Biden needs to deter Putin, who will miss Trump
Here is the President’s first reaction to a massive cyberattack on the US government and companies:
Virtually everything in these two tweets is a lie, though I suppose someone has tried to brief him. The news media has been reporting mostly expert and company statements on the “Cyber Hack,” not inventing its own narrative. Few if any of the “lamestream” media have compelling reasons to protect China, whose malfeasance they report daily. Trump’s own Secretary of State has said it was Russia that launched the attack. Everything is not well under control, as it will take months to root out the malware. There no sign of a “hit” on our voting machines, he did not win the election, and he is by far the biggest embarrassment the country has ever suffered.
Why? is the constant question when it comes to Trump’s efforts to protect Russia. Addicted to accusing others of doing what he himself does, he gives a hint in accusing the lamestream media of financial motives. Trump’s real estate, heavily indebted and on the rocks due to the epidemic, is going to need a lot of money to survive after he leaves office. His licensing business has dried up, due to his dreadful performance as president. Russian President Putin and his friends have laundered their money through Trump’s enterprises in the past. He hopes they will continue to do so, and also allow him the property in Moscow that he has long coveted.
Trump’s weakness on Russia has damaged US national security to the point that President-elect Biden faces a serious problem: should he retaliate, or should he absorb the blow and clean up the mess without entering what could be a serious escalation of conflict with Moscow? He will certainly be bolder than Trump in calling out the Russians, but that is not retaliation. Sanctions, cyberattacks, military pressure, making Putin’s corrupt behavior public–there are lots of options for retaliation, but before doing it Biden will want to be sure that ultimately the US can do more harm to the Russians than they can do to us. If you retaliate, you want to be sure you have escalatory dominance.
There is a big unknown in this quandary. Have we already done to the Russians what they have done to us? Are they retaliating, not initiating a conflict? I might hope that is the case, but if so we are not likely to hear about it. Biden might decide not to escalate, in part to protect our own still secret capability.
There is another big unknown: how much has this cyberattack really helped Moscow? The targets appear to be unclassified government systems and commercial networks. What value can the Russians extract from what they have obtained, and what capability do they have to process it all? The sheer volume of material the Russians have stolen could inhibit effective use of it.
It is also possible that, despite US denials, the Russians have infiltrated classified government systems. That would be a disaster. All the most precious military, intelligence, and diplomatic secrets could be at risk.
But don’t expect the current President of the United States to level with the American people about what has happened. Already in his first remarks on the subject he is trying to obfuscate and coverup. No doubt now he’ll try to get back to thinking about how he can protect himself, his family, and his associates from prosecution once he leaves office. Putin is going to miss Trump. Re-establishment of deterrence will be left to Biden, on top of the many other unsolved problems the disastrous Trump Administration will leave behind.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
2 thoughts on “Biden needs to deter Putin, who will miss Trump”
Comments are closed.
RSS - Posts
It is possible that the Russians gained control of some of the networks they have penetrated. That would present the risk that retaliation would lead to a second strike, in which the hackers could cause systems such as air traffic control, the electrical grid, or financial networks to function erratically. The US may have the capacity to retaliate, but we need to have high confidence in our assessment of second-strike capabilities before we do.
“That would present the risk that retaliation would lead to a second strike, in which the hackers could cause systems such as air traffic control, the electrical grid, or financial networks to function erratically.” – That would a first strike. What’s going on is still in the domain of tradecraft.