US open to economic cooperation with Russia
The US and Russia could restore economic ties once the Ukraine conflict is resolved, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio has suggested.
Speaking in an interview with Breitbart on Tuesday, Rubio noted that Moscow and Washington could discuss the economic and business domain, but only after they have ensured the smooth operations of each other's diplomatic missions and have resolved the Ukraine crisis.
'We have to invite them and see, okay, if you guys are serious about ending this thing, let's sit down and talk about it,' Rubio said. 'I think step three is, if we can end this conflict, what does US-Russian relations look like in the 21st century? Are there things we can work on together geopolitically or maybe even economically?'
According to Rubio, Russia and the US have 'opportunities to work together' to achieve a 'reset' in relations which will 'entail talking about not just Russian assets that have been seized by America, by the Europeans… but also American companies that have been hurt.'
He cautioned, however, that such negotiations remain distant. 'We're not at that step yet… We can't even really talk about those things or fix those things until we bring this war at least to some sort of enduring ceasefire – hopefully permanent.'
Russian President Vladimir Putin signed a decree in 2023 allowing for the temporary takeover of assets belonging to Russia-based foreign companies from 'unfriendly' countries, with several Western companies affected. In October 2024, Russia temporarily nationalized the assets of Glavproduct, a major US-owned food producer.
However, while US-Russian relations sank to historic lows under the administration of US President Joe Biden, his successor Donald Trump has signaled interest in restoring ties. Earlier this month, the two sides held high-profile talks in Saudi Arabia that focused on paving the way for resolving the Ukraine conflict and restoring bilateral ties.
Trump has since indicated that Washington might explore joint ventures in Russia's mineral sector and suggested that sanctions on Moscow could be lifted 'at some point' as part of the broader Ukraine conflict settlement process.
Putin said on Monday that Russia and the US are in talks about 'major' joint economic projects, adding that Moscow is open to cooperating with American private companies and government agencies to develop its rare-earth industry.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Russia Today
2 hours ago
- Russia Today
German intelligence chief claims Russia could attack NATO
Russia could attack NATO countries after the Ukraine conflict is over, Bruno Kahl, the head of the German foreign intelligence agency (BND), has claimed while defending the drive to boost defense spending. 'We are confident, and have the intelligence data that Ukraine is merely one step on [Russia's] path toward the West,' Kahl stated when asked why the Germans should agree to take on 'additional debt' to fund the rearmament program and potentially reintroduce conscription abolished in 2011. 'There are people in Moscow who no longer believe that NATO's Article 5 would be upheld — and they would like to put it to the test,' the spy chief said. He argued that Russia is skeptical about the US resolve to defend its allies and send American troops 'across the Atlantic to die for Tallinn, Riga, or Vilnius.' Russia could 'send little green men to Estonia' under the guise of protecting the Baltic state's Russian-speaking minority, Kahl claimed. Western media used the term 'little green men' to describe commandos sent to protect the residents of Crimea ahead of the 2014 referendum, in which the largely ethnic Russian region rejected the US-backed coup in Kiev and voted to secede from Ukraine and become a part of Russia. Kahl suggested that Russia's ultimate goal is to 'catapult NATO back to where it was in the late 1990s,' and push the US out of Europe. Moscow views the US-led alliance's expansion eastward as a threat, and has cited it as one of the root causes of the Ukraine conflict. President Vladimir Putin, however, said that Russia has no intention of attacking NATO states unless it is attacked first. Moscow also warned that Western military aid to Kiev de facto makes NATO 'a direct participant' in the conflict. Germany has ramped up its hostile rhetoric against Russia under new chancellor Friedrich Merz who said last month Ukraine could receive long-range Taurus cruise missiles. He also pledged to assist Ukraine in the production of its own long-range weapons. Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova has responded by accusing Germany of undermining the peace process.
Russia Today
3 hours ago
- Russia Today
US to cut Ukraine aid
The White House will be slashing military funding for Ukraine as the administration of US President Donald Trump seeks a peaceful resolution to the conflict, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has said. The Pentagon chief made the statement before the House Appropriations Committee in Congress on Tuesday. 'It is a reduction in this budget,' Hegseth said when asked about upcoming military aid funding for Ukraine. 'This administration takes a very different view of that conflict,' he added. Trump has worked towards negotiating an end to the Ukraine conflict and has diplomatically re-engaged with Russia. Since he took office in January, Moscow and Kiev have restarted direct talks for the first time since 2022, when Ukraine unilaterally left the first Istanbul negotiations. 'A negotiated peaceful settlement is in the best interest of both parties and our nation's interests especially with all the competing interests around the globe,' Hegseth said. The Trump administration has also touted an 'America First' pivot and significantly cut foreign assistance, including aid to Ukraine, promising to channel funds towards domestic issues. Last week, US Vice President J.D. Vance echoed Trump's criticism of his predecessor Joe Biden, accusing his administration of spending 'crazy' amounts of money on supporting Kiev. 'They sent $300 billion to Ukraine,' without 'trying to force a diplomatic settlement,' he said. In April, Trump signed a major deal with Kiev allowing the US priority access to Ukraine's mineral wealth, in what he described would be a way for Washington to 'get back' the hundreds of billions it spent on Ukraine under Biden. Ukraine's Vladimir Zelensky has often complained of a constant shortage of US-supplied air defenses, and waning assistance from Washington in recent months. Additionally, the Trump administration rerouted some 20,000 anti-drone missiles – initially earmarked for Kiev under Biden – to the Middle East, the Ukrainian leader claimed on Sunday.
