Trump, partner of Russia? Notes on Anne Applebaum´s article

(Trump and Putin at Helsinki summit, on July 16th, 2018.)

          In the last post, I commented on the deepening of the integration between Russia and Belarus, making the later more dependent on Moscow, away from the Western countries. I used as base an article by US journalist and historian Anne Applebaum written in The Washinton Post on January 4th.

          The Applebaum´s text gave reasons for the Western countries to pay more attention to Russia´s moves towards Belarus, which they haven´t done, citing as main example the Trump´s stance. His government would have gave up US´s historical commitment to a united and free Europe (a clear allusion to his scorn for the European Union) and he would be helping to disseminate informations that collaborate for Russian propaganda on many issues, such as events (without specifying them) involving Montenegro and Afghanistan. Trump administration would have given a strange attention to a non-existent invasion plan of Belarus by Poland, for example, widely publicized by Russian media. In Applebaum´s words, the US president is "inclined to see the Russia´s point of view on most issues".

          Following Applebaum´s posts in Twitter, one realizes that the journalist and historian is a harsh critic of Trump. There is nothing unusual and wrong on this, but watching Western analysts by the same media, practically of them are harsh critics, if not mockers, on the US president. This makes more difficult a cold analysis and calls into question the alleged impartiality of the sources.      

          The US stance on Russia is seen as negative when the president addresses directly to the Russian colleague. The analyst see this, with some reason, as a caring and undeserved treatment to Putin. But let´s look at some points: early in Trump´s turn, former US diplomat in the UN, Nikki Halley, firmly stated that the US would not lift the economic sancations against Russia while it don´t give Crimea back to Ukraine. This was also the position of the US president himself. His former Secretary of Defense, Jame Mattis, was a staunch supporter of NATO, military alliance which have been the Kremlin´s main headache for more than 20 years. Furthermore, on April 11th, 2017, Trump supported the Montenegro´s entry into the aliance, and in September 2018 he still considered setting up an American military base in Poland, for displeasure of the Russians. Not only Poland, but the Baltic countries are in favor of the US presence in the region. They knew the Russian domain in Communist times and don´t want it back, nor as a possibility.

(Anne Applebaum)

          If we compare Trump´s action with his predecessor, the opposition to Russia becomes clearer. In September 2009, the Obama government gave up the anti-missile shield project in Europe launched by his predecessor, George W. Bush, on the allegation of a nuclear treat from Iran. It so happens that Iran haven´t nuclear weapons to date. The shield was clearly a defense against Russia. But a similar initiative nowadays would generate a much more aggressive reaction from Moscow, as seen in the military tensions between Russia and NATO in the second half of 2016. Obama also withdrew troops from Iraq in 2011, which would have helped the emergence and expansion of ISIS, now acting only in Syria. On the exit of the Americans from Syria decided by Trump, the impact is much less important even this helps in Russia´s consolidation in the country, whose troops have been acting since September 2015. At the annual press conference in December, Putin made clear that regards Syria as his area of influence. He stated that the presence of the US troops in the country were "illegitimate" and classified their departure as a "right decision". The US, however, continues to have a physical presence in Iraq, maintains the alliance with Saudi Arabia and has strengthened political support of Israel. In the Obama administration, there was significant worsening of the relationships with Saudis and Israelis.   

        Contrasting with the friendly words, Trump hasn´t been so condescending to Putin in fact. By the contrary: NATO´s military strengthening, guaranteeing alliances in the Middle East, and maintaining sanctions against Russia, crucial issues to curb Russia´s projection in the world, restricts the Moscow´s global action. Remains to know whether the new Secretary of Defense, Patrick Shanahan, and the new UN diplomat, a little savvy Heather Nouert (a post temporarily occupied by Jonathan Cohen since January 1st), will follow the same policy.
       
          Criticism such as Anne Applebaum´s are legitimate, but, more important than White House´s speeches and diatribes, the main issue is what is actually happening, de facto policy, mainly in economic and military matters, two of the mais Achilles´ heel of Russia. If Trump is successful in strengthening the US in the long run (the economy is booming, for example), less space will remain for Russia in the international arena. Putin´s plan to re-establish the Russian superpower and re-create its Empire depends, mainly, of taking this post from US. As we saw in the Cold War, the world was too small for two superpowers, and for the Kremlin the Cold War isn´t over.            

* Published in Portuguese on January 10th, 2019.