Back
About RSIS
Introduction
Building the Foundations
Welcome Message
Board of Governors
Staff Profiles
Executive Deputy Chairman’s Office
Dean’s Office
Management
Distinguished Fellows
Faculty and Research
Associate Research Fellows, Senior Analysts and Research Analysts
Visiting Fellows
Adjunct Fellows
Administrative Staff
Honours and Awards for RSIS Staff and Students
RSIS Endowment Fund
Endowed Professorships
Career Opportunities
Getting to RSIS
Research
Research Centres
Centre for Multilateralism Studies (CMS)
Centre for Non-Traditional Security Studies (NTS Centre)
Centre of Excellence for National Security (CENS)
Institute of Defence and Strategic Studies (IDSS)
International Centre for Political Violence and Terrorism Research (ICPVTR)
Research Programmes
National Security Studies Programme (NSSP)
Social Cohesion Research Programme (SCRP)
Studies in Inter-Religious Relations in Plural Societies (SRP) Programme
Other Research
Future Issues and Technology Cluster
Research@RSIS
Science and Technology Studies Programme (STSP) (2017-2020)
Graduate Education
Graduate Programmes Office
Exchange Partners and Programmes
How to Apply
Financial Assistance
Meet the Admissions Team: Information Sessions and other events
RSIS Alumni
Outreach
Global Networks
About Global Networks
RSIS Alumni
International Programmes
About International Programmes
Asia-Pacific Programme for Senior Military Officers (APPSMO)
Asia-Pacific Programme for Senior National Security Officers (APPSNO)
International Conference on Cohesive Societies (ICCS)
International Strategy Forum-Asia (ISF-Asia)
Executive Education
About Executive Education
SRP Executive Programme
Terrorism Analyst Training Course (TATC)
Public Education
About Public Education
Publications
RSIS Publications
Annual Reviews
Books
Bulletins and Newsletters
RSIS Commentary Series
Counter Terrorist Trends and Analyses
Commemorative / Event Reports
Future Issues
IDSS Papers
Interreligious Relations
Monographs
NTS Insight
Policy Reports
Working Papers
External Publications
Authored Books
Journal Articles
Edited Books
Chapters in Edited Books
Policy Reports
Working Papers
Op-Eds
Glossary of Abbreviations
Policy-relevant Articles Given RSIS Award
RSIS Publications for the Year
External Publications for the Year
Media
News Releases
Speeches
Video/Audio Channel
Events
Contact Us
S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies Think Tank and Graduate School Ponder The Improbable Since 1966
Nanyang Technological University Nanyang Technological University
  • About RSIS
      IntroductionBuilding the FoundationsWelcome MessageBoard of GovernorsHonours and Awards for RSIS Staff and StudentsRSIS Endowment FundEndowed ProfessorshipsCareer OpportunitiesGetting to RSIS
      Staff ProfilesExecutive Deputy Chairman’s OfficeDean’s OfficeManagementDistinguished FellowsFaculty and ResearchAssociate Research Fellows, Senior Analysts and Research AnalystsVisiting FellowsAdjunct FellowsAdministrative Staff
  • Research
      Research CentresCentre for Multilateralism Studies (CMS)Centre for Non-Traditional Security Studies (NTS Centre)Centre of Excellence for National Security (CENS)Institute of Defence and Strategic Studies (IDSS)International Centre for Political Violence and Terrorism Research (ICPVTR)
      Research ProgrammesNational Security Studies Programme (NSSP)Social Cohesion Research Programme (SCRP)Studies in Inter-Religious Relations in Plural Societies (SRP) Programme
      Other ResearchFuture Issues and Technology ClusterResearch@RSISScience and Technology Studies Programme (STSP) (2017-2020)
  • Graduate Education
      Graduate Programmes OfficeExchange Partners and ProgrammesHow to ApplyFinancial AssistanceMeet the Admissions Team: Information Sessions and other eventsRSIS Alumni
  • Outreach
      Global NetworksAbout Global NetworksRSIS Alumni
      International ProgrammesAbout International ProgrammesAsia-Pacific Programme for Senior Military Officers (APPSMO)Asia-Pacific Programme for Senior National Security Officers (APPSNO)International Conference on Cohesive Societies (ICCS)International Strategy Forum-Asia (ISF-Asia)
      Executive EducationAbout Executive EducationSRP Executive ProgrammeTerrorism Analyst Training Course (TATC)
      Public EducationAbout Public Education
  • Publications
      RSIS PublicationsAnnual ReviewsBooksBulletins and NewslettersRSIS Commentary SeriesCounter Terrorist Trends and AnalysesCommemorative / Event ReportsFuture IssuesIDSS PapersInterreligious RelationsMonographsNTS InsightPolicy ReportsWorking Papers
      External PublicationsAuthored BooksJournal ArticlesEdited BooksChapters in Edited BooksPolicy ReportsWorking PapersOp-Eds
      Glossary of AbbreviationsPolicy-relevant Articles Given RSIS AwardRSIS Publications for the YearExternal Publications for the Year
  • Media
      News ReleasesSpeechesVideo/Audio Channel
  • Events
  • Contact Us
    • Connect with Us

