White House spokesman Raj Shah began Monday’s daily press briefing by extending the country’s “deepest sympathies to the Russian people” for a fire in Siberia before pivoting to “the expulsion of dozens of Russian intelligence officers, and the closure of the Russian consulate in Seattle” on President Trump’s orders.
It’s symbolic of the delicate dance the White House has done on Russia. The Trump administration is full of Russia hawks and has frequently taken a hard line against Moscow on substantive policy matters — bombing a Russian client in Syria, arming Ukraine, securing commitments from NATO allies to increase their defense budgets, and adding new low-yield nuclear weapons programs.
If anything, the Russia hawks inside the administration are ascendant. Conspiracy theories aside, CIA Director Mike Pompeo is arguably more hawkish on Russia than the man Trump would like him to replace, outgoing Secretary of State Rex Tillerson. Incoming national security adviser John Bolton is at least as hardline on this front as departing predecessor H.R. McMaster, and both were a step in a tougher direction than Michael Flynn. U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley is a rising star.
At Monday’s briefing alone, the principal deputy press secretary at the White House described Russian actions as “brazen,” “reckless,” and dangerous to the lives of “innocent civilians, confirming they were guilty of using” a military-grade chemical weapon in the United Kingdom.” Shah also announced upcoming visits by three Baltic heads of state, celebrating the independence of Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania early next month.
Taken together, he said, “the U.S. and our allies and partners around the world make clear to Russia that actions have consequences.”
“This is the largest expulsion of Russian intelligence officers in U.S. history,” Jon Huntsman, the U.S. ambassador to Russia, said Monday. “Today’s actions make the U.S. a safer place by limiting the ability of Russia to spy on Americans and conduct covert activities that threaten America’s national security.”
It is certainly bigger than any retribution exacted by former President Barack Obama.
Yet Trump has often seemed like an outlier inside his own administration, reluctant to criticize Russian President Vladimir Putin’s Russia and frequently tepid when doing so. This extends from Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election to the recent attack in the United Kingdom to congratulating Putin on a tainted election victory despite reported advice to the contrary.
Equivocal at best, unduly solicitous at worst, Trump’s Russia rhetoric — delivered against the backdrop of collusion investigations by special counsel Robert Mueller and multiple congressional committees — has prompted many Democrats to ask whether the president is somehow in Putin’s pocket.
Sen. Mark Warner, D-Va., has described it as “more than bizarre” that Trump hasn’t condemned Putin to his satisfaction since taking office. “There is something just strange about this,” the ranking member of the Senate Intelligence Committee told NBC’s “Meet the Press.” “That is the reason why Mueller’s investigation has to continue and our investigation has to continue.”
“After extolling life tenure for China’s Xi, will our President now congratulate Putin on his successful elimination of democratic opposition?” asked Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., Warner’s House counterpart.
“[W]hat does Putin have over Trump?” asked Rep. Ted Lieu, D-Calif., after the administration appeared to slow-walk sanctions against Russia imposed by bipartisan majorities in Congress. Lieu’s Twitter bio concludes, “Also, I don’t take orders from Vladimir Putin.”
Hard to imagine liberal Democrats criticizing Presidents Richard Nixon or Ronald Reagan in these terms during the Cold War. Such exchanges date back to at least the campaign, when Hillary Clinton called Trump a Putin “puppet” during a presidential debate.
“No puppet. You’re the puppet,” Trump shot back. Russia remains a “cloud” over his presidency, and some observers believe that even if the various probes fall short of proving collusion — House Intelligence Committee Republicans have already said no dice over strenuous Democratic objections — they will present Trump as hopelessly conflicted with Russia. The firing of former FBI Director James Comey could also be at the center of an obstruction of justice investigation.
One Republican insider attributed Trump’s reticence to a belief that Democrats are using Russian election meddling to discredit his win over Clinton. “He’s wrong to prioritize that over confronting Russia,” the insider said. “But he’s not wrong about what the Democrats are doing.”
A former GOP national security official said that moral suasion is not an effective means of dealing with Russia or China, arguing that Trump is simply recognizing the reality of how to deal with those countries. Both Republicans said that Trump could take a strong stance on Russia if divorced from collusion allegations.
“We stand ready to cooperate to build a better relationship with Russia, but this can only happen with a change in the Russian government’s behavior,” Shah told reporters, later adding, “We want to have a cooperative relationship. The president wants to work with Russia, but their actions sometimes don’t allow that to happen.”
“I love to negotiate things, I do it really well, and all that stuff,” Trump himself said in a press conference last year. “But — but it’s possible I won’t be able to get along with Putin.”
