The Unattainable Pivot
How U.S. Foreign Policy Miscalculates Its Russia-China Strategy
For decades, the United States has sought to shape global geopolitics to maintain its position as the world’s dominant power. Today, as it faces the rising influence of China, Washington is reviving an old playbook—seeking to drive a wedge between Moscow and Beijing. The idea is simple: if Russia can be persuaded to distance itself from China, the U.S., alongside its European allies, can more effectively counter Beijing. However, this strategy is flawed, largely impractical, and ultimately doomed by the very nature of U.S. foreign policymaking, which is increasingly dictated by domestic political narratives rather than strategic realities.
The U.S. Vision: Pulling Russia Away from China
The U.S. approach to Russia has been paradoxical. While Washington remains deeply adversarial toward Moscow—imposing heavy sanctions, expanding NATO, and fueling proxy conflicts—there is still a lingering belief among some policymakers that Russia could be lured away from its strategic alignment with China. The logic follows the classic realist balance-of-power thinking: isolating China would be much easier if the U.S. could weaken the Beijing-Moscow axis.
The foundation of this strategy is based on historical precedent. During the Cold War, the U.S. successfully exploited the Sino-Soviet split, forging a diplomatic opening with China under Nixon and Kissinger. However, that was a very different geopolitical environment. The USSR and China were ideological rivals competing for leadership within the communist world. Today, Russia and China have overlapping interests that Washington fails to acknowledge:
Economic Interdependence: China is Russia’s largest trading partner, a crucial market for its energy exports, and a source of critical goods amid Western sanctions.
Military and Technological Ties: The two countries are enhancing defense cooperation, military exercises, and technological exchanges, particularly in AI and hypersonic weaponry.
Mutual Opposition to U.S. Hegemony: Both Moscow and Beijing see the U.S. as an existential threat to their sovereignty and governance models, reinforcing their commitment to strategic cooperation.
Expecting Russia to pivot away from China while the U.S. maintains sanctions and military encirclement is not only unrealistic but indicative of Washington’s failure to grasp how closely these two nations are now aligned.
The Real Problem: U.S. Foreign Policy is Domestic Policy
One of the biggest obstacles to effective U.S. diplomacy is the extent to which foreign policy is shaped by domestic politics rather than pragmatic strategic considerations. The Russia-China strategy is a perfect example of this disconnect.
American political leaders do not craft foreign policy purely based on global realities. Instead, policies are designed to resonate with domestic audiences, appealing to voter bases, media narratives, and electoral cycles. This approach leads to several fundamental flaws:
Short-Term Thinking – Unlike China or Russia, which craft decades-long strategic roadmaps, U.S. foreign policy shifts dramatically every election cycle. The idea of pulling Russia away from China, for instance, is not grounded in a comprehensive strategy but rather in political messaging designed to reassure American voters that Washington remains in control of global affairs.
Ideological Framing Over Pragmatism – American foreign policy is often framed as a battle of “democracy vs. autocracy,” despite the U.S. partnering with authoritarian regimes when convenient. This ideological rigidity makes pragmatic diplomacy difficult. If Washington truly wanted to recalibrate relations with Russia, it would have to abandon the moralistic rhetoric that portrays Putin’s government as an irredeemable enemy while engaging in realpolitik.
Bipartisan Posturing on China – While Republicans and Democrats rarely agree on policy, China has become a unifying political target. This has led to an aggressive stance toward Beijing that is often performative rather than strategic. In this atmosphere, any attempt to improve relations with Russia would be interpreted as weakness, making it politically untenable.
Lobbyist-Driven Policy – The U.S. military-industrial complex, energy sector, and think-tanks have vested interests in maintaining tensions with both Russia and China. The idea of realigning with Moscow to counter Beijing would face fierce resistance from those who benefit from a continued adversarial posture.
Why This Strategy Will Fail
The biggest miscalculation in Washington’s attempt to weaken the Russia-China relationship is its assumption that Russia has an alternative geopolitical path. Given the sanctions regime imposed after the invasion of Ukraine, Moscow has no realistic economic partners outside of China, and Beijing has no reason to abandon a relationship that benefits both nations.
Moreover, even if the U.S. were to attempt a thaw with Moscow, European allies—who view Russia as an existential threat—would strongly resist such a move. Germany, Poland, and the Baltic states have no interest in Washington pivoting toward Moscow at their expense.
In reality, the U.S. would need to make significant concessions to Russia—such as lifting sanctions, recognizing its security concerns, and rolling back NATO expansion—to have any hope of pulling it away from China. Given the current political climate in Washington, this is unthinkable.
The Path Forward: A Realist Approach to Foreign Policy
If the U.S. truly wants to build an effective strategy against China, it must abandon its illusion of realigning Russia and instead focus on a more pragmatic global strategy:
Accepting Multipolarity – The unipolar moment is over. The U.S. should engage with regional powers rather than pursuing outdated Cold War containment strategies.
Prioritizing Economic Statecraft Over Military Posturing – Instead of simply expanding military alliances, Washington should focus on strengthening its economic alliances in Asia, Latin America, and Africa to counter China’s influence.
Diplomatic Consistency – Long-term commitments to allies and adversaries alike would make U.S. diplomacy more credible. Constantly shifting policies based on domestic political trends undermines international trust in Washington.
Conclusion
The belief that the U.S. can lure Russia away from China is based on wishful thinking rather than geopolitical reality. It is yet another example of how U.S. foreign policy is dictated by domestic political narratives rather than pragmatic strategic interests. Until Washington abandons its short-term electoral mindset and starts formulating consistent, reality-based diplomacy, it will continue to struggle in an increasingly multipolar world.