Most Russians No Longer See US as Enemy Nation: Poll
Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content.
The proportion of Russians who view the U.S. as the most hostile country towards Moscow has almost halved over the last year, according to a survey.
The poll by the independent Levada Center found 40 percent of respondents agreed that the U.S. was the most hostile nation towards Russia, down from 76 percent in 2024.
Aleksei Miniailo, an independent Russian sociologist who founded a separate polling group called Chronicles, told Newsweek Monday that the Levada figures show how fragile the effect of anti-U.S. propaganda in Russia actually is.
Newsweek has contacted the Kremlin for comment.
A Russian national tricolor flag flies next to a US.. national flag sitting on the U.S. embassy building in Moscow on March 13, 2025.
A Russian national tricolor flag flies next to a US.. national flag sitting on the U.S. embassy building in Moscow on March 13, 2025.Why It Matters
The Kremlin and its propagandists have framed Vladimir Putin's full-scale invasion of Ukraine as a proxy war with the West, regularly issuing nuclear threats towards Kyiv's allies.
However the Levada center polling shows shows that this antipathy towards the U.S. is not shared by most Russians, which could be a backdrop to a thawing of ties between the countries since President Donald Trump came into office.
What To Know
The Levada Center asked 1,613 Russian adults between May 22 and May 28 about their attitudes to different countries in a poll with a margin of error no greater than 3.4 percent.
The share of respondents who named the U.S. as the most hostile country towards Russia was 40 percent—down from 76 percent in 2024.
This dip saw the U.S. drop from first to fourth on the list of hostile countries for the first time in two decades and was behind Germany (55 percent), the U.K. (49 percent) and Ukraine (43 percent), against which Moscow has been waging war since 2022.
Levada said that attitudes toward the U.S. continue to improve amid the Trump administration's peace-making efforts.
It found over one third (37 percent) of respondents had a positive attitude toward the U.S, 21 percentage points since September 2024. Less than half (47 percent) had a negative attitude, down by 25 percentage points in the same time frame.
The survey found that the most positive attitude towards the U.S. came from those under 24 years old (49 percent), Muscovites (42 percent), and those who had visited other European countries.
The groups with the most negative attitude toward the United States were respondents aged 40-54 (52 percent) and those who have never been to European countries (49 percent).
Meanwhile respondents named Belarus (80 percent), China (64 percent), Kazakhstan (36 percent), India (32 percent) and North Korea (30 percent) as Russia's "closest friends and allies."
Miniailo, a Russian opposition politician from the research group Chronicles, said the Levada findings show that propaganda against the West had a strong effect but this can fade very quickly when it comes up against pro-U.S. information flows, such as from Hollywood films.
He said the key factor is whether Kremlin opinion, stated by propaganda outlets is contested widely, which is why an anti-war position is criminally pursued in Russia.
"However, it's hardly possible to criminalize watching Hollywood movies, so the propaganda discourse is challenged by soft power," he added, noting that Chronicles' own polling in 2024 found that Russians wanted to see relations with the West restored, despite Kremlin messaging.
What People Are Saying
Levada Center: "The most hostile countries for Russians are Germany, the U.K., Ukraine, the United States and Poland; For the first time in 20 years of measurements, the U.S. dropped from first place to fourth place on this list."
Aleksei Miniailo, Russian opposition politician and sociologist: "This figure shows how fragile the effect of propaganda actually is...its effects decay very fast."
What Happens Next
Russian media continue to disparage Ukraine's Western allies for their support of Kyiv against Russian aggression. The Levada polling suggests that fewer people are listening to this messaging, as the Trump administration continues to push for negotiations to end the Ukraine war.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
5 minutes ago
- Yahoo
The difference between a Ukraine ceasefire and peace deal explained - and why it matters
Experts believe a ceasefire is a crucial foundation of longer-lasting peace in Ukraine, but Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin appear eager to skip this step. After his meeting with Russian president Vladimir Putin in Alaska last week, Donald Trump appeared to back away from his demand for a ceasefire in Ukraine before any further progress could be made. Following around two-and-a-half hours of talks, the US leader said a deal had not been reached, but gave some indication of what could happen next in a post on his Truth Social platform. "It was determined by all that the best way to end the horrific war between Russia and Ukraine is to go directly to a Peace Agreement, which would end the war, and not a mere Ceasefire Agreement, which often times do not hold up," he said. His remarks appeared to be in line with the position of Moscow, which says it wants a full settlement, rather than a pause, and caused concern among Ukraine and its allies, "We see that Russia rebuffs numerous calls for a ceasefire and has not yet determined when it will stop the killing. This complicates the situation," Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelenskyy wrote on X. Meanwhile some international relations experts have expressed scepticism of a peace deal coming before a ceasefire, warning that this could be a "ploy" by Russia to continue the war. What is a ceasefire? Ceasefires are "designed to keep violence at bay for a designated period of time", according to the Better World Campaign, which works to build a stronger relationship between the US and the UN. They are "generally binding, but often fleeting", the organisation added, but "ideally create space for parties to negotiate potential solutions to conflict". Medecins San Frontieres said ceasefires "do not reflect a juridical end to the state of war", rather, they are a "military decision that responds to strategic objectives: gathering forces, evaluating the opponent's authority and chain of command, or carrying out negotiations". "There is always a risk that relief operations negotiated in the context of a cease-fire may be used as a 'bargaining chip' by the parties to the conflict, so as to obtain political or military compromises or to test the good faith of the adverse party or its ability to control its own troops or a given territory," it added. What is a peace deal? A peace treaty is a "legal agreement between two or more hostile parties, usually countries or governments, which formally ends a state of war between the two parties," the American Bar Association said. They are "often the culmination of international peace discussions, and seek permanent resolutions by establishing conditions for peace", it added. It is different to a surrender, "in which one party agrees to give up arms; or a ceasefire, in which parties agree to suspend hostilities temporarily", or an armistice agreement, "in which parties agree to stop hostilities, but do not agree to long term conditions for peace". The association also makes a distinction between a peace treaty and peace agreement, which are "often negotiated between warring parties within one nation". Why does it matter? Former US ambassador to Cape Verde, and senior fellow at the Fletcher School of Tufts University, Donald Heflin suggested that a ceasefire is a crucial step towards longer-lasting peace. Speaking to Yahoo News, he said skipping to a peace deal "will not work". "A permanent peace deal always involves a million details, and negotiations can take months or even years," he said. "On a ceasefire, you stop the killing, the two armies freeze in place. With a permanent deal, you must agree on what territory the two parties will each end up with, which is much more contentious. "A major pitfall is that while a permanent deal is being worked out, the killing continues. "This whole idea is a diplomatic ploy by the Russians. They look like they want peace, but in reality they have the military advantage, and want the war to continue." Paul B. Stares, director of the Centre for Preventive Action at the Council on Foreign Relations, said that understanding of how a ceasefire agreement could "ease security concerns of both parties" could "help facilitate an agreement when the moment is ripe". He said it should "serve as the foundation for a permanent and comprehensive settlement of the conflict". Unlike ceasefires, Stares said that peace treaties are "often difficult to achieve in the short term", despite Moscow and Washington appearing to be pushing to skip ahead to this final step. What could happen in Ukraine? The prospect of rushing towards a peace deal with no ceasefire first is causing great concern among Ukraine and European allies. In a post on X, Zelensky wrote: "We see that Russia rebuffs numerous calls for a ceasefire and has not yet determined when it will stop the killing. This complicates the situation. "If they lack the will to carry out a simple order to stop the strikes, it may take a lot of effort to get Russia to have the will to implement far greater – peaceful coexistence with its neighbours for decades." Serhiy Leshchenko, an adviser to president Zelensky, said: 'Our vision is a ceasefire first, and then everything else. 'If we negotiate before the ceasefire, it creates a big risk for Ukraine. If there is a ceasefire, it opens up space for diplomats.' Ukraine believes a ceasefire would force Putin to negotiate, and that attempting to skip this is a strategy to prolong the war, NPR reported. What happens next in Ukraine remains unclear, but Trump has indicated that he accepts at least some of Russia's demands, having said there will be "no going into Nato by Ukraine" as part of any peace deal. In a post on Truth Social, Trump also said there would be "no getting back" of the Crimean peninsula, although it remains to be seen what happens to the eastern Donbas region, which Russia is understood to be demanding. Zelensky is due to meet Trump in Washington on Monday (18 August), with European Commission president Ursula von der Leyen, Finnish president Alexander Stubb and Italian prime minister Giorgia Meloni also travelling to the US capital. In a meeting on Sunday, European leaders stressed that no discussions could take place without Kyiv's involvement and clear agreements to safeguard the rest of Ukraine's land. Some called for an immediate ceasefire, with Poland's foreign ministry saying: "You cannot negotiate peace under falling bombs." However, UK prime minister Sir Keir Starmer appeared more open to Putin and Trump's strategy when asked if he wants a ceasefire back on the table. "We want to see an end to the killing," his official spokesman said. "If you can bring about an end to the killing and bring about a sustained peace in one go, then all the better.' Read more What time is Trump meeting Zelensky at the White House? (Yahoo News) Trump isn't fighting for peace in Ukraine, he's managing Russia's victory - and Europe is worried (The Independent) Keir Starmer Splits With Donald Trump On Whether Ukraine Should Be Allowed To Join Nato (HuffPost)
Axios
6 minutes ago
- Axios
The fading threat of new Trump oil sanctions
Secretary of State Marco Rubio was all over TV on Sunday with a consistent message: Don't expect new U.S energy sanctions against Russia anytime soon, but never say never. Why it matters: Fresh penalties could raise oil prices while putting new pressure on Russia's massive fossil fuel export revenue. President Trump has threatened stiff tariffs on buyers of Russian oil and gas, but that appears more remote after his meeting with Vladimir Putin on Friday. China, the largest importer of Russian barrels, would face the most jeopardy under so-called secondary sanctions. The intrigue: The exception is India, another large buyer. Secondary tariffs, announced earlier this month amid wider trade frictions, are slated to begin Aug. 27. White House trade adviser Peter Navarro on Monday put fresh pressure on India to stop purchasing Russian barrels. Driving the news: Rubio told all the major networks that new sanctions to penalize Russia won't help bring peace in Ukraine. "The minute you levy additional sanctions, strong additional sanctions, the talking stops," he told ABC's "This Week." "And at that point, the war just continues. You've probably just added six, eight, nine, 12 more months to the war, if not longer. More people dead, more people killed, more people maimed, more families destroyed." Yes, but: He said in the Sunday show interviews that new sanctions may ultimately arrive if peace talks fail. What they're saying:"Would Trump return to sanctions and tariffs (or at least a mention of them) if the process appears to be stalling? We would not rule it out," ClearView Energy Partners said in a note. "[B]ut we still think broad secondary measures seem unlikely, and that Trump might be more inclined to direct new Russia sanctions at 'shadow fleet' tankers and/or LNG exports." Catch up quick: Trump himself seemed to discount the possibility in an interview with Fox News' Sean Hannity after meeting with Putin. "Well, because of what happened today, I think I don't have to think about that now. I may have to think about it in two weeks or three weeks or something, but we don't have to think about that right now," he said. Friction point: Over 80 senators support Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) and Richard Blumenthal's (D-Conn.) bill that would hit Russian energy buyers with giant new tariffs. Graham, in a Fox News interview yesterday, praised Trump's meeting and argued the planned penalties on India "rattled" Putin and brought him to Alaska. But he urged wider attempts to curb Russia's huge fossil fuel export revenues. "My advice to President Trump and Marco [Rubio] is that you've got to convince Putin that if this war doesn't end justly and honorably, with Ukraine making concessions also, we're going to destroy the Russian economy," Graham said. He called on Europe to put new tariffs on India and threaten new ones against China over Russian energy imports.
