Trump isn’t first president to embarrass U.S. by cozying up to Putin
The definition of insanity is doing the same thing again and again and expecting to get a different result, which is one of the many reasons President Trump’s news conference with Russian President Vladimir Putin seemed so insane. Trump is trying to do something that both of his immediate predecessors tried to turn over a new leaf with Russia. They both failed, and so will he.
Recall that George W. Bush entered the White House promising to end the “dead ideological rivalry” of the Cold War. At a 2001 summit with Putin in Slovenia, Bush declared, “I looked the man in the eye. I found him very straightforward and trustworthy — I was able to get a sense of his soul.”
President Barack Obama tried to appease Putin by giving in to the Russian leader’s demands that we cancel our missile-defense plan with Poland and the Czech Republic — and did it on the 70th anniversary of the Soviet invasion of Poland. And while serving as Obama’s secretary of state, Hillary Clinton humiliated herself when she gave Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov a giant red button with the word “reset” on it (misspelling the Russian word for “reset” to read “overload”).
It is now Trump’s turn to learn the hard way that Russia is an adversary, not a competitor. His summit with Putin was a moment that called for presidential strength. It came on the heels of the indictment of 12 Russian intelligence agents for intervening in the 2016 election and of Russia’s brazen use of a banned chemical weapon on British soil, which resulted last week in the death of a British citizen.
But instead of condemning these actions, Trump refused to acknowledge or denounce the fact of Russia’s election interference, and he publicly sided with Putin over his own intelligence community. Trump does not seem to fathom that the problem with U.S.-Russia relations is not a lack of effort on the part of U.S. presidents. Russia is the only country on Earth other than North Korea that would dare use a toxic nerve agent to attempt to carry out assassinations on foreign soil. It is a regime that blatantly violates its nuclear and chemical weapons treaty obligations, has invaded two of its neighbors, and has threatened NATO countries (and even Mar-a-Lago) with nuclear annihilation.
As cringeworthy as Trump’s news conference was, he didn’t take any of the actions many feared — such as lifting sanctions or recognizing Putin’s annexation of Crimea. Unlike his rhetoric, Trump’s Russia policy has actually been a dramatic improvement over that of his predecessor.
Trump expelled 60 Russian diplomats, approved a $47 million arms sale to Ukraine, continued the deployment of NATO forces to the Baltic states, posted troops to Poland’s border with Russia and levied new sanctions against Moscow for violating the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty.
During his first year in office, he got NATO allies to increase their defense spending by $12 billion and twice bombed Putin’s ally, Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, for his regime’s use of chemical weapons. If Putin was looking for a more pro-Moscow policies from the United States, his election interference backfired in a big way.
Critics say, words matter — and they are right. But if words matter, then Trump’s critics should be careful what they say. In many cases, their responses to Trump’s news conference have matched the president in absurdity.
As always, Trump’s critics bail him out by overplaying their hands. A news conference, however humiliating, is not an impeachable offense. And conspiracy theories aside, there is a simple explanation for Trump’s performance in Helsinki: He is deeply wrong on Russia.
When should we be worried? When Trump’s actions match his rhetoric. Until then, Trump’s summit was simply an embarrassment, not a disaster.