Russians find new biggest enemy to replace US
The US has lost the top spot for the first time in 13 years, dropping to fourth place in the poll, which was published on Thursday.
Only 40% of those surveyed mentioned the US among Russia's primary enemies, with the number dropping by 36% compared to last year, it said.
Attitudes towards America shifted with the return of US President Donald Trump. Since his inauguration, the White House has been making efforts to broker a diplomatic solution to the Ukraine conflict, the pollster noted.
According to the study, Germany is now in first place, with 56% of respondents describing it as an 'unfriendly country' towards Russia, followed by the UK at 49% and Ukraine at 43%.
Before the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in February 2022, only 16% of the Russians considered Berlin an enemy, the Levada Center's data suggests.
German chancellor Friedrich Merz, who assumed office in early May, has intensified aggressive rhetoric towards Russia, while also making steps to boost military aid provided to Kiev by Berlin during the conflict with Moscow.
Last month, Merz said that Ukraine would be allowed to use Western-supplied weapons against Russia without range limitations. He claimed that would be 'possible' to provide Kiev with German Taurus missiles, which have a range of over 500 kilometers and are capable of reaching targets deep within Russian territory, including Moscow. The new chancellor also pledged to assist the government of Vladimir Zelensky with the production of long-range weapons inside Ukraine.
Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov reacted to the statements by Merz by stressing that Berlin's 'direct involvement in the war is now obvious.'
'Germany is sliding down the same slippery slope it already followed a couple of times in the last century – down toward its own collapse,' Lavrov said, referring to the defeats suffered by the country in the First and Second World Wars.
The Levada Center also asked the respondents about the countries they consider Russia's 'closest friends.' Belarus (80%), China (64%), Kazakhstan (36%), India (32%) and North Korea (30%) were the top five.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Russia Today
an hour ago
- Russia Today
Russian negotiator names terms for Putin-Zelensky meeting
The leaders of Russia and Ukraine should meet only after a peace treaty is ready to be signed, top Russian negotiator Vladimir Medinsky told journalists after the two sides concluded the third round of negotiations in Istanbul on Wednesday. Defense Minister Rustem Umerov, who led Kiev's delegation, previously suggested that Russian President Vladimir Putin and Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky should meet next month to try to break the deadlock. Medinsky, however, argued that a face-to-face sit-down would be pointless unless the deal is already finalized. 'The meeting must be properly prepared, and only then will it make sense. We have conveyed this position to the Ukrainian delegation,' he said. 'For such a meeting to take place, we must first agree on the terms of the deal and have a clear understanding of the agenda. In essence, the meeting should serve not to negotiate the agreement, but to sign it,' he added. 'There's no point in meeting only to begin negotiations from square one,' Medinsky said. He argued that a meeting between the two leaders would not automatically end the conflict, pointing to the Chinese Civil War in the 1940s. 'Chiang Kai-shek constantly insisted on meeting in person to discuss everything. I believe they met five times, smiled, and posed for photographs, but it did not bring an end to the civil war. The core issues remained unresolved, and the war went on,' he said. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov added that finalizing agreements would be a necessary precursor for a Putin-Zelensky meeting. Although Putin has questioned Zelensky's legitimacy, he said last month that he was open to meeting him at the final stage of talks. Zelensky, whose five-year presidential term expired in May 2024, has refused to call new elections, citing martial law. Moscow has listed the lifting of martial law as one of the conditions for a lasting ceasefire and has demanded that Ukraine hold elections within 100 days after martial law is lifted.