      rsis.ntu
      rsis_ntu
      rsisntu
      rsisvideocast
      school/rsis-ntu
      rsis.sg
      rsissg
      RSIS
      RSS
      Subscribe to RSIS Publications
      Subscribe to RSIS Events

      Getting to RSIS

      Nanyang Technological University
      Block S4, Level B3,
      50 Nanyang Avenue,
      Singapore 639798

      Click here for direction to RSIS
Connect
Search
  • RSIS
  • Publication
  • RSIS Publications
  • Biden’s “Putin Killer” Remark: Moscow’s Calculated Response
  • Annual Reviews
  • Books
  • Bulletins and Newsletters
  • RSIS Commentary Series
  • Counter Terrorist Trends and Analyses
  • Commemorative / Event Reports
  • Future Issues
  • IDSS Papers
  • Interreligious Relations
  • Monographs
  • NTS Insight
  • Policy Reports
  • Working Papers

CO21059 | Biden’s “Putin Killer” Remark: Moscow’s Calculated Response
Chris Cheang

09 April 2021

download pdf

SYNOPSIS

The atmospherics in Russia-US relations soured following President Biden’s “killer” remark about President Putin, and Moscow’s subsequent recall of its ambassador to the US. Putin himself, meanwhile, strikes a calculated posture. What now?


Source: flickr

COMMENTARY

IN A US television interview aired on 17 March 2021, President Joe Biden was asked whether he thought Russia’s President Vladimir Putin was a killer. In reply, the new American leader said: “I do”.

From Moscow, Putin responded by wishing Biden good health. He added: “I am saying this without irony or tongue in cheek … when we evaluate other people, or even other states and nations, we are always facing a mirror, we always see ourselves in the reflection, because we project our inner selves onto the other person.”

Putin’s Image of Reasonableness: Posturing?

Describing the American people as “mostly honest, decent and sincere” and “who want to live in peace and friendship with us, something we are aware of and appreciate, and we will rely on them in the future,” Putin criticised US domestic and foreign policy, placing the blame on the US ruling class.

He said that Russia would work with the US but only in areas it is interested in, and on terms beneficial to Russia. Seeking to project an image of reasonableness and signal that Russia is still willing to continue a dialogue, Putin proposed having a “live, online” conversation with the US president.

Putin’s spokesman, Dmitry Peskov, subsequently explained to reporters that the proposal implied open dialogue and not debate, noting that Biden’s remarks “are quite unprecedented, so in order not to let these statements harm bilateral Russian-American relations, which are already in a deplorable state, President Putin suggested discussing the situation but doing so openly”.

Other Russian officials however took a stronger line. The Foreign Ministry in Moscow recalled the Russian ambassador in Washington DC for consultations. Vyacheslav Volodin, Speaker of the Duma, described Biden’s comments as “unacceptable,” adding that “they offend the citizens of Russia”.