Russia Today
3 hours ago
- Russia Today
WHISPERING GIANT: Russia's quiet power leaves the West in the dust
One of the central paradoxes of Russia's foreign policy is this: while its primary goal has always been to secure full autonomy in its decision-making, success has often hinged on the international environment in which it pursues that aim. Even today, as Russia enjoys a degree of internal stability unmatched in the past 25 years, global shifts are helping shape the country's ability to resist what can only be described as the increasingly destructive efforts of the collective West. Chief among these global changes is the unmistakable decline of Western Europe's centrality in world affairs. Though the region still remains geographically and symbolically important – given its proximity to Russia and its alignment with the United States – it has lost the capacity to act as an independent player in global politics. Simply put, Western Europe no longer matters as much. It is no longer the center of decision-making or initiative, but a stage on which others perform. The true centers of gravity today are countries like China and India. Their behavior no longer forms the 'background noise' of international affairs – it drives global developments. For Russia, this transformation is both a strategic opportunity and a conceptual challenge. On the one hand, it liberates Moscow from the old and often fruitless task of seeking allies within the West to safeguard its interests, particularly along its most dangerous frontiers. On the other hand, it compels Russia to reconsider the nature of its role in the world. What does global responsibility look like for a nation whose foreign policy has never been driven by messianic ideals or the desire to impose its values on others? Historically, Russia's strategic posture has not been animated by ideological expansionism. Unlike the Western European colonial empires, Russia never pursued dominance over distant territories to extract resources or spread its worldview. Even during the height of its imperial strength, such as in the 19th-century annexation of Central Asia, the Russian Empire did not develop a colonial policy comparable to that of Britain or France. The reason lies not in a lack of capacity, but in a fundamentally different orientation: Russia has always been more concerned with preserving its internal sovereignty and strategic autonomy than with exporting its model. Even the oft-cited concept of 'Moscow as the Third Rome' is misunderstood in the West. It was never a call to global proselytizing. Unlike the United States, which often ties its foreign policy to ideological missions, Russia's approach is deeply pragmatic and rooted in the idea of national self-preservation. The Soviet period, of course, was an exception. The revolutionary zeal of 1917 gave Moscow a temporary ideological edge, and during the Cold War, the USSR promoted its values as part of a broader geopolitical confrontation. But even then, ideological outreach was quickly subordinated to the central strategic aim: maintaining national stability in opposition to American-led containment. Another consistent feature of Russia's foreign policy has been the tactical use of divisions within the West. Whether confronting Sweden, Napoleonic France, or Nazi Germany, Russia always benefited from securing at least one Western partner. In the Crimean War of the 1850s and again during the Cold War, Russia suffered political setbacks in part because the Western front was unusually united. After the Cold War ended unfavorably for Moscow, Russian strategy relied on the hope that the EU would eventually drift from Washington's orbit and reclaim some degree of autonomy. That, clearly, has not happened. Internal crises, the erosion of elite leadership, and the rise of bureaucratic inertia have left Western Europe politically paralyzed. When the Ukraine crisis escalated into a military confrontation, the region's powers not only failed to act independently – they leaned even harder on the United States. This failure of EU emancipation has not strengthened Washington, however. On the contrary, Western Europe's strategic irrelevance only underscores the West's shrinking role in global affairs. That chapter of world history – where Europe stood at the helm – is now closed. Today, Russia faces a world where resistance to Western pressure no longer requires fractures within the Western alliance. What matters now is the emergence of a truly global system – one in which power is no longer concentrated in Euro-Atlantic hands. In this environment, Russia's ability to assert its interests has improved not because the West is weaker per se, but because the world is more balanced. The failure of the previous US administration to 'isolate' Russia is significant not only as a diplomatic defeat for Washington, but as evidence of this wider trend. The global South has not turned against Russia. On the contrary, many emerging powers are increasingly assertive in defining their own paths, free of Western tutelage. This structural shift works to Russia's advantage. And yet, this new reality also imposes obligations. In a world that is waiting for Russia's presence, Russia must now ask: what kind of global actor does it wish to be? This is not a question of abandoning its historical pragmatism or inward-facing strategic culture. Rather, it is about integrating that realism with the unavoidable demands of global responsibility. Unlike the missionary democracies of the West, Russia does not seek to reshape the world in its own image. But as one of the few nations capable of independent action on the global stage, it must now participate in shaping that world, not simply reacting to it. This is the conceptual challenge of the coming years. How can Russia remain true to its tradition of self-defined interest while also engaging with a multipolar world that increasingly demands initiative, leadership, and presence? The answer will not be found in grand ideological blueprints or universalist visions. It will lie, as it always has for Russia, in a careful balancing of national sovereignty with the strategic realities of a changing global article was first published by Valdai Discussion Club, translated and edited by the RT team.
