There is no question of the intense level of interest in Moscow in the 2016 U.S. Presidential Election campaign. For the first time in modern history, Russia faces the prospect of a U.S. president who does not come from the established political process in the U.S., and if elected, would have a mandate for change far exceeding even that of Barack Obama when elected in 2008. This prospect is certainly viewed with some trepidation in a Kremlin which highly values its ability to assess and predict the behavior of its major economic and geopolitical adversary, the U.S.
Putin will not waste any time using his intelligence services to collect the type of information that will allow him to assess the “objective” opportunities presented by a Trump Administration. In this context, “objective” means the ability to influence and manipulate or corrupt and embarrass, ultimately resulting in the geopolitical outmaneuvering of the Trump team.
Putin almost certainly believes he has accurately measured the administration of President Obama and exploited the naiveté of Obama’s national security team over the past eight years. He will seek to do the same with a Trump or Clinton administration, only he has less of a track record to use with Trump. However, given the lack of visibility into Trump’s business dealings in Russia, Putin may believe he already has sufficient kompromat to influence or embarrass Trump.
A very senior former Russian security official characterized his view on the election as follows: Clinton, we have a track record on her. She has been a public figure for a long time: First Lady, U.S. Senator, presidential candidate, Secretary of State. She is predictable. Trump, we have no book on him, he is unpredictable and that makes him very dangerous.
Putin makes no particular secret about his strategic objectives. At the highest level, they are to reinvent a form of the bipolar world, with Russia at the head of a coalition of countries at one pole opposing the U.S./EU at the head of the other pole. The argument can be made that the annexation of Crimea and the Russian support for the separatists in eastern Ukraine is about reasserting Russian influence into a region they feel is historically part of their sphere of influence.
Similarly, the Russian intervention in Syria can arguably be viewed as an opportunity for the Russians to take advantage of what they view as U.S. abandonment of its traditional allies in the region to insert themselves militarily in support of a surrogate, Assad’s Syria. In the process, they make Russia a player in a region, which during the Cold War was an important source of Russian strategic influence in the eastern Mediterranean.
Putin would welcome a U.S. President who may view the “containment” model for strategic stability in Europe and elsewhere as outmoded and needs to be revamped to reflect a post-Cold War world. Putin is likely to believe he has a better chance of establishing that type of dialogue with Trump than he does with Clinton.
Along with what his intelligence services have provided him from their investigations into Trump and his team, Putin may see some opportunity in comments made by Trump during his campaign, such as Trump’s characterization of Putin as a “strong leader,” or “I think I would have a very good relationship with Putin.” These statements coupled with Trump’s suggestion of reducing American commitment to NATO unless other NATO members are willing to pick up their fair share of the costs, align well with a key objective of Putin’s current strategy for weakening NATO.
Trump’s foreign/national security policy team—at least the team that has been presented at this point—includes Carter Page, an investor in Gasprom who favors deeper engagement with Russia. In a speech this Summer in Moscow, Page suggested Washington and the West are to blame for poor relations with Russia, because they have “impeded potential progress through their often hypocritical focus on ideas such as democratization, inequality, corruption, and regime change.”
Paul Manafort, a former senior Trump campaign official with long time relationships with Russian oligarchs and who was an adviser to ousted Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovich, has called for the removal of economic sanctions on Russia and suggested a better economic relationship between the West and Russia benefits both sides. Although Manafort has resigned his position in Trump’s campaign, recent revelations of the extent of Manafort’s dealings with Yanukovich suggest Putin may have plenty of material to use to influence Manafort and, through him, Trump.
Unknown at this point is the type of operational and information security practices Page and Manafort have exhibited, especially during their travels to Russia or the territories of the former Soviet Union. Putin has probably gathered considerable intelligence information on those two Trump advisers. However, Putin is unlikely to believe either of these officials will have key ministerial roles in a Trump Administration and that a more establishment and experienced Republican foreign and national security cadre will emerge if there appears to be a chance Trump will win the election. If this does not turn out to be the case, Putin would, without a doubt, prefer the opportunity to work against an inexperienced U.S. national security team.
Putin’s alleged use of his intelligence service to hack the servers of the Democratic National Committee, stealing a variety of information—including DNC files on the Trump campaign— would illustrate the focus Putin is already putting on understanding possible results of the election and laying the groundwork for influencing whichever administration comes into office in January 2017. He may well have been able to read much of Clinton’s e-mail correspondence during her tenure as Secretary of State as well as correspondence from the Clinton Global Initiative, potentially compromising to her administration.
He is certainly devoting no less effort to collection of intelligence on the Trump campaign but may have elected to keep that intelligence closely held to avoid souring a potential relationship with Trump. On balance, Putin is likely to believe there is more opportunity for Russia to shape a favorable relationship with the U.S.—from his perspective—under an inexperienced and anti-establishment Trump administration.