Federation Council (Upper House) Deputy Speaker Konstantin Kosachev, also described Biden’s remark as “unacceptable,” warning that they “inevitably lead to a sharp exacerbation of our bilateral ties”.

The US National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan said on 22 March that the US was anticipating “tough days” in relations with Russia. In reaction, Secretary of the Russian Security Council Nikolai Patrushev stressed that the US would be responsible for that.

Reflecting Russia’s wish not to worsen the relationship, Patrushev stressed that Russia was “committed to constructive cooperation”, adding that “we haven’t taken any hostile steps against the United States, we are not taking any now, nor are we planning to take any in the future”. Patrushev’s words carry weight, as he is a member of Putin’s inner circle.

Sword of Damocles over Ties

Without directly judging Biden’s remark, Nabila Massrali, spokesperson for the EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, Josep Borrell, commented as well.

She was quoted as saying on 18 March that there was “a long list of failed – in some cases, and successful in other cases – assassinations carried out against critical, independent figures in Russia, including politicians and journalists”. She added that Putin “ultimately holds the responsibility for the Russian authorities, Russian policy and actions”.

According to a European Council press statement of 22 March, European Council president, Charles Michel, said that EU relations with Russia are at a “low point”.

Yet, the EU must exercise caution vis-à-vis Russia, since the latter is a major energy and raw material source, and trade partner with the largest consumer market on the continent. Moreover, Germany and other EU states would like to purchase Russia’s Sputnik V vaccine.

The standpoint of Germany is noteworthy. Foreign Minister Heiko Maas expressed no surprise at the “clear language” from the Biden administration on Russia. Nevertheless, he noted that the US had renewed the New START arms control treaty, showing that the US was ready for dialogue and coming to an agreement with Russia on global challenges.

The US’ continued opposition to the Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline project (the 1,230 km pipeline that will double Russian gas exports to the EU) and Germany’s continued commitment to it, however, will hang like a sword of Damocles over Russo-US as well as US-German relations.

Russian Motivations

Putin’s “softer” line towards Biden’s “killer” remark shows Russia’s interest in ensuring that the bilateral relationship does not deteriorate irreversibly. It also reflects Putin’s efforts to appear reasonable to his own people as well as the American people, in cognisance of the dissonance of views within the body politic of the US (and Europe).

It was not a coincidence that Russian state TV, Rossia 24, reported on 20 March that the Russian ambassador to the US Anatoly Antonov had expressed his thanks to American citizens for their support of good relations between the two countries.

Nevertheless, the “harder” approach of top legislators Volodin and Kosachev signals that as a great power, Russia cannot simply react with sangfroid at Biden’s remark.

Seeking not to burn Moscow’s bridges with the EU, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, during a visit to China on 23 March, pointed out that Russia was ready to build its relations with the EU should it eliminate an “anomaly in contacts” (i.e., its unilateral decisions to impose sanctions).

He noted that there were “only a few European partner countries that have a desire to act based on their national interests”. (He must have had in mind Germany, the Netherlands, Italy, and France; they account for over half of trade between Russia and the EU, Russia’s leading partner).

Delinking from Western-controlled SWIFT?

Lavrov said that Russia seeks to work with China to reduce the impact of any further sanctions. In that regard, Lavrov proposed the reduction of his country’s “exposure to sanctions by strengthening our technological independence and switching to settlements in national and international currencies other than the dollar” as well as moving “away from using Western-controlled international payment systems”.

Lavrov’s statement is not new; in 2018, the then deputy prime minister Arkady Dvorkovich stated that Russian financial institutions and firms were ready to work without SWIFT’s services. As early as 2015, the then prime minister Dmitry Medvedev called attention to perceived Western countries’ threats to restrict Russia’s operations through SWIFT, warning that Russia’s reaction to such a move “will be without limits”.

In the light of Biden’s remark and the announcement of planned US sanctions, Russia does not want more comprehensive US/EU sanctions that might further hurt its economy. Russia also has other common issues to resolve with the US such as climate change, the Middle East, Ukraine, Afghanistan, arms control regime and cyberspace governance.

