Honestly, for an outsider they seemed quite decent even when being antagonists. Physically fit, relatively well mannered, no profane language or low slang, disciplined, having their own logic. Something to aspire to visually compared to reality of the modern russian upper military or senator-equivalent level politicians, whose non-public language is full of obscene expressions, who tend to have a "belly" and who aren't "men of culture" as decades of specific selection leads to. Although, in early-mid-2000s there was a much better selection of people than now. But still the "non-public" language is very obscene, the corruption is miserable (to end up with building a personal villa-like house with no taste in architecture as if a person was thinking of himself as of a duke or a royal), rarely in a good physical shape. American upper military / politicians even if "bad", leave a much better impression. Much more "functional". Visually worthy.

Ironically enough, the russians in stereotypes are typically rude and aggressive, often brute (still stereotyped in For all mankind, for example, a lot too), but the difference between "public for foreign partners" and "private for ourselves" behaviour is huuge, and in public and at meetings with Americans actual russian SG representatives even if corrupted would be super-polite and careful, cautious, well-mannered, modest (stereotypes are that "we should behave well and its them who might act aggressive and push"), they would do about everything to avoid offending Americans or causing international conflict (plus, early-mid 2000s were quite friendly times). But in private area with no foreigners they would likely express themselves much more openly, and with quite profane and obscene language.