
Welcome to the Gray Zone and the Future of Great Power Competition
This is part one of a 3-part series by Cipher Brief Expert and former Assistant Director of CIA for South and Central Asia Dave Pitts, who also […] More
OPINION — “Who ya gonna believe, me or your own eyes?” asked Chico Marx in the 1933 Mar Brothers film, Duck Soup, (though the quote is often incorrectly attributed to Groucho). The recent insistence from those close to President Biden and repeated comments by senior administration officials that the President’s cognitive abilities are ‘just fine’, has to bring this quote to mind.
There have been plenty of “believe your own eyes” indicators of Biden’s diminished cognitive abilities over the past several years. European and Asian mainstream media have not refrained from displaying this, while U.S. mainstream media has largely been a co-conspirator with the administration in concealing the true state-of-affairs from the American people. But now, the power brokers in the Democratic Party have succeeded in their effort to push Biden from the re-election ticket for 2024.
This public ‘cover-up’ of the President’s actual condition is a scandal and those involved have negatively impacted national security because you can be certain that Russian intelligence for whom collection on the U.S. is their highest priority – certainly have focused on the President’s condition, just as they will on his possible successor, Vice President Kamala Harris.
Also in the “who ya gonna believe” category, Reuters reported recently that according to an unnamed official in the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, the Kremlin prefers Donald Trump to win November’s U.S. presidential election. One wonders if that official or anyone currently working in the U.S. intelligence is familiar with the Russian term ‘Maskirovka’.
Maskirovka is a Russian military and intelligence doctrine that was developed in the early 20th century. The doctrine covers a broad range of measure for military deception from camouflage to denial and deception. And when employed by Russian intelligence, the doctrine often includes strategic deception. It is certain that Putin monitors closely what is being said by his spokesperson, former KGB officer Dmitriy Peskov. It’s also certain that both Putin and Peskov would have been trained in the doctrine of maskirovka during their time in KGB and no doubt, employ that training actively today.
I believe a strong case can be made that President Putin doesn’t have a solid preference about who wins or loses the U.S. presidential election in November. Despite who is elected, his central focus will remain on creating political conditions in the U.S. that divide and thus weaken Washington. Putin has been quoted in recent weeks as supporting Biden’s re-election. This is consistent with Putin – and Russia’s – public stance that Russia does not interfere in the internal affairs of other countries. There is more Chico Marx in that expression and interpretation of Russian policy.
It’s not just for the President anymore. Cipher Brief Subscriber+Members have access to their own Open Source Daily Brief, keeping you up to date on global events impacting national security. It pays to be a Subscriber+Member.
The arguments that Putin pefers a Trump victory center around evidence from the 2016 and 2020 elections that Russian efforts in social media centered around supporting Trump’s candidacy over that of Hillary Clinton and then Joe Biden. Putin would of course, welcome Trump’s criticism of NATO and unclear support for Ukraine and he would certainly welcome an erosion of U.S. support for NATO that Trump in the past, has implied. And if Trump were to end the war in Ukraine by allowing Putin to keep everything he has taken through an unprovoked, murderous rampage, that would also be highly desirable to Putin, especially as the Ukraine war drags into a third year and is taking a toll within Russia, something Putin never planned for when he invaded in 2022.
Also likely figuring into Putin’s algorithm are Trump’s narcissism and relative inexperience in geopolitical affairs. As a former case officer, Putin probably believes he has a correct assessment of Trump and is in a position to push the right buttons to manipulate him.
Some or all of these arguments have merit.
However, I believe actions speak louder than words. It is worth remembering that several (and arguably the most significant of Putin’s major geopolitical actions over the past 15 years) took place under the administrations of former President Obama or President Biden. The March 2014-annexation of Crimea, the September 2015-intervention in Syria, 2014’s dramatic expansion of Wagner Group activities in Africa, the Central African Republic, Sudan, Mali and Libya among others, and of course, the February 2022 full-scale Invasion of Ukraine.
Other activities that Putin has been undeterred from taking on Biden’s watch include the detention of a number of American citizens on spurious charges, including Britney Griner—for whom Putin was able to arrange an ‘exchange’ for a genuine criminal, Viktor Bout—and Wall Street Journal reporter Evan Gershkovich, who was just sentenced to 16 years in a Russian Gulag, among others. This is only a partial list of the aggressive actions Putin has taken in his accelerating confrontation with the West that many believe was first signaled with Putin’s speech at the Munich Security Conference in 2007, but has worsened in the past four years.
I believe Putin’s primary goal – thus the actions of his cyber and social media trolls – is to create, then exacerbate, political disharmony in the United States. Then, in due time, to promote divisions that weaken the U.S. as an ally to our partners around the world and as the leader of a strategic pole to counter the Russia-China-Iran-North Korea axis.