For all intents and purposes, Russia’s reaction to the US leader’s remark is deliberately calibrated but it is unlikely to weaken US or European resolve to impose further sanctions.

About the Author

Christopher Cheang is a Senior Fellow in the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies (RSIS), Nanyang Technological University (NTU), Singapore where he researches on Russia.

Categories: RSIS Commentary Series / Country and Region Studies / International Political Economy / International Politics and Security / East Asia and Asia Pacific / Europe / South Asia / Southeast Asia and ASEAN / Global
comments powered by Disqus

SYNOPSIS

The atmospherics in Russia-US relations soured following President Biden’s “killer” remark about President Putin, and Moscow’s subsequent recall of its ambassador to the US. Putin himself, meanwhile, strikes a calculated posture. What now?


Source: flickr

COMMENTARY

IN A US television interview aired on 17 March 2021, President Joe Biden was asked whether he thought Russia’s President Vladimir Putin was a killer. In reply, the new American leader said: “I do”.

From Moscow, Putin responded by wishing Biden good health. He added: “I am saying this without irony or tongue in cheek … when we evaluate other people, or even other states and nations, we are always facing a mirror, we always see ourselves in the reflection, because we project our inner selves onto the other person.”

Putin’s Image of Reasonableness: Posturing?

Describing the American people as “mostly honest, decent and sincere” and “who want to live in peace and friendship with us, something we are aware of and appreciate, and we will rely on them in the future,” Putin criticised US domestic and foreign policy, placing the blame on the US ruling class.

He said that Russia would work with the US but only in areas it is interested in, and on terms beneficial to Russia. Seeking to project an image of reasonableness and signal that Russia is still willing to continue a dialogue, Putin proposed having a “live, online” conversation with the US president.

Putin’s spokesman, Dmitry Peskov, subsequently explained to reporters that the proposal implied open dialogue and not debate, noting that Biden’s remarks “are quite unprecedented, so in order not to let these statements harm bilateral Russian-American relations, which are already in a deplorable state, President Putin suggested discussing the situation but doing so openly”.

Other Russian officials however took a stronger line. The Foreign Ministry in Moscow recalled the Russian ambassador in Washington DC for consultations. Vyacheslav Volodin, Speaker of the Duma, described Biden’s comments as “unacceptable,” adding that “they offend the citizens of Russia”.

Federation Council (Upper House) Deputy Speaker Konstantin Kosachev, also described Biden’s remark as “unacceptable,” warning that they “inevitably lead to a sharp exacerbation of our bilateral ties”.

The US National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan said on 22 March that the US was anticipating “tough days” in relations with Russia. In reaction, Secretary of the Russian Security Council Nikolai Patrushev stressed that the US would be responsible for that.

Reflecting Russia’s wish not to worsen the relationship, Patrushev stressed that Russia was “committed to constructive cooperation”, adding that “we haven’t taken any hostile steps against the United States, we are not taking any now, nor are we planning to take any in the future”. Patrushev’s words carry weight, as he is a member of Putin’s inner circle.

Sword of Damocles over Ties

Without directly judging Biden’s remark, Nabila Massrali, spokesperson for the EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, Josep Borrell, commented as well.

She was quoted as saying on 18 March that there was “a long list of failed – in some cases, and successful in other cases – assassinations carried out against critical, independent figures in Russia, including politicians and journalists”. She added that Putin “ultimately holds the responsibility for the Russian authorities, Russian policy and actions”.

According to a European Council press statement of 22 March, European Council president, Charles Michel, said that EU relations with Russia are at a “low point”.

Yet, the EU must exercise caution vis-à-vis Russia, since the latter is a major energy and raw material source, and trade partner with the largest consumer market on the continent. Moreover, Germany and other EU states would like to purchase Russia’s Sputnik V vaccine.

