Last week a new scandal occurred in Washington and consequences are to be far-reaching. The Washington Post citing anonymous current and former US officials said that during the recent meeting in the White House Donald Trump had revealed highly classified information to Russian foreign minister Sergey Lavrov and Russian ambassador Sergey Kislyak. It was claimed that this information could jeopardize a critical intelligence source of a close US ally on ISIS activities and plans. The report disseminated with light speed In the US press even leading to the discussion of a possible impeachment of the current president because of divulging state secrets. However, in practice for ordinary readers the situation could have another colour and be an extremely disturbing sign concerning the cooperation on combating terrorism.
According to the media, President Trump told Mr Lavrov and Mr Kislyak that Washington has information that ISIS terrorists plan to use laptops for committing a terror acts on aircraft. The focus of the US media was that this ally had not permitted to share this information with Russia and now Moscow could identify the source, which potentially could be used for gathering materials on Russia’s actions in Syria. Now try to disengage yourself from the current differences in the bilateral relations and have another look at the situation: Washington got information that there exists a specific terror threat, Trump decided to share it with Moscow and was blamed for it. Sure, there are some details and particular context, but, nevertheless, doesn’t this material generally deserve to be shared as it is extremely important for fighting terror across the world? It seems that now some could have understandable doubts whether world powers really have a commonly perceived threat of terrorism or conjuncture interests are still more important.
What is also interesting and worth noting is that the media accused Trump of placing the intel source under threat. However, almost all news outlets published this information and eventually some even named the country, which had given materials to America. The media (and, surely, those officials, who leaked information to journalists) should ask themselves what is jeopardizing national security and the intel source more: Trump’s sharing with Russia at a closed meeting or the fact that they openly published almost the same data on their pages. Donald Trump once said that the media hinders him from building closer ties with Russia while the leaks threaten national security. Now it is difficult to say he was wrong. It so happened that the most politically inexperienced president in the US presidential history managed to quickly make a diagnosis.
As for Russia’s reaction, Moscow found the reports absurd with Russian president describing the situation in the US as “political schizophrenia” while foreign minister Sergey Lavrov pointed at the fact that recently the Trump administration officially banned laptops on airlines from some Middle East countries and, therefore, he could see no secreсy in this infromation.
By Greg Miller and Greg Jaffe
The Washington Post
President Trump revealed highly classified information to the Russian foreign minister and ambassador in a White House meeting last week, according to current and former U.S. officials, who said Trump’s disclosures jeopardized a critical source of intelligence on the Islamic State.
By Julia Ioffe
Putin has long used the pretext of counterterrorism cooperation to get what he wants from the West. It just paid off again.
By Ted Galen Carpenter
The American Conservative
Reporting on the Oval Office conversation is the latest salvo.
By Denis Pinchuk and Andrew Osborn
Vladimir Putin said on Wednesday that U.S. President Donald Trump had not divulged any secrets during a meeting in Washington with Russian officials and offered to prove it by supplying Congress with a transcript.
By James Carden
The idea that these leaks to the Post by “current and former U.S. officials” are in the service of US national security interests strains credulity. They manifestly are not.
By Adam Entous
The Washington Post
A month before Donald Trump clinched the Republican nomination, one of his closest allies in Congress — House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy — made a politically explosive assertion in a private conversation on Capitol Hill with his fellow GOP leaders: that Trump could be the beneficiary of payments from Russian President Vladimir Putin.
By Ned Parker, Jonathan Landay and Warren Strobel
Michael Flynn and other advisers to Donald Trump’s campaign were in contact with Russian officials and others with Kremlin ties in at least 18 calls and emails during the last seven months of the 2016 presidential race, current and former U.S. officials familiar with the exchanges told Reuters.
By Massimo Calabresi
Marrying a hundred years of expertise in influence operations to the new world of social media, Russia may finally have gained the ability it long sought but never fully achieved in the Cold War: to alter the course of events in the U.S. by manipulating public opinion.
By Bill Powell
Now Russia is again public enemy No. 1 in the United States, and Putin is on offense around the world.
By Alex Ward
Trump shared intelligence claiming Russia is on the same team.
By Kenneth Rapoza
Depending on who you speak with, Russia has no business in the United States. Other than Lukoil and a uranium mine, Russia only exists in the U.S. as a figment of some people’s wild imaginations. Russia has very little economic interests here. But in China, that’s another story.
By Ekaterina Kuznetsova and Alexander Troïtsky
The American Interest
Putin and Abe seem to have already decided between themselves how their delicate negotiations will end.
By Roula Khalaf
The Financial Times
Moscow has an interest in maintaining the status quo in Tehran.
By Hollie McKay
Afghanistan villagers caught in Taliban territory in the northern province of Kunduz, by the border of Tajikistan, recently began reporting unmarked helicopters at night landing and leaving quickly from known Taliban hideouts, or at least areas outside of government control.
By Leonid Bershidsky
Ukraine knows Russia’s social networks aren’t neutral. But neither are anyone else’s.
Articles also deserving your attention
- The Fallacy of Demonizing Russia (17.05.17)
- First on CNN: Russian officials bragged they could use Flynn to influence Trump, sources say (20.05.17)
- What Russia really wants (20.05.17)
- Ukraine blocks popular Russian-owned social media sites, saying it’s a matter of national security (18.05.17)
- The Key to North Korea Is Russia (18.05.17)
- Is Putin the alt-right’s BFF? (16.05.17)
- Muscovites Fight for a Slum of Their Own (16.05.17)
- Russia-Navalny story (19.05.17)