By Jack F. Matlock Jr.
We must end this Russophobic insanity.
“Whom the gods would destroy, they first make mad.â€
That sayingâ€”often misattributed to Euripidesâ€”comes to mind most mornings when I pick up The New York Times and read the latest â€œRussiagateâ€ headlines, which are frequently featured across two or three columns on the front page above the fold. This is an almost daily reminder of the hysteria that dominates our Congress and much of our media.
A glaring example, just one of many from recent months, arrived at my door on February 17. My outrage spiked when I opened to the Timesâ€™ lead editorial: â€œStop Letting the Russians Get Away With It, Mr. Trump.â€ I had to ask myself: â€œDid the Timesâ€™ editors perform even the rudiments of due diligence before they climbed on their high horse in this long editorial, which excoriated â€˜Russiaâ€™ (not individual Russians) for â€˜interferenceâ€™ in the election and demanded increased sanctions against Russia â€˜to protect American democracyâ€™?â€
It had never occurred to me that our admittedly dysfunctional political system is so weak, undeveloped, or diseased that inept Internet trolls could damage it. If that is the case, we better look at a lot of other countries as well, not just Russia!
The New York Times, of course, is not the only offender. Its editorial attitude has been duplicated or exaggerated by most other media outlets in the United States, electronic and print. Unless there is a mass shooting in progress, it can be hard to find a discussion of anything else on CNN. Increasingly, both in Congress and in our media, it has been accepted as a fact that â€œRussiaâ€ interfered in the 2016 election.
So what are the facts?
- It is a fact that some Russians paid people to act as online trolls and bought advertisements on Facebook during and after the 2016 presidential campaign. Most of these were taken from elsewhere, and they comprised a tiny fraction of all the advertisements purchased on Facebook during this period. This continued after the election and included organizing a demonstration against President-elect Trump.
- It is a fact that e-mails in the memory of the Democratic National Committeeâ€™s computer were furnished to Wikileaks. The US intelligence agencies that issued the January 2017 report were confident that Russians hacked the e-mails and supplied them to Wikileaks, but offered no evidence to substantiate their claim. Even if one accepts that Russians were the perpetrators, however, the e-mails were genuine, as the US intelligence report certified. I have always thought that the truth was supposed to make us free, not degrade our democracy.
- It is a fact that the Russian government established a sophisticated television service (RT) that purveyed entertainment, news, andâ€”yesâ€”propaganda to foreign audiences, including those in the United States. Its audience is several magnitudes smaller than that of Fox News. Basically, its task is to picture Russia in a more favorable light than has been available in Western media. There has been no analysis of its effect, if any, on voting in the United States. The January 2017 US intelligence report states at the outset, â€œWe did not make an assessment of the impact that Russian activities had on the outcome of the 2016 election.â€ Nevertheless, that report has been cited repeatedly by politicians and the media as having done so.
- It is a fact that many senior Russian officials (though not all, by any means) expressed a preference for Trumpâ€™s candidacy. After all, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton had compared President Putin to Hitler and had urged more active US military intervention abroad, while Trump had said it would be better to cooperate with Russia than to treat it as an enemy. It should not require the judgment of professional analysts to understand why many Russians would find Trumpâ€™s statements more congenial than Clintonâ€™s. On a personal level, most of my Russian friends and contacts were dubious of Trump, but all resented Clintonâ€™s Russophobic tone, as well as statements made by Obama from 2014 onward. They considered Obamaâ€™s public comment that â€œRussia doesnâ€™t make anythingâ€ a gratuitous insult (which it was), and were alarmed by Clintonâ€™s expressed desire to provide additional military support to the â€œmoderatesâ€ in Syria. But the average Russian, and certainly the typical Putin administration official, understood Trumpâ€™s comments as favoring improved relations, which they definitely favored.
- There is no evidence that Russian leaders thought Trump would win or that they could have a direct influence on the outcome. This is an allegation that has not been substantiated. The January 2017 report from the intelligence community actually states that Russian leaders, like most others, thought Clinton would be elected.
- There is no evidence that Russian activities had any tangible impact on the outcome of the election. Nobody seems to have done even a superficial study of the effect Russian actions actually had on the vote. The intelligence-community report, however, states explicitly that â€œthe types of systems we observed Russian actors targeting or compromising are not involved in vote tallying.â€ Also both former FBI director James Comey and NSA director Mike Rogers have testified that there is no proof Russian activities had an effect on the vote count.
