Neglecting the entirety of knowledge about modern world processes and their participants inevitably creates an atmosphere of illusions and unmet expectations, giving rise to bold, but often inadequate, even inverted perception of reality, ill-conceived decisions, and erroneous actions.
The nature of current global processes requires increased attention to the government decision-making mechanism, aimed at finding the most effective options that exclude high costs and mistakes. Polycentrism and Bipolarity
The modern world configuration is clearly unlike the structure of the second half of the 20th century: it is primarily characterized by the emerging polycentrism, caused by the increased foreign policy activity of the new centers of power (both states and quasi-state and other entities). It is also distinguished by the absence of a pronounced bipolarity (of the Cold War era) and of provocative unipolarity (the era of the United States sole domination) characteristic of the 1990s.
However, this does not at all interfere with the birth and evolution of the bipolarity of a dissimilar nature within the limits of the emerging and therefore not yet fully established polycentrism. Relations between the United States and China have long been developing as part of a peculiar combination of interdependence and mutual rejection.
Another polycentric bipolarity, that has taken shape over the past 10 years, is the relationship between the USA and modern Russia, which is still in search of its own place in the modern world, is creating new integration structures, alternative energy, financial, and defense systems.
All this gives rise to even greater disorder and chaos in the rest of the world, causing new challenges and risks. A more complex, potentially more confrontational polycentric world structure has become a reality. But the world has never been simple and calm before.
Donald Trump has accumulated all these problems in the United States, still living in the hope of making America great again. Despite the fact that the possibilities of the United States, due to the competitive struggle in the modern world, are clearly shrinking, it still retains undisputed global domination. The latter is based both on the economy that has long gone beyond the boundaries of the United States and is developing throughout the world, as well as on military, geopolitical, and ideological factors. Russia as a Provocateur
It seems obvious that in recent years modern Russia has become not just a potential strategic threat, but a real constantly acting geopolitical provocateur of the West. The use of the energy factor and integration initiatives as tools of its own geopolitical influence, bold and sometimes even daring methods, adopted in the 21st century struggle for the Soviet inheritance (war with Georgia, accession of Crimea, events in Donbass), complemented by accusations of interfering with the 2016 presidential election in the USA and poisoning the Skripals, only strengthened the confrontation that determines the relations between the two states. And, apparently, it is going to last long.
Today, the United States and Russia are the only powers in the world that declare and purposefully implement their own geopolitical programs, which are hardly compatible with each other. On the one hand, there is the US program of the world leadership and global dominance that has been forming throughout the whole history, especially in the 20th century. On the other hand, Russia is making bold attempts to formulate and embody its global vision of the epoch and determine its own (most likely leading) place in it.
The current degraded state of Russia – U.S. relations is based on several intractable problems: the Ukrainian crisis, the war in Syria, Russia being accused of interfering with the 2016 elections in the U.S., and poisoning the Skripals. The American political elite perceives Russia's behavior as a challenge to the long-standing constants of the U.S. foreign policy, its global dominance, messianism, and exclusivity.
That is why, having encountered such a threat for the first time after the end of the Cold War, the United States was as a response forced to resort to a regime of large-scale economic sanctions against Russia, supported by more than 40 countries, aimed primarily at isolating and restraining the country, at changing its political regime and total internal order. All of them were caused by the U.S. response to the decisive (and sometimes conflicting and daring) geopolitical course of Russia on the path of revising its own policy of the 1990s. The perception of this practice by the political elite of the United States as a serious and demonstrative challenge on the part of Russia to American global domination is perhaps the most serious obstacle to getting out of the current impasse.
In this situation, the U.S. and Russia inevitably perceive each other's foreign policy course as provoking signals, which must inevitably be followed by retaliatory actions. Chess Board Turned Over
The current Russia–U.S. relations are perhaps similar to the game on a chessboard turned over and least of all resemble a game of sophisticated and responsible players who have long known each other. Today there are too many illusions, contradictory rhetoric, and mistakes, mutual caution and prejudice, as well as huge mutual mistrust, which in no way contributes to the desired breakthroughs and the goal being quickly achieved. 
Going along with geopolitical clashes at the regional level (in the post-Soviet space and in Syria), the increased foreign policy activity of the two states led their relations to a deadlock, paralyzing a whole range of spheres that used to form the basis of the bilateral and mutually beneficial constructive interaction during the Cold War.
