What Is Trump's Russia Policy?

Earlier today I restated my long held view of Trump’s Russia policy:

I maintain that Trump’s use of that word [“peace”] is a subterfuge for his real aims. Trump wants a ceasefire that will weaken Russia and lead Russia into a separation from China via a forced “deal” with Trump. That deal would be sweetened by removal of sanctions. The end result would be a free hand for the Anglo-Zionists to pivot against China. That was Trump’s stated policy in 2016 and there’s no reason to think he has changed his mind. Trump seems to understand that a full scale US war on Russia cannot achieve this, but a “frozen conflict” in Ukraine could be part of the package of coercion to bring that about. So, “peace” is not the goal.

Most Americans probably assume that government bureaucrats follow presidential statements—on TV, in the newspapers, on X Twitter, wherever—and tailor their actions to follow the “policies” enunciated by the president. In the real world it doesn’t work that way. Now, this issue has taken on much greater urgency because a fair number of people are asking, If Trump didn’t authorize our attack on Russian airbases and strategic bombers—because we know that the attack didn’t happen without some sort of US go ahead or wink and a nod—then who did authorize it? After all, an attack like that on Russia’s nuclear triad is kind of a big deal. Why aren’t the US officials who gave that wink and a nod—presumably in the CIA—following Trump’s “peace” policy?

Vladimir Putin was asking similar questions in the days following the attack. That’s why he called Trump and demanded to know whether Trump had advance knowledge of the attack. But wait—that’s a rather strange question, isn’t it? Wouldn’t Putin simply assume that Trump gave the go ahead—unless Putin knows more about how American government “works”? In the event, Trump assured Putin that he—Trump—had had no advance knowledge. That response apparently infuriated Putin, who no doubt had an inkling that he’d receive that response. Putin must have been asking, ‘How do I deal with a nuclear superpower whose leader doesn’t know when that nuclear superpower launches an attack on one leg of the other great nuclear superpower’s nuclear triad?’ What’s the point of even talking to this guy? Larry Johnson, this morning, cited the view of a retired Russian general:

Today, I interviewed retired Lt. General Evgeny Buzhinsky, who served in the International Treaty Department of the Main Directorate of International Military Cooperation of the Russian Ministry of Defense. I asked him specifically about the importance, or lack thereof, of the Ukrainian drone attacks on the Russian airfields that host some of Russia’s strategic bombers. He said that people should not read too much into [Putin’s] public silence on the matter because Putin viewed this act as a betrayal by London and Washington of the New Start Agreement. The General specifically said, “Putin was furious.” The General went on to say that this moment marked the closest that the United States and Russia have come to the brink of nuclear war since the Cuban missile crisis.

The Russian’s have this thing figured out. Foreign minister Lavrov explained it in simple terms:

Lavrov: "It is obvious that the Ukrainian side is doing everything possible, but it would be absolutely helpless without the support ... of the British, although you never know. Probably some US special forces would be involved in that. But the British are actually behind all those things. I'm 100% sure."

That makes it look like the US is the tail being wagged by the Brit dog, but of course the Russians are smarter than that. In another statement on this issue Lavrov was a bit more explicit about what was going on on the American side:

Lavrov: It is possible that, by inertia, US intelligence services are still involved--but the British are involved 100 percent.

What means this “inertia”? Scott Ritter explains this for us:

Donald Trump is not in control of American policy. If Donald Trump was in control of American policy he would have signed an executive order by now which ended the Biden administration's policy directive of seeking the strategic defeat of Russia, but Trump hasn't changed that. Which means the official policy of the United States that is the foundation for what Marco Rubio does, Steve Witkoff does, Scott Bessent. The official policy is to continue policies that seek the strategic defeat of Russia, and the strategic defeat of Russia means the collapse of the Putin regime through economic sanctions. Trump has not rescinded that.

Not only that, Trump hasn't signed a finding reversing the covert action directives that were given to the CIA regarding support to Ukraine and hostile acts towards Russia. So we are technically in a state of war with Russia right now, and the Russians know this. So what the Russians are hoping is that they can get Trump on a diplomatic path where these things can come to an end. But if you don't stop this, again I've tried to explain to people.

In other words, Trump has simply left Biden’s Russia policy in place. That means that CIA can approve actions that were OK under Biden’s policy. Of course, arguably, they should be giving Trump a heads up, but that’s only an argument.

A few days ago Ritter explained how this works in practice (summary):

Gina Haspel was London Station Chief. She couldn't control Russia House, which came under London Station. She tried to control Russia House but they lied to her and continued to run ops against Russia without her permission. Russia House is the part of the CIA Directorate of Operations that runs Moscow Station and all the covert operations against Russia. It's the "center of power" in terms of intel ops. During the Cold War it was the "center of the universe." "Russia House considers their operations to be so sensitive and so important to national security that they keep the people who know about them limited and sometimes they just don't tell people about them.”

So, Trump didn't tell Putin that the US didn't know--he told Putin that he (Trump) didn't know. It's 100% certain that the CIA--Russia House--knew about this operation at inception and had been tracking it through implementation. They didn't report it up the chain of command because they wanted it to happen, and they probably assumed that if they had reported it up the chain of command the plug would have been pulled.

This morning Ritter expanded on that a bit:

Russia House is out of control, and until you shut down Russia House and you terminate the employment of all these people and shut down every operation, Russia house will continue its decades long war against Russia. It has built resources inside Russia, it has recruited networks inside Russia that do that. Their job in the case of increased hostilities is to create disruption. They have planted viruses in the Russian infrastructure to shut down traffic lights, shut down electronic generation. We're at war with Russia as we speak. Right now. And that needs to be shut down, but it hasn’t been. That's Donald Trump's fault, so this is the inertia that Lavrov is speaking.

A bit more about Russia House. The formal name for Russia House is Mission Center for Europe and Eurasia—one of many CIA “mission centers,” but undoubtedly the most prestigious.

Here are two suggestive links regarding Russia House:

‘The Apprentice’ book excerpt: At CIA’s ‘Russia House,’ growing alarm about 2016 election interference

September 19, 2018

CIA clamps down on flow of Russia intelligence to White House

Critics of the shift in approach say it seems designed to appease the president.

The CIA has made it harder for intelligence about Russia to reach the White House, stoking fears among current and former officials that information is being suppressed to please a president known to erupt in anger whenever he is confronted with bad news about Moscow.

Nine current and former officials said in interviews that CIA Director Gina Haspel has become extremely cautious about which, if any, Russia-related intelligence products make their way to President Donald Trump’s desk. Haspel also has been keeping a close eye on the agency’s fabled “Russia House,” whose analysts she often disagrees with and sometimes accuses of purposefully misleading her.

...

Like other specialized units, Russia House — which remained highly compartmented even after it was integrated into the CIA’s Mission Center for Europe and Eurasia as part of a reorganization under former CIA Director John Brennan — is extremely protective of its intelligence. But some within the agency, including Haspel, have described it as too isolated and in need of an overhaul, according to several of the current and former U.S. officials.

Here’s another side of this. The CIA’s London Station is, supposedly, over Russia House. That tells me that Russia House is physically located in the UK. And that tells me that they’re probably totally in bed with MI6. That doesn’t make me sleep better.

So there’s the bad news about how dysfunctional the US government is. I’ll close with this link to an article that was of personal interest to me:

‘We’ve Got a F--king Spy in This Place’: Inside America’s Greatest Espionage Mystery

Two former top spy hunters offer exclusive new revelations about their quest to solve America’s greatest espionage mystery and what’s at stake with Kash Patel in charge of the FBI.