Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Loose Cannons and Nuclear Buttons: Dealing with Russia
Every time I see “statesmen” foaming at the mouth about insufficient posturing against Russia, I go back to the basics. There are exactly two countries on this planet capable of reducing any country on the face of the earth to toxic, smoldering ruins in hours. These are the United States of America and the Russian Federation (the latest manifestation of the Russian empire).
President Trump has done an admirable job, like most presidents in the Atomic Age, of keeping the natural tensions between the two megadeath powers inside the safety limits. He has succeeded, so far, despite the worst efforts of his domestic enemies, who are more serious about destroying him than they are about national security.
I am not impressed by pseudo-moral preening, expressed in demands for bombastic rhetoric against the only country that can bomb us into a new Stone Age. President Reagan used confrontational rhetoric about the USSR version of the Russian empire, but he only called out their human rights record in face-to-face meetings after an earlier successful meeting to sign the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty. Further, when Reagan did use confrontational rhetoric, the response from the left and from the foreign policy establishment varied from shrieks of horror to sophisticated disapproval – as Peter Robinson can attest.
Beyond the existential threat of international miscalculation, driven by the internal politics of the two nuclear superpowers, there is the constitutional threat to America, driven by the outrageous refusal to acknowledge the legitimacy of a presidential election that did not go the left’s way. We got a taste of this in President George W. Bush’s first term, but the Republican establishment did not fracture into factions that passive-aggressively enabled and sustained the left’s fantasy. That changed in 2016.
President Trump absolutely could not say what his enemies wanted him to say in Helsinki. It is the fault of Neuter Trump Republicans, who willfully keep alive the lie that Trump voters were, and are, an ignorant pack of deplorable, bitter-clingers who might actually have been swayed by Russians. As Mark Davis wrote at Town Hall:
The slightest hint of a Trump denunciation of Russian meddling would have been instantly, virally blasted around the universe as a confession that his election was indeed illegitimate. The hounds baying for his demise gleefully conflate Russians hacking Democrat emails with the Trump campaign conspiring to deny Hillary Clinton her rightful victory. They know that an under-informed public will lap up that narrative if they can hammer it forcefully enough.
So it is that President Trump, back on American soil, was careful to encase his “correction” of his comments in rejection of the election deniers’ lies.
So I’ll begin by stating that I have full faith and support for America’s great intelligence agencies. Always have. And I have felt very strongly that, while Russia’s actions had no impact at all on the outcome of the election, let me be totally clear in saying that – and I’ve said this many times – I accept our intelligence community’s conclusion that Russia’s meddling in the 2016 election took place. Could be other people also; there’s a lot of people out there. There was no collusion at all. And people have seen that, and they’ve seen that strongly. The House has already come out very strongly on that. A lot of people have come out strongly on that. [emphasis added]
President Trump’s actions relative to Russia conform to his National Security Strategy. The NSS signed by the President, put his stamp on the national security state, with the assistance of the military genius H.R. McMaster. Here is how the President assessed Russia in 2017:
China and Russia want to shape a world antithetical to U.S. values and interests. […] Russia seeks to restore its great power status and establish spheres of influence near its borders.
[…]
Russia aims to weaken U.S. influence in the world and divide us from our allies and partners. Russia views the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and European Union (EU) as threats. Russia is investing in new military capabilities, including nuclear systems that remain the most significant existential threat to the United States, and in destabilizing cyber capabilities. Through modernized forms of subversive tactics, Russia interferes in the domestic political affairs of countries around the world. The combination of Russian ambition and growing military capabilities creates an unstable frontier in Eurasia, where the risk of conflict due to Russian miscalculation is growing.
So how did President Trump instruct his administration to respond? Here is what his National Security Strategy says about checking Russia in Europe:
We will work with our allies and partners to diversify European energy sources to ensure the energy security of European countries.
[…]
The United States fulfills our defense responsibilities and expects others to do the same. We expect our European allies to increase defense spending to 2 percent of gross domestic product by 2024, with 20 percent of this spending devoted to increasing military capabilities.
President Trump’s actions, personally and through his appointees, have pushed forward on both the energy and military spending fronts. But what of threats to our domestic politics? President Trump was clear on the threats in December of 2017, name-checking Russia, but noting the adversaries go beyond Russia. In fact, China is a far more formidable threat to our economy, has stolen far more data, and is diligently working to shape public narratives about China.
Today, actors such as Russia are using information tools in an attempt to undermine the legitimacy of democracies. Adversaries target media, political processes, financial networks, and personal data.
Unfortunately, this set of threats is entangled in our fractious domestic politics. As a result, President Trump’s National Security Strategy only offers a minimal outline response. The very thin action list, relative to the rest of the NSS, found on page 14, suggests that McMaster could not get sign-off on very substantive initiatives. Perhaps, if the 2018 midterm election turns out to be a blue riptide, rather than wave, some consensus will emerge to work on real election security.
The reactions to President Trump’s first meeting with President Putin fully justify Trump’s adamant refusal to cede the terms of debate to his domestic foes. His actions, across all instruments of national power, give the lie to accusations of collusion, softness, and betrayal of allies. He has, so far, done as well as an American president could do within the extraordinary constraints of domestic opposition turned up to 11. At the same time, the past 18 months have debunked the claim that Trump could not be trusted with the nuclear codes. The unhinged opposition, on the other hand, does not inspire confidence in what would happen if they had that big nuclear button.
Published in Foreign Policy
Cliff,
This is the magical world of optics that the media, academia, and, of course, the entertainment industry, think is the end all and be all of foreign policy. Facts on the ground which provide the only real context for strategic thinking mean nothing to these people. You might surmise that they neither understand such concepts nor wish to understand such concepts. They are being paid very well for their shallow optics diatribe and thus see no reason to learn a new trick.