Russia Today
4 hours ago
- Russia Today
US State Dept accuses EU of ‘Orwellian censorship'
The EU's online content regulations are an affront to free speech, the US State Department has said in response to France's praise for the Digital Services Act (DSA). The State Department echoed earlier criticism from US Vice President J.D. Vance, who accused EU member states of attempting to quash dissenting voices and stigmatize popular right-wing parties such as the Alternative for Germany (AfD). 'In Europe, thousands are being convicted for the crime of criticizing their own governments. This Orwellian message won't fool the United States. Censorship is not freedom,' the State Department wrote on X on Tuesday. 'All the DSA protects is European leaders from their own people.' Earlier this month, France's mission to the UN promoted the DSA on X, stating, 'In Europe, one is free to speak, not free to spread illegal content.' In Europe, thousands are being convicted for the crime of criticizing their own governments. This Orwellian message won't fool the United States. Censorship is not freedom. Passed in 2022, the DSA mandates that online platforms remove 'illegal and harmful' content and combat 'the spread of disinformation,' according to the European Commission. Critics in both the US and Europe have likened the regulations to the creation of a 'ministry of truth'. Earlier this year, prosecutors in Paris launched an investigation into Elon Musk's platform X, on suspicion that it was being used to meddle in French politics and spread hateful messages. The company dismissed the probe as 'politically motivated.' In 2024, the French authorities detained Russian-born tech entrepreneur Pavel Durov on charges that he had allowed his Telegram messaging app to be used for criminal activities. Durov, who was later released on bail, denied any wrongdoing and accused France of waging 'a crusade' against free speech. He also claimed that French intelligence officials attempted to pressure him into censoring content during Romania's 2024 presidential election. France's foreign intelligence agency, the DGSE, confirmed that it had 'reminded' Durov of his responsibility to police content, but denied allegations of election interference.
Russia Today
6 hours ago
- Russia Today
The US is about to drive a massive stake into the South Caucasus
A recent report from the Spanish outlet Periodista Digital made waves by claiming that Armenia may be preparing to hand over control of a strategic corridor in the Syunik province to an American private military company. If this report is true, the consequences will be profound. This would mark the entry of a Western security actor into one of the most sensitive regions in Eurasia. Armenian sovereignty would be significantly diminished. The strategic calculus of Iran, Russia, China, and Turkey would shift. And the South Caucasus, a region held in balance by conflicting pressures, would face a serious realignment. The Armenian government has denied the report. But the idea that such a scenario could emerge is not far-fetched. Over the past year, the United States has expanded its institutional presence in Armenia. It has signed a Strategic Partnership Charter, introduced border and customs reforms, and deepened security cooperation. American contractors and advisors are already on the ground. These developments suggest a deliberate effort to secure long-term influence – framed as technical assistance, but carrying clear geopolitical weight. The Syunik corridor sits at the center of this unfolding dynamic. Iran views the territory as a gateway to the Caucasus. Russia considers it a buffer protecting its regional interests. China has identified it as a possible node in the westward expansion of Belt and Road infrastructure. US involvement in this space, even indirectly, would be interpreted by each of these powers as a strategic provocation. Moscow would see this as confirmation that it is being pushed out of the South Caucasus altogether. Tehran would regard it as another stage in a pattern of encirclement. Beijing would see growing risk in placing long-term logistical bets on a region where US-aligned security actors operate. France, which has positioned itself as Armenia's diplomatic partner, would lose ground to a deeper US-Turkish arrangement. Each player would adjust accordingly, and the fragile equilibrium that has kept open conflict at bay would begin to fray. For Türkiye, this shift could unlock long-held ambitions. A Western-secured corridor through Syunik would give Ankara a direct route to Azerbaijan and Central Asia. The corridor would serve Turkish strategic and commercial goals while shielding Turkey from accusations of coercion. American involvement would provide cover – and legitimacy. The presence of a US-linked private military actor would not go unnoticed or unanswered. It would alter how other regional powers assess risk, opportunity, and urgency. The shift would not require formal agreements or large troop deployments. Influence would be exerted through contracts, technical programs, and private-sector partnerships. The effect would be real. The South Caucasus is one of the few regions where major powers still operate in parallel without direct confrontation. That balance has held not because of harmony, but because each actor respects the costs of escalation. When a new player enters that system – especially one with global reach – the calculations change. This is why the report matters. Even if the details prove inaccurate, the scenario it outlines matches current trends. It reflects a trajectory already visible in US policy: assertive engagement through nontraditional instruments, designed to shape the regional environment without provoking formal conflict. It also reflects the growing potential for backlash. Strategic moves framed as stabilization may be perceived by others as disruption. And when those others include nuclear powers and regional heavyweights, perception quickly becomes policy. The logic of great-power competition that has shaped recent years of international security policy has now reached the South Caucasus. The form is quieter – conducted through infrastructure, contracts, and influence – but the stakes remain high. In this environment, smoke should not be ignored. It may not always mean fire. But it always means heat – and someone is trying to raise the temperature.
