The train is leaving...

On March 23, US Secretary of State John Kerry arrived in Moscow, his third visit in less than a year. And again the question arises: why?

The head of the State Department is forced to resort to personal "micromanagement" in solving diplomatic problems with Russia, when a telephone conversation or a meeting of lower-level diplomats no longer gives results. Judging by the frequency of Mr. Kerry's visits to Belokamennaya - and the last time he was in Moscow in December 2015 - such "dead ends" arise all the time. There is too much neglect in Russian-American relations.

Last time, Kerry discussed the war in Syria in Moscow and, in particular, the deterioration of Russian-Turkish relations in connection with the destruction of the Russian Aerospace Forces aircraft by the Turks. This time - again Syria, and more specifically - the expansion of the ceasefire regime and the problem of power in this country for the transition period. Kerry has already said the truce has resulted in a "fragile but nonetheless mutually beneficial reduction in violence". And although the United States is not ready to give up the slogan “Assad must go” so easily, the Americans have little choice - the “moderate rebels”, exhausted by the war on several fronts, are losing their appeal as a significant political force every day.

But Russia will also have to choose: by supporting the Kurds, it irreversibly spoils relations not only with the Syrians themselves, but also with Turkey, Iraq and Iran. And now the question is, will the Syrian regime allow "moderate" oppositionists to participate in a peaceful struggle for power?

Kerry could only repeat once again: sanctions against Russia will be lifted only after the full implementation of the Minsk agreements

Ukraine was another important topic of negotiations. Kerry repeated (this time personally) the demand already voiced by both Barack Obama and the State Department to release Nadezhda Savchenko, who has become a symbol of the Ukrainian-Russian confrontation.

Kerry and Sergey Lavrov have been discussing the Ukrainian crisis for years. Washington is not satisfied with Moscow's efforts to maintain a truce in the rebellious regions of Ukraine. Moscow, in turn, accuses Kyiv of provocations aimed at discrediting Russia's actions. Carrying out constitutional reform (in Ukraine) and elections (in Donbas), indicated by the Minsk agreements, is now not possible. Kyiv claims that the authorities of the "people's republics" are unable to ensure transparency and, most importantly, security of the elections. In turn, separatist leaders refuse to allow Ukrainian right-wing radical parties to participate in the elections, which, according to Kyiv, puts an end to all plans.

At the talks on March 24, a consensus on the Ukrainian issue, most likely, was never reached, despite the presence in Moscow of German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier.

Apparently, Kerry's meeting with Putin did not produce any significant results either. Kerry could only repeat once again: the sanctions against Russia will be lifted only after the full implementation of the Minsk agreements...

However, one detail, which is remembered both in Moscow and in Washington, undoubtedly influenced the course of the negotiations. By the end of this year, a new president will be elected in the United States. And that is why the Kremlin is now absolutely not interested in diplomatic breakthroughs, which can fundamentally spoil the ground for working with the new American administration. And the Kremlin is primarily interested in maintaining the status quo.

However, Moscow should remember that the next American president - even if it will be the unpredictable Donald Trump, whose victory the Kremlin seems to be praying for now - may turn out to be much tougher on Russia than Barack Obama. And this means that Russia should be more attentive to the current proposals of the US administration - both on Syria, and on Ukraine, and on other issues. Because the train is leaving.