MOSCOW -- When U.S. secretary of state nominee Rex Tillerson appeared before the U.S. Senate for his confirmation hearing on January 11, pundits and politicians in Moscow were watching closely for signals of the new administration's stance on Russia.
Reactions ranged broadly from upbeat pragmatism to an "I-told-you-so" warning that a Russia hawk could be entering President-elect Donald Trump's cabinet. Overall, the comments painted a much more sober take on a Trump presidency than the jubilation displayed by many in Russia after his surprise victory in November.
On the Vesti FM state radio station, prominent pro-Kremlin journalist Vladimir Solovyov chided those Russians who were expressing surprise at what many saw as a hawkish tone to Tillerson's comments.
"For our dear listeners I will for the 156th time, although it is fashionable to say 150th, repeat that Tillerson is not Major Vikhr [a Russian TV superhero], and Trump is not Colonel Isayev, Stierlitz [a fictional Soviet superspy akin to James Bond]. They are both patriots of the U.S. One will, if confirmed, become the secretary of state. The second will, if a few days pass well, move from the status of president-elect to the status of president of the U.S. They in no way intend to carry out promises they never made to Russia. For them, the priority is the United States and their policies.
"That is the reason why Tillerson is saying that Russia is not taking into consideration the interests of the United States. Because he is interested primarily in America's interests, not Russia's. Have no illusions. That is why, when some people were wildly overjoyed that Trump won and not Hillary [Clinton, the Democratic candidate] that was a question of taste, but we have to remember that there can be various lettering written on this little cake, but essentially this will not be pro-Russian politics. Perhaps there will be a little less hysteria, perhaps a little more, perhaps slightly better relations between leaders, perhaps a little worse."
WATCH: Rex Tillerson: Russian 'Illegal' Actions In Ukraine Required More Forceful Response
Leonid Slutsky, head of the Duma's International Affairs Committee, told the Interfax news agency that he thought Tillerson's testimony suggested Washington might be amenable to reaching a deal with Moscow over Crimea, the Ukrainian peninsula seized by Russia in March 2014.
"If we look deeper, I was particularly interested by statements not only about sanctions, cyberattacks and so on -- they are to be expected -- but the ones on the question of Crimea. Tillerson, in particular, noted that the United States will only recognize the unification of Crimea with Russia in the event that the current situation around the peninsula can be regulated in a way that satisfies Ukraine," Slutsky was quoted as saying. "As we know Ukraine is a territory managed externally and the remote control is located in Washington. That is to say -- could this be the beginning of the process of presenting conditions for recognition instead of the categorical 'give back Crimea'?"
Aleksei Puskhov, a prominent Russian lawmaker, wrote on Twitter: "At the hearings, Tillerson voiced the position of the American political mainstream. Which again proves the artificial nature of the hysteria around Trump."
Aleksei Venediktov, editor-in-chief of Ekho Moskvy radio, read out Tillerson's comments that, in 2014, following Russia's annexation of Crimea, he would have supplied weapons and U.S. intelligence to Ukraine to defend against an incursion in the east of the country. Venediktov asked: "Who is this man? This is a man who bears the [Russian] Order of Friendship received from Igor Ivanovich Sechin and Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin."
"Some people say the Republicans are going to be pragmatists. But I would say their pragmatism is in their strictness. We have just heard that from Tillerson and we will hear that from Trump. That is to say, 'Guys, the rules are that we are a great power, we are a superpower and you are either with us or against us.' Ever since this Trump story began I said this is what would happen. That's how it's ended up."
On January 12, President Vladimir Putin's spokesman Dmitry Peskov said the Kremlin had "noted" Tillerson's stance on Crimea, but rejects it. "We are not in agreement with that formulation and will explain our position," the president's spokesman said in comments carried by Interfax.
Peskov declined to comment on Tillerson's assertion that Russia invaded eastern Ukraine and that it was necessary to supply Kyiv with weapons. "I would leave this without a reaction. We will explain to Secretary of State Tillerson all the relevant questions when they arise," he said.
The pro-Kremlin Vzgylad news and commentary website contrasted Tillerson's hearings in the senate with Trump's press conference the same day, the first since his election, noting the former's "hawkish" tone. "The speech by Tillerson, who was named the most pro-Russia of the possible candidates for secretary of state, sounded considerably harsher [than Trump's]."
Vyacheslav Nikonov, head of the parliamentary committee on education, described the statements from Trump and Tillerson as moderate in comments to the TASS news agency. "In general, if we compare them to what could have been said, these statements look entirely moderate." He said that Tillerson "was careful throughout, meeting the primary goal of getting confirmed by the Senate as secretary of state."He continued, saying that Tillerson had nonetheless "taken the maximum pro-Russian stance on the questions."
However, Nikonov rejected Tillerson's proposed condition for the recognition of Ukrainian Crimea as Russian territory. "Russia has absolutely no need for anyone to recognize Crimea. This is a part of Russia and no part of Russia requires recognition."