It was in such an extraordinary situation (one and a half years after the election of Trump) that an agreement on the first official personal meeting of the two presidents on July 16, 2018, in Helsinki was finally reached. Just before NATO Summit and meeting in Helsinki, former foreign ministers of 16 countries, including Madeleine Albright, the U.S. Secretary of State, David Miliband, Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, and Joschka Fisher, his colleague from Germany, addressed President Trump. They urged the American President to strengthen the "deteriorating relations" of the U.S. with Western allies 
. The message also warned the President that ignoring the "threat from Putin's Russia" could turn into new problems for the West. Putin and Trump: Untapped Partnership
During the years at the peak of power, each of the two leaders has developed a stable image in the West. Putin has the image of an autocratic "tsar" of the new Russia, decisively and mercilessly changing the geopolitical configuration and building the world according to his own patterns. The regime of international sanctions directed personally against Putin turned out to be ineffective in this part, only strengthening his power inside the country and increasing his popularity in a number of regions of the world.
Trump's personality is no less remarkable, an original and a unique president, able to surprisingly often change his views and still make such contradictory statements and things that surprise even the most sophisticated experts in world politics.
And there is every reason for this. Trump is working hard to create the image of a man who, without fear of being known as a destroyer of civilization, unlike his predecessors, boldly and resolutely tackles the inherited complex and intractable issues that have been accumulating in the country and in the world for decades.
Trump's foreign policy is a bizarre combination of modernized isolationism with an admixture of obvious demagogy, typical undisguised American unilateralism, old and orderly ideas of global domination and somewhat forgotten protectionism of the past.
However, with all the differences between the two presidents, there is one thing that unites them: Putin and Trump are the only leaders who openly challenge the usual course of life and the established pillars of the world order. Some people love them, others hate them.
It is important to take into account that the first official meeting of the two presidents in 2018 took place in the atmosphere of growing disagreements between the U.S. and other NATO members, in the situation of economic wars launched by Trump, when some European countries started realizing that it is difficult, and almost impossible, to provide European security without Russia.
Neither must we forget that the position of the American President himself domestically still remains fragile, although it has strengthened over a year and a half. The U.S. political elite still hardly perceives him, considering this phenomenon alien, accidental, and destructive. The fate of the President is still in the hands of the Congress. Investigations of Russia's interference in the 2016 elections are still ongoing, and Trump himself is ruthlessly and continuously being attacked by his opponents: the Democrats and the liberal press.
Despite public assurances 
by Presidents Putin and Trump about their desire to establish bilateral contacts and the absence of personal anger between them, there are no signs of any noticeable movement towards each other yet.
Was it then worth expecting anything serious from the negotiations in Helsinki? Indeed, given the entire complex outline of current Russia – U.S. relations, it would be difficult to answer this question. One thing was clear: two presidents, two leaders of the modern world were to start a very difficult dialog on extremely complicated issues. If so, then the mere fact of such a meeting could be considered as an undoubted success.
And regardless of the outcome of the meeting of the two presidents (which turned out to be still useless and disappointing in the opinion of many), it is time to understand that one can hardly expect any changes in the bilateral relations between Russia and the United States without certain changes in their foreign policy.
So far, these relations (or rather, what remains of them) are developing in the framework of an untapped partnership with a clear tendency to complete or partial degradation. Dilemma of Today
The current situation inevitably poses a question to all interested parties, which has become an intractable dilemma. How to pursue an independent geopolitical course and preserve national dignity and sovereignty, and at the same time form a constructive partnership with the United States that do not accept such course? Is it possible whatsoever?
In other words, are the changes that would allow the two countries to establish a dialog and maintain a solid foreign policy course for each of them, implementing their own geopolitical program, possible?
However, it is time to ask other, equally important, questions. Why are the relations between Russia and the United States getting worse in spite of the fact that Putin and Trump occasionally compliment to each other? What will America be like after Trump? Will he be able to create a new model of American domination? What exactly does Putin want from the U.S.? What is the objective of Russia's foreign policy activism and is it achievable? What will the growing wave of anti-Russian sanctions lead to? When is the moment we can call the world multipolar? Or is multipolarity just an imaginary and unrealistic illusion? Will Russia be able to implement and benefit from the policy of geopolitical maneuvering, which in the foreseeable future may result in something more significant?
These are the questions that anyone can hardly give a complete and comprehensive answer today. However, these are exactly the issues, resolution of which really conditions the relations between the world players, their changing role in the world, the world itself, and the destinies of the nations.