In this study, the author examines the foreign policy of Y.V. Andropov and assesses the impact of his personal position on the Soviet-US and Sino-Soviet relations during his tenure as the leader of the Soviet Union. The author was guided by the principles of historicism, scientific objectivity, and reliance on sources. It is proved that Y.V. Andropov adopted the foreign policy of the USSR from the position of the “hawks” in the Soviet leadership, which were represented by D.F. Ustinov. According to such a position, foreign policy should be absolutely subordinated to the interests of national security, which can only be guaranteed by the superiority of both nuclear and conventional forces over potential adversaries. Military power should be at the forefront of foreign policy decisions. Therefore, no matter on the issue of Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) in Europe, or on the issue of the armed forces on the Sino-Soviet and Sino-Mongolian borders, regardless of the objective changes in the situation, Y.V. Andropov always maintained a tough position. Author proves that the Soviet leader persistently rejected the reasonable proposals of diplomats and was unwilling to make any concessions that contradicted the ideas of military supremacy. This primarily concerned the issue of the INF deployment on the territory of Eastern Europe, which was a key topic of discussion at the Geneva negotiations. As a result, the Soviet Union could not avoid being drawn into the new round of the arms race provoked by the U.S. President Ronald Reagan, one of the results of which was the deployment of the American INF in Western Europe. In the East, he missed the opportunity to improve relations with China, which had begun to reorient itself away from confrontation with the USSR to building a balance in relations with the United States and the Soviet Union and continued a pointless confrontation with it. The foreign policy heritage that Y.V. Andropov left to his successors was an isolated and tense external environment in which there was few freedom of action. In addition, the growth of military expenditures caused by his tough line on foreign affairs aggravated the stagnation and crisis in the social-economic development of the USSR.