- There is also no evidence that there was direct coordination between the Trump campaign (hardly a well-organized effort) and Russian officials. The indictments brought by the special prosecutor so far are either for lying to the FBI or for offenses unrelated to the campaign such as money laundering or not registering as a foreign agent.
So, what is the most important fact regarding the 2016 US presidential election?
The most important fact, obscured in Russiagate hysteria, is that Americans elected Trump under the terms set forth in the Constitution. Americans created the Electoral College, which allows a candidate with a minority of popular votes to become president. Americans were those who gerrymandered electoral districts to rig them in favor of a given political party. The Supreme Court issued the infamous Citizens United decision that allows corporate financing of candidates for political office. (Hey, money talks and exercises freedom of speech; corporations are people!) Americans created a Senate that is anything but democratic, since it gives disproportionate representation to states with relatively small populations. It was American senators who established non-democratic procedures that allow minorities, even sometimes single senators, to block legislation or confirmation of appointments.
Now, that does not mean that Trumpâ€™s presidency is good for the country, just because Americans elected him. In my opinion, the 2016 presidential and congressional elections pose an imminent danger to the republic. They have created potential disasters that will severely try the checks and balances built into our Constitution. This is especially true since both houses of Congress are controlled by the Republican Party, which itself represents fewer voters than the opposition party.
I did not personally vote for Trump, but I consider the charges that Russian actions interfered in the election, orâ€”for that matterâ€”damaged the quality of our democracy ludicrous, pathetic, and shameful.
â€œLudicrousâ€ because there is no logical reason to think that anything that the Russians did affected how people voted. In the past, when Soviet leaders tried to influence American elections, it backfiredâ€”as foreign interference usually does everywhere. In 1984, Yuri Andropov, the Soviet leader then, made preventing Ronald Reaganâ€™s reelection the second-most-important task of the KGB. (The first was to detect US plans for a nuclear strike on the Soviet Union.) Everything the Soviets didâ€”in painting Reagan out to be a warmonger while Andropov refused to negotiate on nuclear weaponsâ€”helped Reagan win 49 out of 50 states.
â€œPatheticâ€ because it is clear that the Democratic Party lost the election. Yes, it won the popular vote, but presidents are not elected by popular vote. To blame someone else for oneâ€™s own mistakes is a pathetic case of self-deception.
â€œShamefulâ€ because it is an evasion of responsibility. It prevents the Democrats, and those Republicans who want responsible, fact-based government in Washington, from concentrating on practical ways to reduce the threat the Trump presidency poses to our political values and even to our future existence. After all, Trump would not be president if the Republican Party had not nominated him. He also is most unlikely to have won the Electoral College if the Democrats had nominated someoneâ€”almost anyoneâ€”other than the candidate they chose, or if that candidate had run a more competent campaign. I donâ€™t argue that any of this was fair, or rational, but then who is so naive as to assume that American politics are either fair or rational?
Instead of facing the facts and coping with the current reality, the Russiagate promoters, in both the government and the media, are diverting our attention from the real threats.
I should add â€œdangerousâ€ to those three adjectives. â€œDangerousâ€ because making an enemy of Russia, the other nuclear superpowerâ€”yes, there are still twoâ€”comes as close to political insanity as anything I can think of. Denying global warming may rank up there too in the long run, but only nuclear weapons pose, by their very existence in the quantities that are on station in Russia and the United States, an immediate threat to mankindâ€”not just to the United States and Russia and not just to â€œcivilization.â€ The sad, frequently forgotten fact is that, since the creation of nuclear weapons, mankind has the capacity to destroy itself and join other extinct species.
In their first meeting, President Ronald Reagan and then General Secretary Mikhail Gorbachev agreed that â€œa nuclear war cannot be won and must never be fought.â€ Both believed that simple and obvious truth and their conviction enabled them to set both countries on a course that ended the Cold War. We should think hard to determine how and why that simple and obvious truth has been ignored of late by the governments of both countries.
We must desist from our current Russophobic insanity and encourage Presidents Trump and Putin to restore cooperation in issues of nuclear safety, non-proliferation, control of nuclear materials, and nuclear-arms reduction. This is in the vital interest of both the United States and Russia. That is the central issue on which sane governments, and sane publics, would focus their attention.Î¦
Jack F. Matlock Jr., ambassador to the Soviet Union from 1987 to 1991, is the author of Reagan and Gorbachev: How the Cold War Ended andÂ Superpower Illusions: How Myths and False Ideologies Led America Astrayâ€”And How to Return to Reality. This article appeared in The Nation on June 1. The article was sent to the Peaceworker by Sharon Tennison of the Center for Citizen Initiatives with the following message: