A spy or a patriot?

PERRYSCOPE

Perry Diaz

Once the undisputed leader of the free world since the end of World War II, the United States,  led the fight against Communism. American presidents took their jobs and responsibilities seriously in seeing to it that red lines were drawn to deter the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) from expanding.  This came to be known as “containment.”

In 1946, the diplomat George Kennan explained this “containment” policy:  “The Soviet Union was a political force committed fanatically to the belief that with the U.S. there can be no permanent modus vivendi.”  The following year, President Harry Truman asked Congress to adopt a policy “The US should give support to countries or peoples threatened by Soviet forces or communist insurrection.”  This principle came to be known as the “Truman Doctrine.”  This was the beginning of the Cold War.   

Trump blasts NATO

Last July 11-12, NATO’s cohesiveness was put to test when President Donald Trump attended the annual NATO summit in Brussels, Belgium.  On his first day, Trump and several of his aides had breakfast with NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg.  The event, which was televised, began with Trump criticizing German Chancellor Angela Merkel (who was not present) and complained about a gas pipeline linking Russia to Germany, which the German government had approved.   He then accused Germany of being “a captive of Russia.”

When the NATO leaders began their summit meeting, Trump accused them of being delinquent in their defense spending and insisted they double it to 4% of their GDP.  However, the 28 other leaders ignored Trump’s proposed increased military spending and instead agreed to a joint summit declaration that recommitted them to moving toward the 2% target by 2024, which they already had agreed upon during the 2014 summit.  But Trump countered by tweeting that he had “single-handedly raised vast amounts of money” for NATO.  Evidently, he lied again.  

On July 13, Trump visited the Queen of England and met with UK Prime Minister Theresa May.  It was a pretty hectic week but it could have generated a lot of goodwill among the leaders of NATO and strengthened America’s enduring military partnership with her 28 NATO allies. Instead, Trump wreaked havoc on the alliance.

Foolish, stupid

But not only did Trump blast his NATO allies, he blamed his own country for the deterioration of relations with Russia.  Before the Helsinki summit began, Trump tweeted: “Our relationship with Russia has NEVER been worse thanks to many years of U.S. foolishness and stupidity and now, the Rigged Witch Hunt!"  The Russian foreign ministry tweeted back: "We agree."

On July 16, Trump and Putin met in Helsinki, Finland, behind closed doors with just their interpreters.  Their meeting lasted more than two hours.  When they finally emerged in the pressroom, Putin was noticeably observed walking with his signature KGB stance.  Putin took charge of the briefing by speaking first.  His report did not reveal anything that showed what they had agreed upon in specific, measurable, and deliverable terms.  They’re all nice things to hear if you happen to be in Alice’s Wonderland.  But in geopolitical terms, it’s all hogwash.

Chilling shock waves

During the question and answer session, Trump was asked about the indictment of 12 officers from Russia’s GRU, the equivalent of the CIA.   Indicted for allegedly hacking the Democratic Party’s computer servers during the 2016 elections, Special Counsel Robert Mueller III issued a 29-page indictment on July 13, 2018 against the Russian spies.  

The investigation that led to the indictment was backed up by US intelligence agencies’ detailed narrative, which was provided to Trump before the summit.  But in a surprising – and stunning – rebuke of the US intelligence community, Trump declined to endorse the US government’s assessment that Russia interfered in the 2016 elections, saying he doesn’t “see any reason why" Russia would be responsible.  

Standing next to Putin, he then firmly said in no uncertain terms:  “I have great confidence in my intelligence people. But, I will tell you that President Putin was extremely strong and powerful in his denial today.  He just said it’s not Russia. I will say this: I don’t see any reason why it would.”  Evidently, Trump just vindicated Putin of interfering in the US elections, which sent chilling shock waves around the world.  Trump had just thrown America and the American people under the bus.

When Putin was asked whether he had actively wanted Trump to win the presidency, and if he directed any officials to help ensure Trump would win,  Putin may have let the cat out of the bag without knowing the repercussion.  His answer to the double question was: “Yes, I did.  Yes, I did.  Because he [Trump] talked about bringing the US-Russia relationship back to normal.”  

