along Russia’s border
Larry Johnson did a series on NATO exercises conducted, with Ukraine, along the Russian border. Many of these exercises mimicked a decapitation strike against Russia. They include: Understanding Military Exercises; The Road to War in Ukraine — The History of NATO and US Military Exercises With Ukraine — Part 1; The Road to War in Ukraine — The History of NATO and US Military Exercises With Ukraine — Part 2; The Road to War in Ukraine — The History of NATO and US Military Exercises With Ukraine — Part 3 Here’s Larry Johnson:
“The ten-year period — 2011 -2021 — marked a dramatic surge in the size of the Ukrainian military. Although the number of active-duty soldiers stabilized at 200,000 starting in 2018, the Ukrainian reserves grew by a factor of 10. These reserves were made possible by Ukraine’s annual military training with NATO and USEUCOM forces. The stage was set for going to war with Russia.”
The US/NATO knew that attempting to expand NATO to Ukraine would force Russia to intervene
A very strong case can be made that the US began the process of creating conditions for war with Russia as far back as 2008. Senior US government officials knew that the threat of adding Ukraine to NATO would be seen as a serious “military threat” by Russia, a threat that would crosse Moscow’s security “redlines” and could force it to intervene.
At the annual NATO summit back in 2008, the George W. Bush administration publicly called for adding Russia’s neighbors Ukraine and Georgia to the military alliance. NATO’s secretary-general declared that the two countries would eventually become members. But privately, US diplomats knew that this move would be seen as an existential threat by Moscow and could provoke Russian military intervention in Ukraine.
Former US Ambassador to Russia William J. Burns, who later became CIA director, admitted in a classified 2008 embassy cable that NATO expansion to Ukraine crosses Moscow’s security “redlines” and “could potentially split the country in two, leading to violence or even, some claim, civil war, which would force Russia to decide whether to intervene.”
President Putin discussed these and other issues in an address he gave at the Munich Security Conference in February 2007. It was a clear statement of Russian foreign policy including the need for multilateralism. Although the speech was mostly ignored in the West, some have compared it to the speech given by President John F. Kennedy at American University in June of 1963. Both were appeals for diplomacy rather than war.
Russia tries to avert war with the Minsk Agreements
In 2014, after the Maidan coup, a civil war broke out between Kiev and several eastern Ukrainian republics. This is a complex story but to simplify–in 2014 and 2015 agreements were entered into in Minsk, ie the Minsk agreements—aimed at restoring peace in the region by ending the separatist war. France and Germany were to oversee the agreements. Both Hollande and Angela Merkel have both admitted that the Minsk Agreements were designed to buy time for an arms buildup for Ukraine. Ukrainian government forces and pro-Russian separatists had been fighting in the Donbass region of eastern Ukraine since 2014 in a conflict that Kyiv says has claimed some 15,000 lives.
Russia proposes a new security treaty in December 2021
Despite the risk of war, Western leaders continued to insist that Ukraine would join the US-led military alliance. In December of 2021, Russia submitted a proposal for a new mutual security guarantees to the United States. At this very time, NATO was conducting another exercise in the Black Sea. The proposal was immediately dismissed by NATO and the US.
The US and NATO had apparently forgotten the words of President John F. Kennedy: “while defending our own vital interests, nuclear powers must avert those confrontations which bring an adversary to a choice of either a humiliating retreat or a nuclear war. To adopt that kind of course in the nuclear age would be evidence only of the bankruptcy of our policy—or of a collective death-wish for the world.”
On February 18, 2022, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov voiced alarm on Friday over a sharp increase in shelling in eastern Ukraine and accused the OSCE special monitoring mission of glossing over what he said were Ukrainian violations of the peace process.
February 22, 2022, Russia intervenes in Ukraine
Who provoked who? We have all heard the mantra that Russia’s intervention in Ukraine was “unprovoked”, but there is a great deal of evidence to the contrary. Ukraine built significant fortifications in the Donbass and had been shelling civilian areas for several weeks. There were also fears that Ukraine was preparing a military campaign against the pro-Russian population of the Donbass. Russia argued that intervention was necessary to prevent the Donbass from being overrun. The fortifications are so extensive that Russia is still clearing these areas.
