George W. Bush once told the story about the time he introduced his dog, a Scottish terrier named Barney, to Vladimir Putin. Mr. Putin was uninterested. He shrugged. Later, on a visit to Moscow, the Russian leader asked the president if he would like to meet his dog.
Sure, said Mr. Bush. Out bounded a large black Labrador retriever. Mr. Putin looked W. in the eye. “Bigger, stronger and faster than Barney,” he said.
The symbolism was obvious. Even though top thug is more appropriate, Mr. Putin likes to think of himself in top dog terms. Who can blame him? In the power game, he’s faced three presidents and gotten the better of each.
He hosed Mr. Bush into thinking he could trust him, then stiff-armed him, turning his back on his overtures. He outfoxed Barack Obama to the degree that foreign policy softness is seen as the sore point in that president’s legacy.
As for Donald Trump, many see the wisdom in canine analogies. He’s written off as Putin’s poodle.
History books won’t find a Russian leader who has dominated and deceived U.S. presidents to the degree this cold-blooded oppressor has. And with Mr. Trump seemingly in hock, the shaming of America by a lesser power is not about to end quickly.
Monday’s expulsion of Russian officials by the United States in concert with similar action by Canada and European allies was a strong, positive step. But no one should bet that Mr. Trump, who refrained from personally announcing the decision, is about to change his approach to Russian relations. For every hard turn at the Kremlin, he’s made several swoons.
In facing Mr. Putin, the United States leads in the wrong arms race. The new race, as evidenced by the 2016 election registers, is information warfare. While Washington dithered, the Kremlin took control of this battlefield with cybertyranny and propaganda bombardments. Militarily, while spending hundreds of billions less on defence, Mr. Putin has made gains as well, expanding his territory and influence in the Ukraine and elsewhere.
All three U.S. presidents made the mistake of thinking they could work with the ex-KGB bully and bring him on board. They didn’t realize he had no interest in joining hands with liberal Western democracies. They didn’t realize there are no more Gorbachevs.
Mr. Bush’s trust was answered with Moscow’s opposition to the Iraq invasion, human rights abuses in Chechnya, military intervention in Georgia. As this president prodded him for more democratic liberties, Mr. Putin seized control of independent television networks, did away with elections of governors and eliminated political opponents.
Barack Obama spoke of dealing with Mr. Putin from a position of mutual respect. “We see Russia as a partner, not an adversary.” Then came Crimea, the destabilizing of the Ukraine, support for Bashar al-Assad in Syria, and, directly under Mr. Obama’s nose, a campaign to sabotage a U.S. presidential election.
Enter Mr. Trump, who – as Russian Roulette, a new book by journalists Michael Isikoff and David Corn, makes clear – had been trying for years to cultivate Mr. Putin for purposes of expanding his Trump Tower empire.
As President, after seeing how the Russian manhandled his predecessors, he still believed some kind of Putin partnership could be worked out. In explaining his submissiveness, there’s also the hanging question of whether he is compromised, whether on account of Moscow hotel prostitutes, money laundering or payback for Russians helping him win.
Even if all the blackmail speculation is rubbish and Mr. Trump’s plan for close co-operation is honestly motivated, he’s falling into the same trap of not only his recent presidential predecessors, but so many others as well.
For the longest time, Franklin Roosevelt had faith he could work well with Joseph Stalin. “He won’t try to annex anything,” FDR said of him. After the tyrant’s death, Dwight Eisenhower was hopeful of harmonious relations with the Soviets. Didn’t happen. Same with John F. Kennedy, until Nikita Khrushchev boxed him around at a 1961 summit in Vienna. Jimmy Carter was dovish until Soviet expansionism taught him a lesson.
Mr. Putin is an old-school authoritarian. He’s entrenched. He has no designs on friendship with the West.
Some, such as Canadian Foreign Minister Chrystia Freeland, who is barred from entering Russia, get it. European leaders are gaining resolve, seeing Mr. Putin for what he is. But given who is in the Oval Office, the big dog isn’t about to lose ground.
European Union member states have agreed to take further measures against Russia after saying it was 'highly likely' Moscow was behind a nerve agent attack on a former Russian spy and his daughter.
Reuters
Lawrence Martin