Russia embarks on a diplomatic and political confrontation with the US because it feels that American politics is so shaky and unfocused that it offers Moscow the opportunity to impose bilateral and international equations; equations that would help it retrieve its special position in the balance of powers and strengthen its leadership in oil alliances as well as in new strategic alliances. China, on the other hand, is swallowing its ego to let the Olympics pass and is keeping its cool to avoid provocation over what it considers violations and interference in its domestic affairs. However, it may adopt an explicitly harder position and slip into an open diplomatic confrontation with the West, especially the US, not only for the sake of revenge, but also to cover up the disturbing domestic events expected after the Olympics. These two oil and strategic allies prefer Democratic candidate Barack Obama over Republican candidate John McCain. They believe that he is a fresh leader who is capable of taking risks and committing errors, untrained as he is for leadership, political sharpness, witty negotiations and sweet talking. They are seconded in this evaluation by the Islamic Republic of Iran whose leaders master political wittiness and the art of using fine white cotton to cut open a deep wound with surgical precision. Tehran is a major player in the oil alliance, as is Venezuela under Hugo Chavez. It has gathered the cards it earned from the Bush administration during its war in Iraq and is slated to use everything it has in the most important round of negotiations following the US presidential race. Tehran hopes to deal with Barack Obama as president. For this reason, it is practically “voting” for him, as are its smaller allies, such as Syria which has no weight in the oil alliances. Damascus, in turn, awaits the next president to take office and will not offer peace with Israel to the Bush administration no matter how far this administration backs off on its threats and commitments. Damascus hopes Barack Obama will rush to embrace it as a partner to facilitate the American exit from Iraq and as a major Arab player in the new relationship with Israel. Under such a scenario, he would rehabilitate the relationship with Damascus by directly exchanging ambassadors with the country rather than having to go through France, Europe or Qatar. 

Russia, as reveals its behavior at the Security Council, is exploiting regional issues to escalate its confrontation and defiance against the US, even if this came at the expense of causes, peoples, rights and principles. The open political rhetoric exchanged between Russian ambassador Vitaly Chirkin and his US counterpart Zelmay Khalilzad resembles the Cold War rhetoric. Chirkin is far more violent than Khalilzad, not only because Russiaís policy at this turning point is far more aggressive while the US policy is on the retreat, but also because the socially shy Chirkin can quickly transform into a media gun when need be. Khalilzad, on the other hand, favors appeasement and prefers to win hearts. For this reason, he appears weak and hesitant contrary to his predecessor, John Bolton, who not only implemented American policy, but also persistently tailored it to the power and weight of the US. 

For her part, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice undermined ñ whether deliberately or unintentionally ñ her predecessor, Colin Powell, when she aligned herself with the neoconservatives as National Security Advisor. Today, she is trying to adopt the very policies that might have succeeded when embraced by Colin Powell back then. At this, we can possibly say that the golden opportunity for a black woman and a black man to hold the two most sensitive posts in the US administration is almost wasted as a result of poor alliances and assessments, let alone numerous blunders. Condoleezza Rice’s policy today can be described as the “too late” policy.