Sanctions on Russia. The US and the EU implemented extensive sanctions on Russiaincluding excluding Russia from the SWIFT clearing system and seizing over $300 billion in Russian assets. The belief was that the sanctions would crash the Russian economy and lead to the overthrow of President Putin. This did not happen. The Russian economy adapted and continued to grow.
The US has run this war. On March 25, 2025 the New York Times printed an enormous story titled: The Partnership: The Secret History of the War in Ukraine. The US has provided the weapons and financial support to Ukraine, but the US and NATO assistance went much further. The Times story revealed a secret operation in Wiesbaden, Germany where US and NATO forces formed a partnership with Ukraine “…of intelligence, strategy, planning and technology that would become the secret weapon.” In this operation “…American and Ukrainian officers planned Ukraine’s counter offenses. A vast American intelligence-collection effort both guided big-picture battle strategy and funneled precise targeting information down to Ukrainian soldiers in the field.”
In other words, the US and NATO were directly involved in killing Russian soldiers and Russia knew this was happening. This operation was supported by a finding signed by President Biden.
Conclusion– The US and Russia have a long very positive history going all the way back to the founding of our nation. We were allies in World War 2 even though Russia was in the grip of communism at that time. Russia is no longer a communist country. Why are we essentially at war with Russia today? The only possible reason is that Russia insists on being a sovereign nation and on using her resources to benefit her people rather than transnational financiers. Under the Wolfowitz Doctrine from 1992, the US is to act to prevent a rival power from arising in the EU, Asia or the former territory of the Soviet Union. Unless this doctrine is set aside it implies that the US will go to war with Russia and China–wars the US is unprepared to fight. This fact is demonstrated in these articles by Lt Col (Retd) Alex Vershinin: The Return of Industrial Warfare (Jun 17 2022) The Attritional Art of War: Lessons from the Russian War on Ukraine – RUSI May 2024 Battlefield Conditions Impacting Ukraine Peace Negotiations – Russia Matters, Apr 18 2025 republished by Responsible Statecraft: Ukraine’s battlefield position is deteriorating fast May 5 2025.
Certain people within the US and NATO acted to force Russia to intervene in Ukraine. The people of Ukraine have been used as a proxy so the US and NATO could safely confront Russia. Since February 2022 the Russian Federation has basically been at war with the United States and NATO. Russia has carefully conducted this war as a war of attrition designed to exhaust the US and NATO and force a new security architecture–and as the above essays discuss, this is a war Russia is winning. Russia has adapted to all the weapons provided Ukraine and continues to expand and improve her military technology, and her weapons. Military recruitment is strong in Russia and her people are united and quite angry at the insults, and the lies. Isn’t it time we made peace?
As Otto von Bismark noted–Russia is slow to saddle up but fast to ride. Russia is now riding very fast.
In the face of powerful interests, can President Donald Trump be the president of peace? Trump ran on the promise to be a “peace president”, specifically promising to end the wars in Ukraine and Gaza, stating in his inaugural address that he wanted to be known as “a peacemaker and unifier.”
Significant elements within the national security state are opposed to peace–not only in Russia, but in Iran and Gaza as well. Senator Lindsey Graham has split with the president and claims to have 81 Senators prepared to support more sanctions on Russia. The President has business before the Senate and needs their support.
There is also opposition to peace with Iran. AIPAC and Israel want the US to go to war with Iran and are demanding zero enrichment and a complete dismantling of nuclear energy. Iran says there will be no deal if this is the demand. Like with Russia, a US war with Iran is beyond current US military capabilities.
A term has been circulating on the internet–TACO, short for Trump Always Chickens Out. The term, coined by the Financial Times columnist Robert Armstrong, has been used to describe how markets tumble when the President issues threats, usually over tariffs, then rebounds when Trump gives way. This phenomena, lucrative for traders in the know, is the subject of a story in today’s New York Times. Asked about the term President Trump lashed out at the reporter: “I chicken out? I’ve never heard that,” he said. “Don’t ever say what you said,” he told the reporter. “That’s a nasty question. To me, that’s the nastiest question.”
President Putin recounts that he has dealt with 3 US Presidents, none of whom were able to carry out the promises they made. His conclusion? The president may change but US policy stays the same. Will this be the case with this president on the question of peace with Russia, Iran and Gaza?
At this moment in history–our lives may depend on the answer.