The standpoint of Germany is noteworthy. Foreign Minister Heiko Maas expressed no surprise at the “clear language” from the Biden administration on Russia. Nevertheless, he noted that the US had renewed the New START arms control treaty, showing that the US was ready for dialogue and coming to an agreement with Russia on global challenges.

The US’ continued opposition to the Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline project (the 1,230 km pipeline that will double Russian gas exports to the EU) and Germany’s continued commitment to it, however, will hang like a sword of Damocles over Russo-US as well as US-German relations.

Russian Motivations

Putin’s “softer” line towards Biden’s “killer” remark shows Russia’s interest in ensuring that the bilateral relationship does not deteriorate irreversibly. It also reflects Putin’s efforts to appear reasonable to his own people as well as the American people, in cognisance of the dissonance of views within the body politic of the US (and Europe).

It was not a coincidence that Russian state TV, Rossia 24, reported on 20 March that the Russian ambassador to the US Anatoly Antonov had expressed his thanks to American citizens for their support of good relations between the two countries.

Nevertheless, the “harder” approach of top legislators Volodin and Kosachev signals that as a great power, Russia cannot simply react with sangfroid at Biden’s remark.

Seeking not to burn Moscow’s bridges with the EU, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, during a visit to China on 23 March, pointed out that Russia was ready to build its relations with the EU should it eliminate an “anomaly in contacts” (i.e., its unilateral decisions to impose sanctions).

He noted that there were “only a few European partner countries that have a desire to act based on their national interests”. (He must have had in mind Germany, the Netherlands, Italy, and France; they account for over half of trade between Russia and the EU, Russia’s leading partner).

Delinking from Western-controlled SWIFT?

Lavrov said that Russia seeks to work with China to reduce the impact of any further sanctions. In that regard, Lavrov proposed the reduction of his country’s “exposure to sanctions by strengthening our technological independence and switching to settlements in national and international currencies other than the dollar” as well as moving “away from using Western-controlled international payment systems”.

Lavrov’s statement is not new; in 2018, the then deputy prime minister Arkady Dvorkovich stated that Russian financial institutions and firms were ready to work without SWIFT’s services. As early as 2015, the then prime minister Dmitry Medvedev called attention to perceived Western countries’ threats to restrict Russia’s operations through SWIFT, warning that Russia’s reaction to such a move “will be without limits”.

In the light of Biden’s remark and the announcement of planned US sanctions, Russia does not want more comprehensive US/EU sanctions that might further hurt its economy. Russia also has other common issues to resolve with the US such as climate change, the Middle East, Ukraine, Afghanistan, arms control regime and cyberspace governance.

For all intents and purposes, Russia’s reaction to the US leader’s remark is deliberately calibrated but it is unlikely to weaken US or European resolve to impose further sanctions.

About the Author

Christopher Cheang is a Senior Fellow in the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies (RSIS), Nanyang Technological University (NTU), Singapore where he researches on Russia.

Categories: RSIS Commentary Series / Country and Region Studies / International Political Economy / International Politics and Security

Popular Links

About RSISResearch ProgrammesGraduate EducationPublicationsEventsAdmissionsCareersVideo/Audio ChannelRSIS Intranet

Connect with Us

rsis.ntu
rsis_ntu
rsisntu
rsisvideocast
school/rsis-ntu
rsis.sg
rsissg
RSIS
RSS
Subscribe to RSIS Publications
Subscribe to RSIS Events

Getting to RSIS

Nanyang Technological University
Block S4, Level B3,
50 Nanyang Avenue,
Singapore 639798

Click here for direction to RSIS

Get in Touch

    Copyright © S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies. All rights reserved.
    Privacy Statement / Terms of Use
    Help us improve

      Rate your experience with this website
      123456
      Not satisfiedVery satisfied
      What did you like?
      0/255 characters
      What can be improved?
      0/255 characters
      Your email
      Please enter a valid email.
      Thank you for your feedback.
      This site uses cookies to offer you a better browsing experience. By continuing, you are agreeing to the use of cookies on your device as described in our privacy policy. Learn more
      OK
      Latest Book
      more info