The following day, as criticisms of Trump’s performance snowballed upon his return to Washington, he hastily gathered reporters at the White House.  He professed his full faith in the U.S. intelligence agencies.  But in a play of words, Trump used the “Would/Wouldn’t” word game, apparently in a desperate attempt to control the geopolitical tsunami he created in Helsinki.  

He then read a prepared script by his staff,  “In a key sentence in my remarks, I said ‘would’ instead of ‘wouldn’t.’ The sentence should have been, ‘I don’t see any reason why it wouldn’t be Russia.’  I think that probably clarifies it,” he said. Then he added, extemporaneously (unscripted): “It could be other people also. There are a lot of people out there. There was no collusion at all,” in an apparent attempt to shield Putin and the indicted Russian spies.  That blew it!

Pax Russica

In defense of Putin, former Republican presidential candidate and commentator Patrick Buchanan posted on his website:  “Trump’s message has been clear, consistent and startling. NATO is obsolete. European allies have freeloaded off U.S. defense while rolling up huge trade surpluses at our expense. Those days are over. Europeans are going to stop stealing our markets and start paying for their own defense.  And there will be no Cold War II.”

This brings to the fore how Putin reacted at the end of Cold War I. In his annual state of the nation address to Russian parliament and the country’s top political leaders in April 2005, Putin said the Soviet collapse was a tragedy for Russians.  “First and foremost it is worth acknowledging that the demise of the Soviet Union was the greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the century,” Putin said. “As for the Russian people, it became a genuine tragedy. Tens of millions of our fellow citizens and countrymen found themselves beyond the fringes of Russian territory.”

In retrospect, it is a well-known fact that Reagan was instrumental in the dissolution of the Soviet Empire in 1989 when he worked with USSR’s Secretary General Mikhail Gorbachev under the principle of “detante,” a period of easing of the geopolitical tensions between the US and USSR, which led to lessening the Cold War.

But detante worked favorably for Reagan because his goal – unbeknown to Gorbachev -- was to achieve the end of communism in Eastern Europe, the breakup of the Warsaw Pact, and, eventually, the dissolution of the Soviet Union.  In Putin’s playbook, he’d use Trump to achieve the breakup of the European Union (EU) and the dissolution of NATO (23 of the 28 members of EU are members of NATO), the same way Reagan used Gorbachev to break up of the Warsaw Pact and the collapse of the Soviet Union. 

Yes, Trump and Buchanan were right; there will be no more Cold War II, not because America and Russia would become partners and the two world superpowers.  It’s because America would cease to be the world’s sole superpower, and EU and NATO would no longer exist.  

The Russian Federation would then fill the power vacuum left by the US and become the only superpower.  It would be the birth of a new Russian Empire that would include all the former Soviet satellites that had joined the defunct NATO.  It would be a complete turnaround of the East-West geopolitical relationship.  Hence, we’ll see the end of Pax Americana and the beginning of Pax Russica.

Spies among us 

Just about the time Trump and Putin were answering questions from reporters at the conclusion of their private meeting, a Russian national residing in the US, Maria Butina, was arrested and indicted on charges of conspiracy and acting as a foreign agent.

Putin’s background as a KGB officer assigned in East Germany before the implosion of the Soviet Empire could most probably been involved in recruiting spies – known as “assets” -- to work for Russia.  East Germany was then a hotbed of espionage activities because of its proximity to NATO countries.  Would it be outrageous then to suspect that Trump could be Putin’s asset?

In my column, “Was Trump the Siberian Candidate?” (December 28, 2016), I wrote: “During the presidential campaign, the American media had suggested that Trump was the ‘Siberian Candidate’ whom Putin helped in winning the presidency by orchestrating the hacking of the U.S. elections.  While Trump seemed to be Putin’s man in the U.S. elections, it’s turning out now that Trump may have deceived – or tricked — Putin all along to help him win the election.  And this begs the question: Was Trump the ‘Siberian Candidate’ or an American patriot?”  A wise man once said, “When in doubt, there is no doubt.”  (PerryDiaz@gmail.com)