Democrats who like to complain that the Republican Party in Congress serves only as President Donald Trump’s praetorian guardsmen will soon have to contend with the GOP’s sprawling investigations into the president’s ties to Russia. Unquestionably, it is valuable to perform a post-mortem on 2016 and to have a full picture of the role Russia played in undermining the integrity of the democratic process. But the burning question before American policymakers today has nothing to do with 2016. The immediate threat posed by Russia and the Trump administration’s lack of a comprehensive policy toward Moscow has been obscured by partisan one-upmanship in Washington.

Capitol Hill is about to be consumed by Russia probes. Beginning on March 20, the House Intelligence Committee will hold public hearings regarding the nature of Russia’s intervention in the political process. They will hear from Obama-era figures like former CIA Director John Brennan, former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, and the National Security Agency director, Admiral Michael Rogers.

A possibly more fruitful congressional investigation on the matter is set to begin on Wednesday in a Senate Judiciary subcommittee led by Senator Lindsey Graham. The senior senator from South Carolina is no Trump apologist, but nor does he wish to see the president’s political capital exhausted and his influence undermined. Yet this subcommittee’s focus is limited to questions regarding criminal justice, and so the process will inevitably devolve into politics. To the extent this subcommittee’s investigation is generating any headlines, they have to do with whether or not FBI Director Jim Comey will confirm or deny Donald Trump’s unsubstantiated claim that his predecessor ordered the surveillance of Trump Tower. It is reasonable to expect that this probe, too, will deteriorate into political theater.

Whether or not a FISA warrant was approved to monitor the Trump organization or even Donald Trump himself is a source of legitimate concern. The reasonable suspicion that might have led to the procurement of that kind of warrant, presuming it exists, is of urgent public interest. Yet the idea that Trump associates were caught up in the surveillance of Russian officials, or were themselves targeted for surveillance, would hardly surprise the informed observer.

Public reports have already published the summaries of transcribed intercepts of Russian officials and Trump associates that were likely secured as a result of the routine monitoring of Russian diplomatic traffic. Whether or not those kinds of releases are appropriate (they’re not), this is public knowledge now. One of those intercepts resulted in the compulsory resignation of former National Security Advisor Mike Flynn. Furthermore, the idea that Trump associates were not in contact with Russian officials beggars belief.

Informal Trump campaign advisor Roger Stone has boasted of his backchannel relationship with Julian Assange, the founder of the Russian intelligence laundering outfit WikiLeaks. He also confessed to having a twitter exchange with the entity known as “Guccifer 2.0,” which American officials believe to be a construct of Russian military intelligence. Trump attorney Michael Cohen helped craft a peace plan for Ukraine utilizing his contacts with pro-Russian political figures in Kiev. Trump’s former campaign manager Paul Manafort (who resides in a Trump Tower apartment) served as a political advisor to the ousted Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych, who is implicated in ordering the deaths of Ukrainians during the Euromaidan revolution and who is living in exile in Russia. Trump campaign advisors Carter Page and J.D. Gordon had confirmed contacts with Russian officials with the stated aim of improving bilateral relations between Washington and Moscow. Page even sought and received the approval of former Trump campaign manager Corey Lewandowski to travel to Moscow. The idea that Trump associates never had contact with Russian governmental officials during the campaign was always laughable.

There is some value in definitively proving that which is already known, but it is hardly an American strategic priority. To the extent that it distracts this White House from crafting a coherent Russia policy, this is political performance art that comes at a cost.

The Trump administration seems deeply conflicted as to how to pursue a relationship with Russia. Contrary to the worst fears of the president’s critics, Trump White House has not been as willing to look the other way when it comes to Russian abuses. United Nations Ambassador Nikki Haley’s first speech to the General Assembly castigated Russia and promised that sanctions would remain in place until occupied Crimea was free. Vice President Mike Pence contradicted the campaign when he said that cooperation with Russia and sanctions relief was contingent on Moscow engaging in more effective anti-ISIS operations in Syria (operations then-candidate Trump insisted were already ongoing). On Tuesday, the Trump administration’s Justice Department indicted two Russian spies in the hacking of 500 million Yahoo email accounts in 2014. The indictment implicates the Russian intelligence agency, FSB.

These are not the acts of an administration that is willing to forego traditional American grand strategy in pursuit of rapprochement with Russia. Yet the Trump administration has not entirely abandoned its overtures toward the Kremlin. Administration sources are telling reporters their objective is to drive a wedge between Iran and Russia, dissolve their de facto alliance, and isolate Tehran. This reveals how blinkered administration officials are by their prejudices. These two historically hostile nations are united only by their desire to see American power and influence curtailed. That Russian strategic objective was again confirmed a month ago when Moscow deployed ground-launched mid-range cruise missiles at operational bases inside the country, violating the 1987 Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty. The Trump administration has so far declined to respond to that destabilizing provocation publicly.

Partisans in Washington are obsessed with getting the narrative right, but re-litigating 2016 is a thoughtless pursuit. The issue now isn’t how the Obama administration bungled its relationship with Russia at every turn, but how the Trump administration will correct for those failures and preserve America’s geostrategic hegemony. If that is the issue that really matters, these investigations really don’t.

+ A A -
You may also like
0 Shares
Share via
Copy link
Powered by Social Snap