Allegations that involve Donald Trump's son-in-law Jared Kushner persist, following U.S. media reports over the weekend. According to the Washington Post and New York Times, Kushner and Russian Ambassador to the U.S. Sergey Kislyak discussed setting up backchannel communications between Washington and Moscow, during the transition period in December..
The Post says Kushner, a senior White House aide, also suggested using Russian diplomatic facilities for the communications. The meeting was also attended by Trump’s former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn.
In March, The White House disclosed that a meeting between Kushner and Kislyak took place last year, but dispute the latest media reports.
How unusual are backchannels? What are standard procedures for transition teams? The Cipher Brief’s Leone Lakhani asked four-star General Jack Keane, former Vice Chief of Staff of the U.S. Army.
The Cipher Brief: What did you first think when you heard Jared Kushner allegedly was setting up a backchannel for communications with Russia?
JK: I didn’t think it was that much of a big deal because we routinely establish communications with our adversaries and our allies. We also do it, as governments are transitioning. Like a lot of these stories about the Trump Administration, they seem to lack a justification for the seriousness of them in my mind.
President Barack Obama did extensive backchannel communications with the Iranians, who are also an adversary. We’ve had other presidents do this as well. You just don’t take over the duties on January 20th. You begin to develop a relationship with all of these countries, to include our adversaries.
The Middle Eastern countries – because they were so concerned about their relationship with the United States [under the previous Administration] — sent delegations to the transition team. And it’s a responsible thing to do. I’m convinced that’s one of the reasons President Trump’s Middle East trip was so successful. They’ve actually been working on it since November, which is appropriate and certainly no violation of law. It’s just good governance.
TCB: It’s not unusual to have conversations in the transition period, but the question was whether the information was passed on to the sitting President?
JK: I don’t know. President Obama didn’t pass on much of what he was doing with the Iranians to the incumbent President Bush. And there seemed to be no scrutiny of that by the media.
TCB: And you’re saying he did that during the transition period?
JK: Yes, actually there was some contact, if I recall, prior to the election.
TCB: What about the significance of the locations? If the reports are correct, these meetings were to be set up at Russian diplomatic facilities.
JK: If I understand this correctly, what is alleged and not confirmed, is this was a one-time conversation that was going to take place with some Syrian generals, who had expressed some concerns about the war and some misinformation about what was happening. It wasn’t actually a back channel. It was a discussion with the Syrian generals that they would try and make some arrangements for.
If that was going to take place, that should have been done in coordination with the incumbent intelligence services. They’re not committing a crime, but it would be much more appropriate to do it in settings that are favorable to us, instead of a setting that’s favorable to them.
TCB: But the White House admits a meeting between Kushner and Ambassador Kislyak happened.
JK: Yes, and there is certainly nothing inappropriate about that, as many of the foreign ambassadors in DC meet with governments in transition and likely discuss issues of importance to their countries national interest.
TCB: Is it possible the Russians were using this as an opportunity to manipulate or misinform the incoming Trump team?
JK: The Russians are always working us. This is what they do. Sometimes, it’s fairly clumsy and kind of laughable. But yes, certainly, the Russians are operating all the time in their national interests.
Just as friendly countries are trying to establish a relationship with the incoming administration to impact on their national interests. Maybe using the word manipulation would be too strong, but certainly they are developing a relationship that they believe will benefit their national interests. The Russians are doing the very same thing as well. They do it routinely.
TCB: What kind of precautions should U.S. officials have taken to counter such an attempt? Or is that an ongoing effort for all U.S. officials?
JK: Most U.S. officials are pretty conversant with Russian behavior. They get briefings on it. We’re always on our guard about it. You can assume that if you’re talking to one of them, your conversations are monitored by the NSA.
TCB: If that’s the case, do you think this could have been a result of Jared Kushner’s lack of experience and naiveté, or something more nefarious?
JK: Your question supposes there was something wrong – similar to the rest of the main stream media – or inappropriate and yet this whole discussion has been that there was nothing inappropriate, and is actually quite normal for an incoming Administration.
I don’t think there’s anything wrong with what he’s done. I think there’s been a huge exaggeration by the media. I think it’s part of a pattern that’s been established, taking the insignificant things and making them something that they’re not. I don’t see what the issue is. There’s certainly no crime here. I don’t even think it’s inappropriate to have discussions with Russians or Chinese, or whoever.
TCB: So if U.S. officials are familiar with the way Russians operate, and former National Security Advisor Michael Flynn was reportedly with Kushner at the time, should they be aware of the dangers in the situation? Michael Flynn should be advising Jared Kushner on how the Russians operate.
JK: Absolutely. Michael Flynn is an intelligence agent himself. He’s very much aware of Russia’s manipulations and what they’re doing. I’m sure he’s never had a conversation with a Russian in which he didn’t think the Russian was trying to take advantage of him to some degree.
Again, I don't understand your preoccupation with this Administration talking to foreign governments during their transition. It is routine and widely practiced by previous Democratic and Republican administrations. I am disappointed that Cipher Brief fell into the media hysteria with circular reporting of supposed wrong doing yet there is no evidence of it.*
*Editor's Note: It is important to us at The Cipher Brief to include all voices that help our readers understand different points of view on the serious security issues we face. That includes voices who are not happy with the questions we ask. Despite that, it remains our responsibility and our mission to ask the tough questions while striving to provide all viewpoints.
