Market Data 
If you ask people in Europe who their favorite U.S. presidential candidate is, you’re likely to get little or no response. But Vladimir Putin, Russia’s president for the last 20 years, has a strong opinion on the matter.
He famously commented that Kamala Harris, the Democratic Party’s candidate for the U.S. presidential race, is his candidate of choice and that she has an “expressive and infectious laugh” that indicates “she’s doing well.” This is not the first time the Kremlin’s resident has commented on his personal favorite in the U.S. presidential election. In February, it was Joe Biden’s turn, when Putin said that he was “more experienced, more predictable, a politician of the old formation”.
On both occasions there was a confused reaction of the general public, as it is no secret that the other candidate for the presidency on both occasions, Donald Trump, is closer to Putin’s figure and ideology and has not shied away from it – even complimenting the Russian president during his political career.
Trump has been heavily aided by Russian propaganda. In fact, Putin’s remark about Harris came just one day after Reuters, citing a senior U.S. intelligence official, reported that the Russian state-owned media outlet RT had built and used networks of U.S. and other Western personalities to create and spread pro-Russian narratives. And that these actors are, among other things, aiding Moscow’s efforts to sway voter preferences in favor of the former president and diminish the prospects of the vice president.
Just as with media, in both cases—whether praising Biden’s experience or mocking Harris’s laugh — Putin’s goal seems to remain the same: to insert himself into U.S. political discourse in ways that serve Russia’s interests.
In fact, a visit to the website of TASS, the Russian state media agency, reveals extensive coverage of this seemingly innocuous remark, counting five different articles about it on its English-language website. This raises the question of who the actual recipients of these statements were and what purpose they served.
In this regard, it can be argued that this interference of Vladimir Putin in American politics may serve to further enhance the influence of various conspiracy theories (i.e., Russian propaganda products), which all discuss underlying motives and plots related to the Ukrainian conflict.
One such narrative, which has been widely disseminated, posits that the Ukrainian war is not a war for the freedom, independence, or lives of the Ukrainian people, but rather a secret war between the United States and Russia. This narrative further suggests that Kamala Harris, like Joe Biden before her, and her party, bear partial or even primary responsibility for the war in Ukraine because they support and promote an expansive NATO mostly for economic reasons. This would make the Democrats and Putin almost “allies,” while Donald Trump, according to this narrative, would resolve or avoid the situation because he has a very different idea of how NATO should be run.
The assertion that NATO was the primary instigator of the war in Ukraine is a perspective widely held by a wide range of individuals and entities, including Donald Trump himself, prominent intellectuals, politicians, members of the clergy, and, most importantly, Russia. Accordingly, this theory is often accompanied by the notion that Donald Trump will succeed in stopping the war, a view widely held among right-wing politicians and espoused by Trump himself. The inevitable conclusion of this narrative is that Donald Trump will be seen as the person who will end the war and as a hero, which is not only how he sees himself, but which also ends up being perfectly in line with the agenda of the Russian propaganda machine that is supporting him. Of course, this narrative is greatly complemented by Trump’s most famous recent claim on the issue, that he would “end the war in 24 hours,” which positions him in a great light in an America where 70% of the population wants the war to end.
This would seem far-fetched and convoluted, were it not for the fact that Trump’s inner circle and political allies seem to think the same.
RFK Jr, who suspended his presidential campaign and then endorsed Trump, infamously claimed that “Biden wants the war in Ukraine to continue because of the Democratic Party’s alleged ties to BlackRock,” i.e., an asset management firm. In an earlier campaign speech, he claimed that the money the U.S. is sending to Ukraine is actually going to defense contractors owned by BlackRock, and that once the war is over, BlackRock will profit from the reconstruction of Ukraine. Trump himself said that Biden “[…] invaded Ukraine.”
It can be argued that the Russian president’s consistent interjections in U.S. politics serve a broader strategic purpose: aligning his goals with those of Donald Trump. Both men have criticized NATO and downplayed the importance of American commitments abroad. By amplifying narratives that discredit Democrats and frame Trump as a ‘peacemaker,’ Putin’s rhetoric subtly pushes Trump’s agenda, while also positioning Russia to benefit from a more fractured and isolationist Western alliance.
As the 2024 election approaches, Russia’s influence is likely to persist, shaping the way Americans perceive their leaders, their alliances, and even their role in the world. In the end, Putin’s commentary is not just about meddling in a foreign election; it’s part of a broader strategy to reshape global power dynamics in Russia’s favor. Whether or not Trump’s promise to ‘end the war in 24 hours’ resonates with voters, the ongoing influence of Moscow in American politics should not be underestimated.
[Photo by kremlin.ru, via Wikimedia Commons]
Martina Sapio is a developing lawyer with a strong foundation in international law and a passion for geopolitics. Currently, she is a trainee lawyer at Clifford Chance. The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author.
Read the full article here