The 2024 election presents a fertile ground and perhaps a unique opportunity, for such disruptive activity, particularly after the failed assassination attempt against Donald Trump and now with the drama that is certain to accompany Biden’s decision to withdraw from the election.
It may not be until the Democratic Party convention in August that we know who will be on the ballot for the Democrats on November 5, but Putin is certain to use every effort to inflame passions on both sides of the U.S. political divide perhaps with the objective of encouraging more political violence in the U.S. and certainly with the hope to bring the U.S. to complete political disfunction before a new U.S. president sits in the Oval Office in January, 2025.
From Putin’s optic, the U.S. Presidential candidate most likely to contribute to exacerbation of political disharmony in the U.S. is certainly Donald Trump. With that Putin objective in mind, Trump would be Putin’s choice.
On the level of achieving his strategic objective of rebuilding his vision of Imperial Russia, Putin’s actions under the nearly twelve years of Biden as VP or President suggest a preference for the current administration or some derivative thereof.
Not a Subscriber+Member but need access to the national security content that the experts read? We can help you with that.
Putin would likely relish the opportunity to face off against a President Harris. The current Vice President has little or no foreign or security policy experience other than what she might have absorbed the past three and a half years.
Objectively, her profile on foreign and security policy matters has been modest. Putin’s relationship with the only U.S. president of color, Barrack Obama, was extremely bad. The two clearly loathed each other. Putin did not respect Obama, in part because—to Putin—Obama had no credentials. He had never served in the military or intelligence services and had no experience in business. Putin takes great pride in his intelligence background and is more likely to show restraint and respect for a U.S. president who has some “credentials” in his view. With a President Harris, a woman of color, Putin’s fundamental racism and misogyny toward women (remember his treatment of Angela Merkel), is likely to be on full display.
Russians prefer predictability on the part of their geopolitical adversaries. They like to have a high degree of confidence in being able to anticipate – and thus neutralize – the response of their adversaries.
I recall a conversation I had before the 2016 election, with a senior retired Russian four-star general officer in which he compared then-candidate Trump to Hillary Clinton. The general said Clinton is well known to us and despite her anti-Russian attitudes, because we know her quite well, we are comfortable that we can handle any vector her administration would take with regards to relations with the Russian Federation. Trump on the other hand, is less predictable. Yes, we know much about him as a businessman, but as a President or how his administration would react to events on the world stage is not known.
That was eight years ago, and now, the Russians have had a chance to observe four years of President Trump and four years of him out of office. The Russians likely believe he is the perfect foil for the objective of exacerbation and political disharmony in the U.S., but he may not be the person they would like to see in the oval office for four more years.
As former world chess champion and Putin critic Garry Kasparov has said, Putin plays his opponent, not the situation on the board.
Maskirovka is a consistent feature of Russian responses to challenges they see going forward on the geopolitical chessboard and it is easier and more cost effective than other measures. Why would we believe it is not in Putin’s current playbook?
Is it not worth considering that the noise about Trump being the Kremlin’s preferred victor is maskirovka? Whether you support Trump as the potential next U.S. President or not, do you really believe Putin would prefer the unpredictable and erratic Donald Trump over a successor to Biden who comes from the Obama/Biden school of caution and incrementalism? And yet, the prevailing narrative in the U.S. is likely to remain that Trump is the Kremlin’s preferred candidate. Perhaps Putin’s maskirovka is working.
The Cipher Brief is committed to publishing a range of perspectives on national security issues submitted by deeply experienced national security professionals.
Opinions expressed are those of the author and do not represent the views or opinions of The Cipher Brief.
Have a perspective to share based on your experience in the national security field? Send it to [email protected] for publication consideration.
Read more expert-driven national security insights, perspective and analysis in The Cipher Brief
Who’s Reading this? More than 500K of the most influential national security experts in the world. Need full access to what the Experts are reading?
Related Articles
This is part one of a 3-part series by Cipher Brief Expert and former Assistant Director of CIA for South and Central Asia Dave Pitts, who also […] More
DEEP DIVE — In at least five battleground states Tuesday, polling places were targeted by bomb threats, “many of which appear to originate from Russian […] More
EXPERT OPINION – Dear 47th President of the United States, congratulations on your victory and thank you for your willingness to serve as the leader […] More
During the 2024 Cipher Brief Threat Conference, Dave Pitts joined Brad Christian, Mike Vickers, and Ralph Goff in a discussion about Gray Zone Operations; a […] More
EXCLUSIVE INTERVIEW — The Pentagon said Monday that North Korea has sent some 10,000 troops to Russia to train and deploy to the battlefield in Ukraine […] More
DEEP DIVE — Does Vladimir Putin have actual “red lines” for the West when it comes to the war in Ukraine? And if so, what will […] More
Search