Boston Globe
6 minutes ago
- Boston Globe
What to know about Crimea, the Black Sea peninsula seized by Russia from Ukraine over a decade ago
How did Russia seize Crimea? In 2013-14, a massive popular uprising gripped Ukraine for weeks, eventually forcing pro-Moscow President Victor Yanukovych from office. Amid the turmoil, Russian President Vladimir Putin pounced, sending armed troops without insignia to overrun Crimea. Putin later called a referendum in Crimea to join Russia that Ukraine and the West dismissed as illegal. Russia's relations with the West plummeted to new lows. The United States, the European Union and other countries imposed sanctions on Moscow and its officials. Moscow's illegal annexation of Crimea on March 18, 2014, was recognized only by countries such as North Korea and Sudan. In Russia, it touched off a wave of patriotism, and 'Krym nash!' — 'Crimea is ours!' — became a rallying cry. Advertisement The move sent Putin's popularity soaring. His approval rating, which had declined to 65% in January 2014, shot to 86% in June, according to the Levada Center, an independent Russian pollster. Putin has called the peninsula 'a sacred place' and has prosecuted those who publicly argue it is part of Ukraine — particularly the Crimean Tatars, who strongly opposed the annexation. What happened after the annexation? After the annexation, fighting broke out in eastern Ukraine between pro-Kremlin militias and Kyiv's forces. Moscow threw its weight behind the insurgents, even though it denied supporting them with troops and weapons. There was abundant evidence to the contrary, including a Dutch court's finding that a Russia-supplied air defense system shot down a Malaysia Airlines passenger jet over eastern Ukraine in July 2014, killing all 298 people aboard. Advertisement Russian hard-liners later criticized Putin for failing to capture all of Ukraine that year, arguing it was easily possible at a time when the government in Kyiv was in disarray and its military in shambles. The fighting in eastern Ukraine continued, on and off, until February 2022, when Putin launched a full-scale invasion of Ukraine. Why is Crimea important? Crimea's unique location makes it a strategically important asset, and Russia has spent centuries fighting for it. The peninsula was home to Turkic-speaking Tatars when the Russian empire first annexed it in the 18th century. It briefly regained independence two centuries later before being swallowed by the Soviet Union. Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev transferred Crimea from Russia to Ukraine in 1954, when both were part of the USSR, to commemorate the 300th anniversary of the unification of Moscow and Kyiv. In 1991, when the Soviet Union collapsed, the peninsula became part of newly independent Ukraine. Russia kept a foot in the door, however: Its Black Sea Fleet had a base in the city of Sevastopol, and Crimea — as part of Ukraine — continued to host it. By the time Russia annexed it in 2014, it had been within Ukraine for 60 years and was part of the country's identity. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has vowed to retake it and said Russia 'won't be able to steal' the peninsula. Advertisement For either side, possession of Crimea is key to control over activities in the Black Sea — a critical corridor for the world's grain, among other goods. What role does Crimea play in Russia's war in Ukraine? Ahead of its full-scale invasion, Moscow deployed troops and weapons to Crimea, allowing Russian forces to quickly seize large parts of southern Ukraine early in the war. A top Russian military official later said that securing a land corridor from Russia to Crimea by holding the occupied parts of Ukraine's Donetsk, Luhansk, Zaporizhzhia and Kherson regions was among the key goals of what the Kremlin called its 'special military operation' in Ukraine. Before the invasion, Zelenskyy focused on diplomatic efforts to get Crimea back, but after Russian troops poured across the border, Kyiv began publicly contemplating retaking the peninsula by force. The peninsula soon became a battleground, with Ukraine launching drone attacks and bombing it to try to dislodge Moscow's hold on the territory. The attacks targeted the Russian Black Sea Fleet there, as well as ammunition depots, air fields and Putin's prized asset — the Kerch Bridge linking Crimea to Russia, which was struck in October 2022, in July 2023 and in June 2025. How does Crimea factor into peace efforts? Putin listed Ukraine's recognition of Crimea as part of Russia among Moscow's demands for peace in 2024. Those also include Ukraine ceding the four regions illegally annexed by Russia in 2022, dropping its bid to join NATO, keeping the country's nonnuclear status, restricting its military force and protecting the interests of the Russian-speaking population. Kyiv has rejected ceding any territory. Russia currently holds roughly 20% of Ukrainian land, including Crimea, so any deal that freezes the lines more or less where they are would benefit Moscow. Advertisement