The genocide being carried on against Christians over the last few decades in the Middle East isn’t even worth mentioning. That the latest version of the Russian Empire is still illiberal is not exactly news. Here’s some real politic that the media might go after but they’d much rather talk about Trump’s wide ties at Helsinki and how they portend an end to Life on Earth.
NATO’s Challenge Is Germany, Not America
Regards,
Jim
Trumps corections are transparent lies, the incinserity of them is plain to see. At no point in his career did Reagan ever draw the moral equivalencies between the US and USSR that Trump now draws between us and Russia. A pattern that far predates his holding of the office where rhetoric naturally should be more guarded. Did Regan run in 1980 saying what a great a powerful leader Brezhnev was? How the US military were a bunch of killers like the Russians? That we kill lots of people too?
Your excuse for Trump is that admitting to the truth would only empower his domestic critics to further criticise him. This reveals to me the true depravity of Trumpism, which is that it rejects truth in favor of support for Trump.
I am a Reagan Republican, not a Helsinki Republican.
http://docquery.fec.gov/cgi-bin/fecimg/?201701099041247749
http://docquery.fec.gov/cgi-bin/fecimg/?201701099041237487
http://docquery.fec.gov/cgi-bin/fecimg/?201701099041237947
http://docquery.fec.gov/cgi-bin/fecimg/?201701099041253037
http://docquery.fec.gov/cgi-bin/fecimg/?201702149049587293
http://docquery.fec.gov/cgi-bin/fecimg/?201702149049564816
I recommend everyone read this.
Specifically this part. It might help you understand the art of diplomacy
Cont. from above.
But yeah, go call him out publicly for a liar, and see how far you get in your negotiations.
I can’t believe how stupid people are being about Helsinki.
Sure, calling Putin a poopy-head in public hasn’t worked for more than a decade. But if we do it one more time, it might. After all, it’s the first rule in international diplomacy that the truth shall set us free…
EX CIA chief Brennan states that the intel community will withhold info from Trump
Treason by any other name …?
Columbo,
Odd but I was thinking exactly the same thing. Can we arrest Brennan for open sedition? Maybe somebody could just hit him with a water balloon filled with lime jello. However, I don’t want to encourage anyone to do any bad behavior because that would be so very wrong.
Brennan is such a [redacted].
Regards,
Jim
Trump isn’t a polished diplomat and he probably should have skipped the Putin press conference in Helsinki. But one of the few things Obama got right was that it does no good to try and publicly humiliate a leader of Russia who has as many nuclear weapons as we have.
Just because you keep repeating a lie doesn’t make it any more true.
Which precisely explains why Trump went after Merkel for her energy deal with Russia.
Again, if you don’t see Trump as predictable, the problem is with you and not with Trump. Clearly, information is missing.
It also explains why he’s been so harsh with NATO allies. They need their backsides smacked a bit until they understand that running in a busy road is a spectacularly bad idea.
Jim, you and I are on the same page as Joe DiGenova. Check out 29:40 (and following) of Hannity last night …
https://video.foxnews.com/v/5811046281001/?#sp=show-clips
And in some ways that’s a problem. Because this is not 1987. And it never will be again.
The problem with the Obama response to Romney in 2012 wasn’t its substance, it’s the way the Left memory-holed it for convenience.
No one admired The Gipper more than me. But we cannot be cemented into the late 20th Century forever.
As the material in a post I made yesterday indicated, the only way that Trump could have appeased those American Globalists who hate him for being President would have been for him to have placed Putin in a choke hold and then beaten him to a bloody pulp.
Today’s “post-able material” would include a sequence wherein first you view Obama leaning over and with a large grin on his face, whispering something to Putin. Because as those who are paying attention know, Obama was more appeasement-oriented in his dealings with Putin and other world leaders than Trump would ever be.
The same clip then goes on to depict a demonic and red faced Anderson Cooper looking like his head would explode, because Trump something something something while in Helsinki.
You can’t fight in here. This is the War Room!
From a frequent Trump critic:
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2018/07/what-putin-was-up-to.php
I accept claims that Putin despises Hillary Clinton. It does not necessarily follow that he feared her policies. Indeed, he flourished under her time as Secretary of State. Perhaps his distaste arose from her role as the ascendant half of the ultimate political grifter team. No one likes having the touch put on them.
From Neo-Neocon, on Senator Jeanne Shaheen calling for hearings with the interpreter from the Helsinki meeting:
I agree it is bad, but think it is a matter of the Democratic Party base rather than the general NH electorate. She is not up for reelection until 2020, so needs to maneuver in the current crazy currents.
Outside the USA, the intelligence and law-enforcement agencies, whether the CIA (whose meddling in other countries’ elections has been a source of amusement to the outside world for some decades), the FBI or any other agency with a less well-known acronym, have been held in great respect, even awe. (And when a Brit uses the word ‘awesome’, it’s not to describe the square footage of his new kitchen).
That has been the case up until now. I’m not sure how much of the idiocies now being uttered by Messrs Brennan, Clapper, Comey, McCabe, Strzok and Ms Page are actually being reported in other countries, but they are doing a great disservice to the institutions they once worked for.
People who identify as Republicans overwhelmingly support President Trump’s performance in Helsinki.
There is a political cadre within the permanent government, who are fighting President Trump’s attempts to challenge them.
And they do so with the half-truth of Russian meddling.
And with the Gallup polling people coming out two weeks ago to explain that the percentage of Americans who are concerned about Russia is such a low percentage they have no way of charting it, it is probably not a profound leap to mention that most Americans are unaware that the KGB ceased to exist a long time ago. –
The article goes on to point to the KGB’s new incarnation. Russia’s secret police and spy apparatus changed letterheads and evolved tactics.
@michaelramirez nails the real threat to European security: