Responding to Hillary Clinton’s description of Tulsi Gabbard as a Russian asset, my colleague Brad Polumbo observes that Clinton isn’t exactly a credible presidential campaign analyst.
But neither is Clinton a particularly good analyst of Vladimir Putin and the Russian intelligence services. Clinton, after all, was the secretary of state so delusional as to hit a mislabeled red “reset” button for U.S-Russian relations, just as Putin was escalating his aggression in Central and Eastern Europe.
Clinton’s analysis of Gabbard is also flawed. Because Gabbard is not a Russian asset — she is merely a Russian favorite.
The distinction matters. The favorite perception is easy to explain: its because Gabbard’s policy platform sits on two key understandings favorable to Putin’s interests: Gabbard’s support for a significantly reduced U.S. military presence around the world, and Gabbard’s support for Kremlin allies. Most notable here is Gabbard’s previously stated support for Bashar Assad’s Syrian regime. That fits with Putin’s interest in consolidating Assad’s position and thus boosting Moscow’s influence as the key international interlocutor in the Middle East. Similarly, Gabbard’s belief in a reduced military footprint also serves Russian interests insofar as it presents the prospect of a weakened NATO.
Still, to say that Gabbard is a Russian asset is idiotic and unbound from any established facts. In the intelligence world, an “asset” is an intelligence service agent or officer. For Gabbard to be a Russian asset, she would thus either have to be taking direction from a Russian intelligence service or intentionally working on behalf of one of those services. There is no evidence that this is the case.
Nor is there evidence that Gabbard is being used by the Kremlin to gain influence in Washington (an access agent), or to purvey Russian propaganda (a useful idiot).
The truth is more basic: Gabbard is a Kremlin favorite because her policy ideas fit with Russian strategic objectives. That’s as far as it goes.
