National Review Online
Monday, July 10, 2017
On Sunday morning, President Trump, home from the G20
Summit in Germany, announced on Twitter that “it is time to move forward in
working constructively with Russia!” If the president’s meeting with Vladimir
Putin over the weekend is any indication, that’s good news for the Kremlin and
bad news for the U.S.
Trump’s first face-to-face encounter with Putin since
becoming president was less an attempt to press American interests with an
adversary than to gin up a diplomatic “bromance,” à la Canada’s Justin Trudeau
and France’s Emmanuel Macron, or Israel’s Benjamin Netanyahu and Indian prime
minister Narendra Modi.
According to Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, “there was
a very clear positive chemistry” between Trump and Putin, and “they connected
very quickly.” Indeed, Tillerson’s readout of the meeting was a veritable
symphony of whistling past the graveyard on nearly every issue of importance:
The two leaders “acknowledged the challenges of cyber threats and interference
in the democratic processes of the United States and other countries,” for
example, and “agreed to explore creating a framework around which the two
countries can work together to better understand how to deal with these cyber
threats.” President Trump suggested on Twitter that they “discussed forming an
impenetrable Cyber Security unit” — a fox-guarding-the-henhouse solution if
ever there was one. (The president seemed to back off the idea in a later tweet
Sunday evening.) They also chatted about Syria, where, according to Tillerson,
American and Russian “objectives are exactly the same.”
The above is so much nonsense, but it’s clear that the
president and his team have decided that an attempt at affectionate relations is worth the cost — namely, allowing the
Kremlin to get off relatively cost-free after it attempted to influence the
2016 presidential election and as it continues to prop up the murderous Assad
regime in Syria.
George W. Bush and Barack Obama both thought that they
could establish friendly relations with Russia’s authoritarian leader. Both
presidents eventually adopted a more antagonistic line — President Obama spent
the final days of his presidency expelling Russian spies from the country. The
simple fact is that Vladimir Putin is a cold-eyed cynic willing to ruthlessly
pursue the expansion of his, and Russia’s, power, whether that means exporting
arms to terrorists in the Middle East or assassinating dissidents and
journalists at home. Putin’s thuggery and the failure of the optimistic
approach of the last 16 years are plain to see. Nonetheless, Donald Trump seems
bent on repeating the mistakes of his predecessors, and with even less reason
to have illusions about the Russian leader.
What is needed, obviously, is a clear-eyed view of
Vladimir Putin and his aims. The president is not incapable of this. He seems
to be sobering up to the facts about President Xi Jinping in China; after a
warm meeting with him in Mar-a-Lago, Trump is, predictably, finding Xi much
less helpful than advertised when it comes to, among other issues, the lunatic
regime in North Korea.
On cybersecurity, a more realistic view means recognizing
that Russia is not interested in an alliance against other nefarious actors; it
means recognizing that Russia is one of the nefarious actors, and that any
realistic cybersecurity strategy will involve hardening our defenses against
Russian threats, which are coming thick and fast not only against government
servers but also against the digital infrastructure of major American
businesses.
In this regard, it’s critical that the United States not
dismiss Russia’s election-related hacking with a shrug. American intelligence agencies
agree that Russia waged a hostile cyber offensive against the United States in
the run-up to last year’s election, and a January report from the director of
national intelligence warned that “Moscow will apply lessons learned from its
Putin-ordered campaign aimed at the U.S. presidential election to future
influence efforts worldwide, including against U.S. allies and their election
processes.” Ensuring that that does not happen means punishing Russia severely
for last year’s adventurism.
The White House reportedly has flirted with the idea of
lifting the sanctions imposed by the Obama administration late last year. That
would be a mistake. The Senate agrees. That chamber recently passed, nearly
unanimously, a robust sanctions package that would codify President Obama’s
sanctions and expand them, taking direct aim at Russia’s (intertwined) defense
and energy sectors. The House should pass and the president should sign that
bill in the strongest possible form.
As for Syria, Russia is not leaving anytime soon — since
Obama’s failure to enforce his “red line” allowed Putin to establish a foothold
and flex his muscle in the Middle East. But this does not mean that the U.S.
should play the patsy time and again, which was the Obama policy. The U.S. must
work with allied forces to hold as much territory as possible to establish a
position of strength, with the ultimate goal of negotiating a decent peace and
probable de facto partition.
President Trump has said that his foreign policy will be
based on “principled realism.” This weekend’s meeting makes clear that that his
approach to Russia is in urgent need of more principle and more realism, both.
No comments:
Post a Comment