All posts by natyliesb

Tatiana Ryabkova: Will the Reduction in Inequality in Russia Survive the War?

By Tatiana Ryabkova, Russia Post, 7/26/24

Journalist Tatiana Rybakova notes that the war with Ukraine has led to a reduction of inequality in Russia and looks at whether that will continue after the war ends.

Russia’s economically depressed areas – typically where defense enterprises, agriculture and barely competitive sectors, such as light industry, are concentrated – are currently on the rise. The previously prosperous northwest of the country is declining, while Eastern Siberia and the Far East have caught a second wind.

Social shifts caused by the war

The Russian middle class, increasingly filled with officials in recent years, is now seeing more people from disadvantaged social strata, which previously seemed doomed to poverty and debt. Meanwhile, the part of the middle class that is usually called the “creative intelligentsia” is visibly struggling – besides those who are on the pro-war side. What do these shifts mean?

The Baikal–Amur Mainline (BAM) and Trans-Siberian Railway, the main railways of Eastern Siberia and Primorye (the territory along the Sea of Japan), are overwhelmed. They have become the main routes for transporting goods to China and Far Eastern ports, from where they are sent to India and other countries. Wage gains in logistics have outpaced all other sectors, including IT. Not long ago, it was people working in transportation at the other end of the country, in the Northwestern Federal District, who made good money; today, however, the Baltic ports, customs terminals and railways are empty: practically no freight flows to or from Europe – the borders are closed.

Where there is freight, there is money. The closure of the northwestern borders was a big hit to the region’s timber industry, which had been the biggest in the country. It is too expensive to transport timber across the country to China, and besides, the Siberian taiga has its own lumberjacks and sawmills. Moreover, China has its own pulp and paper mills, several of which are located right on the border with Russia, while the inputs are provided by long-trusted local suppliers. Industry officials say that it is economically feasible for these mills to transport raw materials from no more than a thousand kilometers away.

Timber is not the only industry on the border with Europe that has suffered, as the entire region lived on trade with Russia’s neighbors. In particular, raw materials and components were actually cheaper for a local enterprise to bring over from the neighboring Baltic countries or Finland. Petersburgers, citing better quality and price, even went to Finland for their weekly groceries.

Now, Russia’s Far East is invigorated. For example, the largest construction companies in Russia have rushed in to build new residential complexes in Vladivostok, Sakhalin, Khabarovsk and Nakhodka. The boom is driven not only by more money in the wallets of the local population but also the Far Eastern Mortgage program, with interest rates of 2% per annum – versus the 20% prevailing in the market – spurring demand.

Besides railways and ports, another important source of new income for the Far East is contract service in the army, as it is for residents of Ryazan and Voronezh regions and other Russian backwaters.

War pays

Russia’s regions are now competing in terms of enlistment bonuses: the highest-paying are Karachay-Cherkessia and Moscow Region, offering RUB 1.3 million (about $20,000) and RUB 1.7 million ($25,000), respectively, though nowhere is less than a million paid.

Still, it is not only money that motivates people to enlist: as political commentator Abbas Gallyamov notes, contracts are often signed by men who were considered good-for-nothings – by their relatives, acquaintances and sometimes even themselves. But now they are heroes, “participants in the special military operation,” “the new elite,” as Putin called them, entitled to all sorts of benefits, honor and respect. Those who are lucky enough to return alive and in one piece are given comfortable jobs with good pay.

Even if they do not come back, their families receive substantial compensation for a killed-in-action father or husband. Political commentator Vladimir Pastukhov has calculated that payments for a family member killed in action can reach RUB 14 million (EUR 140,000). This compares to the average monthly wage in Russia of approximately EUR 730 and means a family receives approximately 16 years of average wages for every member killed.

“If we take into account that now a significant part of the army is people who get paid not the average but the minimum wage, which this year is about EUR 192 [a month], then compensation in the event of their death for their families is up to 60 years of their potential income. In Russia, these people do not work that long, so the compensation covers the income of two or three generations of Russian men at once, who have finally become economically attractive to their partners. In other words, the payment immediately compensates for lost income from unborn children,” Pastukhov wrote on his Telegram channel.

Professional military men are now much better off, too. Not long ago, military salaries were, by Moscow standards, pathetic. A military career attracted only people from poor regions: sure, the salary is small, but the pay is stable; the uniform is free, they feed you, you can retire at 45, and the pension is good compared to a civilian one.

Now, not only do officers receive good money for staying in the combat zone, but they also have excellent opportunities for additional “earnings.” Before, there were quiet rumors that Prigozhin’s Wagner PMC, while recruiting convicts into its ranks, manufactured time at the front, followed by an amnesty six months later, for some inmates who could pay. These days, the trade in “special operation participant” documents has become an open secret: more and more deputies and bureaucrats are announcing that they fought in Ukraine, while even small businessmen who want to protect themselves from raiders and siloviki are getting in on it. For those who are actually in Ukraine, there is the option to pay off your commander so that he does not send you to fight on the front line but rather to, for example, unload shells in the rear.

So what? a cynic would say. What’s wrong if the poor are becoming, if not rich, then at least better off? In Russia, there has been a lot of talk for a long time about the need to reduce inequality – both across the population and across regions – which in Russia was already very high. People got what they wanted, albeit in a terrible way.

How long will there be money for war payments?

Even if we ignore the moral side of getting rich by killing other people, we still must admit that this method of reducing inequality is not only expensive (already a third of federal budget expenditures go toward the war and related payments) but also toxic.

First of all, because war is a short-term affair. The Russia-Ukraine war is unlikely to last a decade, and not only because the sides hardly have enough resources for that. Judging by Putin’s rhetoric, even he is for peace – albeit on his own terms.

Almost the entire West is for ending the war, while China, apparently, is not happy about the current situation. And though predicting the end of a war is a thankless task, we can still say with reasonable confidence that we are talking about 2-3 more years at most. Everyone understands this, including those who are benefitting from the war.

Even now, many in Russia, including high-ranking officials, are asking a completely reasonable question: what will happen when those 300,000-400,000 soldiers, who are accustomed to mortal risk and good money and know how to handle weapons, come back? Of course, the authorities will probably give them benefits, perhaps some kind of regular payments or a preferential mortgage. But it is unlikely that these payments and benefits will be indexed, even to real inflation, which is still high now, while there are no factors suggesting it will come down after hostilities end.

Of course, they will be shown honor and respect and will continue to be invited to schools to speak, just like veterans of the Great Patriotic War in Soviet times. Yet during United Russia primaries for local elections, across the country special operation veterans were sunk – after all, party functionaries did not get into politics to give way to some kind of “new elite.” The candidacy of a former tractor driver who fought in the special operation had to be rammed through so he could become a Federation Council senator.

Others will not be able to live on “veteran payments” alone; they will have to work. But will there be work for those who before the war often did not have a real vocation or who during the war lost the skills they had? Besides them, there are workers at defense factories: today, they work three shifts for good wages, but what about tomorrow? Will they have to choose between keeping their job for the prewar pay of $200 a month or taking a hike?

Not everything is hunky-dory in terms of regional development, either. Yes, the current modernization of the BAM and Trans-Siberian Railway, like other infrastructure projects in Siberia and the Far East, is likely to continue, as if the war ends, trade with China, which has faltered of late amid Chinese fears of secondary sanctions, will certainly pick up. Perhaps, the northwest of the country will see some relief if some sanctions are lifted – at least if the borders are open for the export and import of goods.

But how high will demand and prices be? Inflation around the world is dying down, and the end of the war may also cause prices for key Russian commodities to fall, from oil and gas to metals. For example, Kuzbas coal is already facing headwinds: China does not want to buy more; it just does not need so much. Stockpiling is a bad thing, however: production cannot just be stopped, while stockpiling means direct losses, and no expansion of the Trans-Siberian Railway or the BAM can change that.

Oddly enough, salvation from the crisis for Russian industry might be defeat in the war – at least in the form of an obligation to rebuild what was destroyed in Ukraine. Then there would be a place to sell metals, oil and gas, timber and coal. If the war ends without such an obligation and without the lifting of sanctions, then those who have greatly benefited from the war risk reverting to their starting point. But with weapons in hand and anger at the politicians who promised them everything.

Ben Aris: Ukrainian incursion into Kursk paralyses Russia’s railways

By Ben Aris, Intellinews, 8/19/24

Once the Armed Forces of Ukraine (AFU) took its first Russian railway station inside Russia it was in the position to cause chaos and glean valuable troop movement intel.

“Russia has a fully digitised railway system, so once you access the system of any train station, no matter how small, you have access to the entire network,” Paul Con, a Ukraine observer, said in a social media post.

The AFU breakthrough has led to a severe disruption in railway operations, paralysing key routes across the country. The central office of Russian Railways (RZD) has urgently requested the Belarusian railway authorities to halt the dispatching of freight trains to Russia, as the system has become overloaded, according to a report by the Union of Belarusian Railroad Workers.

The main problem is that a reported 133,000 civilians are fleeing the region at the same time after the AFU crossed the border on August 6. And the situation may be getting worse after Ukrainian forces were seen in the Belgorod region to the north, which has now also declared a state of emergency.

The load has incapacitated RZD’s ability to receive trains from Belarus on the Moscow and Bryansk railway routes, which also abuts the Ukrainian border.

Official documents indicate that the request to stop incoming freight trains was issued on August 12, reflecting the critical situation on the ground. The ban is indefinite, as Russian authorities are uncertain when control over the affected railways will be restored, UA Wire reports.

Transport logistics between Russia and Belarus have reportedly collapsed, with numerous freight trains now stranded in dispatch areas. Russia’s Smolensk region in particular has become a bottleneck, with “abandoned” trains accumulating due to the halted traffic. A lack of locomotives has made the situation worse, UA Wire reports.

What remains unclear is if the AFU has been able to hack the RZD’s IT system to further disrupt the railways, however, once into the system they have been able to glean valuable information about Russia’s troop movements. RZD is reportedly now trying to lock the AFU out of the system.

“It seems that the Ukrainians managed to infiltrate the Russian railway system and were able to track the routes of arms shipments. Completely overhauling the system is currently causing significant headaches for IT specialists in Moscow,” added con.

Russia has been struggling to counter the AFU’s incursion. Other reports say that the expeditionary force has brought upgraded drones with them that use new frequencies that are impervious to Russian electronic warfare jamming, while the AFU has also upgraded their own jamming software which is now highly effective against Russian drones. Western reporters that made it to the Russian-Ukrainian border were surprised with the freedom of movement AFU forces have and the total absence of Russian drones. As bne IntelliNews reported, in the drone war, Russia has had the upper hand until recently.

The Kremlin has been bringing reinforcements up from Donbas to counter the AFU’s incursion, and also troops from as far away as Kaliningrad, but to move men and materiel over such long distances in Russia there are few alternatives to the railway.

Russia Matters: Kamala Harris on Russia

Russia Matters, 8/8/24

Less than three weeks ago, Kamala Harris seemed to be firmly positioned in Joe Biden’s shadow as the incumbent fought to extend Democrats’ control of the White House for another four years. On July 21, however, the low-key VP was propelled to the front of this fight following Biden’s announcement that he was dropping out of the presidential race, a decision with roots in the incumbent’s disastrous debate performance against the GOP’s Donald Trump. The change of Democratic front-runner has made many (including RM’s staff) wonder what policies the world’s most powerful country might pursue under a President Harris. Given the aims of the Russia Matters project, we focused on trying to ascertain what Harris’ public words and actions may tell us about her potential policies toward post-Soviet Eurasia.  

It follows from Harris’ role as vice president under Biden that overall, the new Democratic presidential candidate—who has just chosen Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz as her running mate—shares the traditional post-Soviet American foreign policy establishment view of “Russian people good, Russia’s leaders bad.”  

While Harris didn’t drive the Biden administration’s policy on the Russian-Ukrainian conflict, she was, nevertheless, charged with “walking Volodymyr Zelenskyy through Western intelligence indicating an attack was days away, [and] pushing the Ukrainian president, who had been publicly dismissive of the threat, to prepare for war,” days before Russia invaded Ukraine on Feb. 24, 2022, according to WP’s recent review of her foreign policy views. Speaking five days before that invasion at the 2022 Munich Security Conference, Harris warned that the U.S. would impose “significant and unprecedented economic costs” on Russia if Moscow invaded Ukraine, but reiterated Biden’s position that U.S. forces would not be deployed to fight for Ukraine even as they would participate in “defend[ing] every inch of NATO territory.” One year later, speaking at the 2023 Munich Security Conference, Harris vowed that “the United States will continue to strongly support Ukraine… for as long as it takes.” During that same conference in the capital of Bavaria, Harris proved instrumental in advancing U.S.-led efforts to secure the release of U.S. citizens wrongly detained in Russia in exchange for Russian nationals held for espionage, assassination and other crimes in the West (these efforts bore fruit Aug. 1, 2024, with the largest prisoner exchange between Russia and the West since the Cold War). More recently, Harris represented the United States at the Ukraine Peace Summit in Switzerland on June 15 and 16, 2024, during which she announced $1.5 billion in aid for Ukraine. 

While actively involved in shaping America’s response to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, Harris is also attuned to Russia’s domestic politics. For instance, she was among the first foreign leaders to comment on the death of Russian opposition leader Alexei Navalny in a Russian prison colony on Feb. 16, 2024. “If confirmed, this would be a further sign of Putin’s brutality,” she said on that day. Harris also developed a relationship with Navalny’s wife, Yulia, writing a tribute to her after Time named her one of the 100 Most Influential People of 2024. 

Given that Harris has followed Biden’s line on the Russian-Ukrainian conflict and other issues described above, it could be tempting to predict that a President Harris’ foreign policy toward Russia will simply follow Biden’s lead. Indeed, Harris’ aides have recently told WP that the core of her foreign policy would not likely swerve from Biden’s robust support for Ukraine. However, she is still likely to approach global problems differently from Biden, who has longtime personal relationships with leaders such as Putin, which has shaped his rigid views on many issues, according to WP’s sources.

The compilation of Harris’ views on various issues, which you can find below, is part of Russia Matters’ “Competing Views” rubric, where we share prominent American figures’ takes on issues pertaining to Russia, U.S.-Russian relations and broader U.S. policies affecting Russia. All sections may be updated with new or past statements. The quotes below are divided into categories similar to those in Russia Matters’ news and analysis digests; reflecting the most pertinent topic areas for U.S.-Russian relations broadly, and for the drivers of the two countries’ policies toward one another.

I. U.S. and Russian priorities for the bilateral agenda

Nuclear security and safety:

  • Kamala Harris with Sens. Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Cory Booker (D-N.J.) and Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.) writing in response to the Trump administration’s Nuclear Posture Review: “Our review reportedly pays only superficial attention to the substantial threat posed by nuclear terrorism and nuclear proliferation. These efforts are just as important as deterring existing nuclear weapons states.” (Letter to President Trump, 01.29.18)

North Korea’s nuclear and missile programs:

  • Harris with Sens. Sanders and Warren signed a February 2018 letter to Trump, along with 15 other senators, saying he lacks the “legal authority” to carry out a preemptive strike on North Korea. (WP, 02.05.19)
  • Putin’s potential meeting with Kim Jong Un [would be] an act of desperation … when you look at Russia’s unprovoked war on Ukraine, and the idea that they would supply ammunition to Russia, well, it’s predictable where that ends up. I also believe very strongly that for both Russia and North Korea, this will further isolate them… We are all absolutely clear and unequivocal about the goal of the complete denuclearization of North Korea. (The Hill, 09.10.23)

Iran and its nuclear program:

  • Today’s decision to violate the Iran nuclear deal jeopardizes our national security and isolates us from our closest allies. This nuclear deal is not perfect, but it is certainly the best existing tool we have to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons and avoid a disastrous military conflict in the Middle East. (Kamala Harris’ statement, 05.08.18)
  • Iran poses a real threat to the United States based on its nuclear capabilities, and the negotiation of the JCPOA … was a smart way to put a cap on that in terms of escalating the threat. … If this president is thinking about putting us in a position where we are in a war with Iran, the consequences will be absolutely unacceptable and tragic in terms of the young men and women who are American soldiers sent and deployed into something that was completely avoidable. (MSNBC, 09.16.19)

Humanitarian impact of the Ukraine conflict:

  • Absolutely there should be an investigation and we should all be watching and I have no question that the eyes of the world are on this war and what Russia has done in terms of this aggression and these atrocities. (Reuters, 03.10.22)
  • First, from the starting days of this unprovoked war, we have witnessed Russian forces engage in horrendous atrocities and war crimes. Their actions are an assault on our common values, an attack on our common humanity. And let us be clear: Russian forces have pursued a widespread and systemic attack against a civilian population — gruesome acts of murder, torture, rape, and deportation. … In the case of Russia’s actions in Ukraine, we have examined the evidence. We know the legal standards. And there is no doubt these are crimes against humanity. And I say to all those who have perpetrated these crimes and to their superiors who are complicit in these crimes: You will be held to account. (White House, 02.18.23)

Military and security aspects of the Ukraine conflict and their impacts:

  • There is a playbook of Russian aggression, and this playbook is too familiar to us all. Russia will plead ignorance and innocence. It will create false pretext for invasion, and it will amass troops and fire power in plain sight. … Our forces will not be deployed to fight Ukraine, but they will defend every inch of NATO territory. (Times, 02.22.22)
  • Ukraine has regained more than half the territory Russia occupied at the start of the conflict thanks, in part, to a massive supply of American and European weapons. The Russian military has suffered severe setbacks.  It has lost two thirds of its tanks and more than a third of its fleet in the Black Sea. Because of Putin’s aggression and recklessness, Russia has also suffered over 300,000 casualties. Remember, that’s more than five times what it lost in 10 years in Afghanistan. And now it forces conscripts onto the frontlines with as little as two weeks of training. (White House, 02.16.24)

Military aid to Ukraine: 

  • The United States will continue to strongly support Ukraine. And we will do so for as long as it takes. (White House, 02.18.23)
  • In partnership with supportive, bipartisan majorities in both houses of the United States Congress, we will work to secure critical weapons and resources that Ukraine so badly needs. And let me be clear: The failure to do so would be a gift to Vladimir Putin. (White House, 02.16.24)
  • [To Zelenskyy] the President and I … will continue to work to secure the resources and weapons that you need to succeed. We will also continue to support your efforts to secure a just and lasting peace. … President Zelensky, as President Joe Biden and I have made clear, we will be with you for as long as it takes. (The Hill, 02.17.24)
  • Ukraine needs our support, and we must give it. (NBC, 02.18.24)
  • We see it in Ukraine, where our weapon deliveries and missile warnings help the people of Ukraine defend their homes and homeland, their sovereignty and territorial integrity. (White House, 05.30.24)
  • President Biden and my support for the people of Ukraine is unwavering. We support Ukraine not out of charity but because the people of Ukraine and their future is in our strategic interests. It is in our interest to uphold international rules and norms, such as sovereignty and territorial integrity and the international system we helped create following World War Two, which bolsters America’s security and prosperity. It is in the interest of the United States to defend democratic values and stand up to dictators.  It is in our interest to stand with our friends, such as Ukraine. (White House, 06.15.24)

Punitive measures related to Russia’s war against Ukraine and their impact globally:

  • We are working with our allies in that regard, and we’ve been very clear that we are prepared to issue sanctions [on Russia over Ukraine] like you’ve not seen before. (CBS/RIAN, 12.26.21)
  • We will interpret any violation of Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity by Russia and Vladimir Putin as an aggressive action and it will be met with costs, severe and certain, (ABC, 01.20.22)
  • If Russia further invades Ukraine, the United States, together with our allies and partners, will impose significant and unprecedented economic costs. (White House, 02.19.22)
  • We have also imposed economic costs on Russia for its aggression. And together with our G-7 partners, we have frozen Russia’s sovereign assets and made clear Russia must pay for the damages it has caused to Ukraine … If we fail to impose severe consequences on Russia, other authoritarians across the globe would be emboldened, because you see, they will be watching—they are watching and drawing lessons. (White House, 02.16.24)
  • We will work to make sure Russia pays damages to Ukraine and ultimately, we want to see Ukraine emerge from this war as a nation that is free, democratic and independent. (The Hill, 02.17.24)

Ukraine-related negotiations: 

  • Russia continues to say it is ready to talk while at the same time it narrows the avenues for diplomacy. Their actions simply do not match their words. (AP, 02.19.22)
  • The U.S. was committed to continuing to impose costs on Russia and we will continue to work toward a just and lasting peace. (AP, 06.15.24)
  • In contrast, [Russian ruler Vladimir] Putin put forward a proposal yesterday. However, we must be frank: he is not calling for negotiations, he is calling for surrender. The United States is supporting Ukraine not out of charity but because it is in our strategic interest. (Ukrainska Pravda, 06.15.24)

Great Power rivalry/new Cold War/NATO-Russia relations:

  • Harris cited “public reporting” that the Russian government had put bounties on American soldiers in Afghanistan. (Responsible Statecraft, 10.14.20)
  •  [At the beginning of talks with the leaders of Latvia, Estonia and Lithuania:] I recognize the threats… we stand with you on this and many other issues… and we stand together as NATO allies. (White House, 02.18.22)
  • The NATO alliance is stronger and Russia is weaker because of what Putin has done. (NDTV, 03.10.22)
  • Russia is a bigger country. Russia is a powerful country. Russia decided to invade a smaller country called Ukraine so basically that’s wrong. (Mail Online, 03.01.22)
  • If Putin thinks he can wait us out, he is badly mistaken. Time is not on his side. (White House, 02.18.23)
  • The NATO alliance is stronger now than ever before, and the United States commitment to NATO and to its Article 5 is ironclad. … Our response to the Russian invasion is a demonstration of our collective commitment to uphold international rules and norms… if Putin were to succeed with his attack on these fundamental principles, other nations could feel emboldened to follow his violent example. (White House, 02.18.23)
  • The United States is prepared to defend every inch of NATO territory. (U.S. Embassy in Georgia, 03.14.22)
  • Now, thanks to the leadership of the United States, NATO is stronger, larger, more unified and more effective than ever before. We have reinforced NATO’s eastern flank with more weapons and forces, including air defense and fighter coverage, a sustained presence of army brigades, and a permanent U.S Army headquarters in Poland. (White House, 02.16.24)
  • Donald Trump has embraced Putin. … It’s not just happening today. It’s been happening, as he, Trump, threatened to abandon NATO and encouraged Putin to invade our Allies. (Politico, 07.21.24.)

China-Russia: Allied or aligned?

  • The reality is that North America and Europe have now done more together now than in many years. This is important in dealing with Russia’s aggressive actions, but also in dealing with a more competitive world and the security implications of China’s growth. (CE NoticiasFinancieras, 02.18.22)
  • We must maintain open lines of communication to responsibly manage the competition between our countries.  (AP, 11.19.22)
  • We are also troubled that Beijing has deepened its relationship with Moscow since the war began. Looking ahead, any steps by China to provide lethal support to Russia would only reward aggression, continue the killing, and further undermine a rules-based order. (White House, 02.18.23)

Missile defense:

  • To be updated.

Nuclear arms:

  • Harris with Sens. Sanders, Warren, Booker and Gillibrand writing in response to the Trump administration’s Nuclear Posture Review: “Your purported plans to develop new, more usable low-yield nuclear weapons and reintroduce Cold War-era weapons systems are unnecessary to maintain deterrence and are destabilizing. Further, your reported decision to expand the conditions under which the United States might use its nuclear weapons, including to respond to a broadened range of non-nuclear attacks, is equally disturbing.” (Letter to President Trump, 01.29.18)
  • Harris with Sens. Sanders, Warren, Booker, Klobuchar and Gillibrand to Trump: “Your administration’s efforts to double down on new, unnecessary nuclear weapons while scrapping mutually beneficial treaties risks the United States sliding into another arms race with Russia and erodes U.S. nonproliferation efforts around the world. … A collapse of the INF Treaty and failure to renew New START would lead to the absence of verifiable limits on U.S. and Russian nuclear forces for the first time since the early 1970s. … Abandoning the Treaty would free Russia to expand its capacity to directly threaten the entire U.S. homeland.” (Letter to President Trump, 12.12.18)

Counterterrorism:

  • [Harris on Russian bounties for U.S. soldiers in Afghanistan:] Is the intelligence in doubt? I would say during my three plus years of being on the Senate intelligence committee and therefore being in receipt of classified information about threats to our national security … I have come to highly respect the intelligence community for their professionalism, the detail and precision with which they work … It is well known and understood that part of the responsibility of the president of the United States is to concern himself or herself with the wellbeing of our service members … It would be wonderful to have a president who actually cares about those men and women and expresses some level of concern about their wellbeing but we don’t see that with Donald Trump in any meaningful way. (WP, 07.02.20)
  • No, there is no, whatsoever, any evidence [of Ukraine’s involvement in the Crocus City Hall terrorist attack]. And first, let me start by saying what has happened in an act of terrorism and the number of people who’ve been killed is obviously a tragedy and we should all send our condolences to those families. (The Hill, 03.24.24, ABC, 03.24.24)

Conflict in Syria:

  • Syrian President Bashar al-Assad viciously attacked innocent civilians, including scores of children, who suffocated to death from chemical weapons. This attack reinforces the clear fact that President Assad is not only a ruthless dictator brutalizing his own people—he is a war criminal the international community cannot ignore. President Trump must consult with Congress to address the administration’s lack of clear objectives in Syria and articulate a detailed strategy and path forward in partnership with our allies. (Statement, 04.06.17)
  • What has happened in Syria is yet again Donald Trump selling folks out. And in this case, he sold out the Kurds, who, yes, fought with us and thousands died in our fight against ISIS. And let’s be clear. What Donald Trump has done, because of that phone call with Erdogan, is basically giving 10,000 ISIS fighters a “get out of jail free” card. And you know who the winner is in this? There are four: Russia, Iran, Assad and ISIS. (Democratic debate transcript, 10.16.19)

Cyber security/AI:

  •  [W]e must act urgently to bolster our country’s defenses like our election infrastructure and cybersecurity, a bipartisan issue that we have been working on in a bipartisan way. (Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, 08.01.18)

Elections interference:

  • I think we’re all clear that Russia attacked our country during the 2016 election and that they are continuing to attack us today. Russia not only attacked one of our most sacred democratic values, which is a free and fair election, but also, I believe, our very American identity. … [T]hey manipulated us and they are an adversary and they provoked us and they tried to turn us against each other. (Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, 08.01.18)
  • Russia was able to influence our election because they figured out that racism, sexism, anti-Semitism, homophobia, and transphobia are America’s Achilles heel. These issues aren’t only civil rights — they’re also a matter of national security. We have to deal with that. (Twitter, 02.05.19)
  • On this election issue, this long standing adversary decided that they wanted to attack us where we are strong, and one of the almost intangible strengths of America is we can hold ourselves out as a democracy, as flawed though we may be, it gives us the authority to walk in rooms and actually talk about human rights, talk about civil rights, talk about concepts of freedom. … [T]hey decide to attack the strongest pillar of democracy which is freedom and open elections. So let’s get Americans going at each other, what’s going to get heat? And they tried out a bunch of different things and you know what caught heat? The issue of race. So Russia exposed America’s Achilles heel. (NBC, 08.11.19)
  • We need to … upgrade the elections infrastructure, knowing that Russia needs to be held accountable for the fact that they interfered in the election of the president of the United States and will attempt to do it again. (Democratic debate transcript, 10.15.19)
  • When they influenced our elections, they diminished in some ways the integrity of our election system and therefore their goal was accomplished … and they did it through technology. … Until we can get legislation passed, I would urge that social media companies institute [requiring disclosures] as their policy … 2020 is not going to be immune and [there will be] attacks, misinformation campaigns, distortions of reality and truth to turn the American people off from this election. (Remarks at Lesbians Who Tech Pride Summit, 06.21.20)
  • I serve on the Senate Intelligence Committee. We have published detailed reports about exactly what we believe happened. And I do believe that there will be foreign interference in the 2020 election, and that Russia will be at the front of the line. (WP, 09.06.20)
  • Let’s take for example, Russia. So, I serve on the intelligence committee of the United States Senate. America’s Intelligence Community told us Russia interfered in the election of the president of the United States in 2016 and his plan in 2020. Christopher Wray, the director of the FBI, said the same, but Donald Trump, the commander in chief of the United States of America, prefers to take the word of Vladimir Putin over the word of the American Intelligence Community. You look at our friends at NATO, he has walked away from agreements. (Vice presidential debate, 10.07.20)
  • I serve on the Intelligence Committee of the United States Senate. America’s intelligence community told us Russia interfered in the election of the president of the United States in 2016 and is playing in 2020. (Responsible Statecraft, 10.14.20)

Energy exports:

  • There could be a knock-on impact to energy prices paid by American consumers from ongoing tensions between Russia and Ukraine, U.S. Vice-President Kamala Harris said, adding that the U.S. government is working to mitigate the effects. (Reuters, 02.20.22)

Climate change:

  • To be updated.

U.S.-Russian economic ties:

  • To be updated.

U.S.-Russian relations in general:

  • [On the release of Russian-held prisoners in the Aug. 1, 2024 exchange:] [They and their families] have shown incredible courage in the face of atrocious and devastating circumstances. Russian authorities arrested, convicted them in sham trials, and sentenced them to long prison terms. This has been an appalling perversion of justice. Over many years President Biden and I and our team have engaged in complex diplomatic negotiations to bring these wrongfully detained Americans home. We never stopped fighting for their release… We will never waver in our commitment to bring home every American who has been wrongfully detained or held hostage. That is my solemn commitment to my fellow Americans which I will always honor. (AP News, 08.01.24)

II. Russia’s domestic policies

Domestic politics, economy and energy:

  • [On Alexei Navalny’s death:] If confirmed, this would be a further sign of Putin’s brutality. … Whatever story they tell, let us be clear, Russia is responsible. (Independent Online, 02.16.24)
  • Alexei Navalny has been a brave leader who stood up against corruption and autocracy, and he stood up for the truth. (Presidendcy.ucsb.edu, 02.17.24)
  • [Yulia] Navalnaya has vowed to continue her husband’s fight for justice and the rule of law, giving renewed hope to those working against corruption and for a free, democratic Russia. And in so doing, she demonstrates exceptional selflessness and strength. Since that day in Munich, Navalnaya has emerged not only as a symbol of democratic values, but as a courageous fighter for them. The United States stands with her—and all those fighting for freedom and democracy. (Time, 04.07.24)

Defense and aerospace:

  • [On Russia’s test of an anti-satellite weapon] Without clear norms for the responsible use of space, we face real threats to our national and global security. By blasting debris across space, this irresponsible act endangered the satellites of other nations as well as the astronauts on the International Space Station. (CNN, 12.01.21)

Security, law-enforcement and justice:

  • N/A

III. Russia’s relations with other countries

Russia’s general foreign policy and relations with “far abroad” countries:

  • See Great Powers competition and U.S.-Russian relations in general sections above.

Ukraine:

  • The American people, you see, are in awe of the resolve of the people of Ukraine, in awe of their resilience and righteousness, their willingness to fight for freedom and liberty, and the extraordinary tenacity and leadership of President Zelenskyy. (White House, 02.18.23)

Other post-Soviet republics:

  • President Biden and I have been following events in Georgia with great concern. We worry about developments, such as the Georgian parliament’s recent passage of the foreign agents bill, that could threaten Georgia’s democracy and undermine Georgia’s relationship with the United States and Europe. We applaud your recent actions to veto that anti-democratic measure and your commitment to protect civil society as it comes under threat in Georgia. (Messenger Online, 05.28.24)

Matt Taibbi: American Stasi: Tulsi Gabbard Confirms “Quiet Skies” Nightmare

By Matt Taibbi, Substack, 8/7/24

Tuesday night, while self-styled Democratic nominee Kamala Harris pledged to defend “freedom, compassion, and the rule of law” to cheers in Philadelphia, Hawaii’s Tulsi Gabbard described being tracked by teams of government agents in a surveillance regime more reminiscent of East Germany than a free country. Whistleblowing Air Marshals told Uncover DC Gabbard was singled out as a terror threat under the so-called “Quiet Skies” program, and the former presidential candidate says she noticed.

“The whistleblowers’ account matches my experience,” says Gabbard. “Everything lines up to the day.”

This story began two weeks ago, when the former Hawaii congresswoman returned home after a short trip abroad. In airport after airport, she and her husband Abraham Williams encountered obstacles. First on a flight from Rome to Dallas, then a connecting flight to Austin, and later on different flights for both to cities like Nashville, Orlando, and Atlanta, their boarding passes were marked with the “SSSS” designation, which stands for “Secondary Security Screening Selection.” The “Quad-S” marker is often a sign the traveler has been put on a threat list, and Gabbard and Williams were forced into extensive “random” searches lasting as long as 45 minutes.

“It happened every time I boarded,” says Gabbard. The Iraq war veteran and current Army reservist tends to pack light, but no matter.

“I’ve got a couple of blazers in there, and they’re squeezing every inch of the entire collar, every inch of the sleeves, every inch of the edging of the blazers,” she says. “They’re squeezing or padding down underwear, bras, workout clothes, every inch of every piece of clothing.” Agents unzipped the lining inside the roller board of her suitcase, patting down every inch inside the liner. Gabbard was asked to take every piece of electronics out and turn each on, including her military phone and computer.

That was the other strange thing. “I use my military ID to get through security sometimes,” says Gabbard, who among other things traveled to her reservist base in Oklahoma during this period. Once, she was unable to get through security with military ID. Transportation Security Administration (TSA) agent saw the “SSSS” marker. “The TSA agent said, ‘Why are you Quad-S? You’re in the military,’” explains Gabbard. “And I said, ‘That’s exactly what I’m wondering.’

Examples of “Quad-S” boarding passes. Tulsi Gabbard’s air tickets, as well as those of her husband Abraham, were similarly marked

Gabbard goes on: “Then I said, ‘The only thing I can think of is, I work in politics.’ And he said, oh.”

The agent told her he’d encountered supporters of a certain former president who’d had no issues traveling before, but were now “marked quad-S every time they traveled.” Gabbard shrugged and slogged through, still encountering extra security. At one flight, she says, there were “at least six TSA agents doing additional screening,” along with canine support. “There were dogs in Dallas when we got there, dogs at a couple of the gates.”

She called a colleague, who told her: these things happen, don’t worry. “So I thought, ‘Maybe I’m just being paranoid,’” Gabbard says. Then she saw this past Sunday’s report in Uncover DCa site edited by the well-known Twitter writer Tracy BeanzUncover interviewed Sonya LaBosco, the Executive Director of the Air Marshal National Council (AMNC), an advocacy association for Federal Air Marshals. Disclosing Gabbard had been placed on a domestic terror watch list, the former Marshal LaBosco told a disturbing story:

According to LaBosco… Gabbard is unaware she has two Explosive Detection Canine Teams, one Transportation Security Specialist (explosives), one plainclothes TSA Supervisor, and three Federal Air Marshals on every flight she boards.

Uncover DC said Gabbard was initially placed on the list on July 23rd, and that trios of Air Marshals first began following her on flights on July 25th. As Racket would learn, surveillance was conducted on at least eight flights, with different three-Marshal teams for each flight, part of the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) “Quiet Skies” regimen that can literally surround people with human watchers. There are “potentially 15 or more TSA uniformed and plain clothes” at a gate for such assignments, LaBosco told Racket. The story about Gabbard was surfaced by two TSA whistleblowers, including one detailed to follow her. When Gabbard read this, she felt a shock of recognition.

“When I saw that, I thought, ‘Wow, okay. So everything I was experiencing was exactly what I feared was going on,’” she says.

Though clearly outraged, Gabbard stresses the important part of her story isn’t any inconvenience or insult she’s gone through.

“This is not a woe-is-me situation,” she explains. Instead, “it’s bringing to the forefront… how brazen the political retaliation and abuse of power continues to be under the Biden-Harris administration.”

The former Democratic congresswoman from Hawaii’s 2nd district is far from the first American to be placed under physical surveillance as a “domestic terrorist” threat in post-9/11 America. Especially since January 6th, 2021, when the Quiet Skies program expanded to accommodate a broad effort to track people who were at the Capitol, Americans following Americans on airplanes is no longer uncommon, though the public largely has no idea of the scale of this activity.

However, Gabbard is by far the highest-profile figure to be caught up in this surveillance web. As a war veteran with no connection to J6 or any other known offense, her appearance on a terror watch list is striking, and symbolic of the way politicians and intelligence officials have turned the machinery of the War on Terror inward in the last decade. This aspect of the story galls Gabbard the most.

“I enlisted because of the terrorist attack on 9/11,” Gabbard says. “I was like a lot of Americans. We enlisted to ensure the safety, security, and freedom of the American people and go after the terrorists who attacked us. And so now to have confirmation — I guarantee there are other men and women in uniform or veterans now being targeted.

“I can’t think of a word that adequately captures how I feel. The closest I can think of is the deepest sense of betrayal.” She pauses. “It cuts to the core.”

Gabbard pointed to this summer’s release of documents from the ill-fated “Homeland Intelligence Experts Group,” an advisory panel led by former CIA chief John Brennan and former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper. Litigation filed on behalf of former Ambassador to Germany Ric Grenell led to the disbanding of the group, and the production of documents identifying Trump supporters, people “in the military,” or “religious” as “indicators for extremism or terrorism.” Gabbard says this is an indication that the intelligence community is targeting people of “many stripes,” but “especially so those who still wear the uniform or who have worn the uniform.”

“IN THE MILITARY”: The Homeland Intelligence Experts Group identified soldiers as a heightened risk for domestic terrorism

Neither Gabbard nor, apparently, the whistleblowing Marshals know why the former congresswoman would be on a terror watch list. Gabbard has been a persistent, pointed critic of politicians in the current administration. The day before her reported placement on the TSA list, Gabbard appeared on the Ingraham Angle and criticized the “proxy war” in Ukraine, saying the administration was selling the public “crap” excuses for expanding its military commitment, with intent to turn Ukraine into “another Afghanistan.” A debate clash in the 2020 primary was also a factor in ending Harris’ run that year, featuring the viral line: “She put over 1500 people in jail for marijuana violations and then laughed about it when asked if she ever smoked.”

Gabbard’s account squares with LaBosco’s description of how Quiet Skies works. Surveillance, LaBosco says, is “every flight, every leg. If she has three legs that day, it’ll be nine Air Marshals. So if she does three flights in a day, she’ll have a set of Air Marshals on every one of her flights.” As for canine teams, “They maneuver over to the gate area. You will have plainclothes TSA officers, you will have uniformed TSA officers and the canine teams will be running in the gate area. They’ll have them floating around to try to pick up a scent of something.” LaBosco says these dogs are only trained for explosives, not narcotics.

What now? Gabbard, who has spoken to at least one of the whistleblowers, is reviewing possible courses of action, contacting former congressional colleagues about a possible Hill investigation. In a seemingly related matter, Empower Oversight — the firm that represented FBI whistleblowers Steve Friend and Marcus Allen as well as IRS special agents Gary Shapley and Joseph Ziegler in the Hunter Biden case — sent a letter Monday night to Homeland Security Inspector General Joseph Cuffari demanding an immediate investigation in the Gabbard case. The firm represented an Air Marshal in another ugly Quiet Skies case two years earlier (see below), and though Cuffari’s IG office promised in January 2023 to investigate, there’s no evidence it ever did, making the Gabbard story more troubling.

Worse, Empower today says it’s learned that the TSA has already initiated an investigation to identify the two TSA whistleblowers who leaked “sensitive security information” in Gabbard’s case. The firm sent another letter to the IG this morning asking for help in stopping retaliation before it begins. “A retaliatory investigation that hunts for whistleblowers in order to intimidate them into silence is exactly the wrong step for the agency to take,” the firm wrote, adding that the TSA “should be investigating the abuses on which [Marshals] are blowing the whistle.” The TSA has not commented for this article.

“Quiet Skies” is a Transportation Security Administration (TSA) program for tracking “travelers who may present an elevated risk,” as well as “unknown or partially known terrorists.” It’s a signature initiative for a new vision of the federal enforcement state that, as covered in this space before, moved after 9/11 from an emphasis on making cases and building prosecutions to endless intelligence-gathering as well as “disruption” and “prevention.” In a key moment, the FBI in 2008 put out a new “baseline collection plan,” which urged agents to come with plans to “disrupt” potential “acts of violence” or other “criminal behavior.” Agents began getting credit for an internal metric called “disruptions,” which allowed them to rise without records of prosecutions or even arrests.

Because most investigations under this new system will never lead to court, agents do not have to worry about meeting probable cause standards or justifying surveillance. The behaviors may be technically permitted, even if some would consider them unconstitutional.

“It all comes under the heading of the Department of Pre-Crime,” adds Empower attorney Jason Foster, longtime Chief Investigative Counsel to the Senate Judiciary Committee. “So it’s ‘We don’t have to prove anything. We’re not going to court. We’re just following people.’”

In the wake of 9/11 programs like the TSA’s “No Fly List” and the multi-agency Terrorist Screening Center regularly made the news as the focus of controversies, with criticism often coming from Democrats. In an incident that sounds similar but in fact underscores the expansion of the scope of such programs, the late Massachusetts Senator Ted Kennedy was prevented from boarding planes on five occasions in 2004, apparently because a suspected terrorist was using “Anthony Kennedy” as an alias. These programs symbolized the Bush-era reflex for wide-scale screening of mostly Muslim suspects, and came to be frowned upon as racist and anachronistic. When a judge in 2019 finally declared the Terrorist Screening Database unconstitutional, voices across the spectrum cheered, “It’s about time.”

Despite the perception that terrorist watchlists are a thing of the past, they’ve actually expanded, with Clear Skies representing an aggressive new generation of watchlisting, which no longer just targets Muslims but ranges of alleged domestic offenders. Though it’s theoretically possible Gabbard’s case will prove a mistaken-identity caper à la Kennedy’s incident (“I can’t imagine what, but they might have an excuse,” a Republican House aide counseled), LaBosco insists whistleblowers waited to make sure it wasn’t an “anomaly” before coming forward. “We thought, ‘Maybe this was a mistake,’” she says. “But then, second flight, third flight… no, this is no mistake.”

Quiet Skies eats up an astonishing amount of resources: an Inspector General’s report about the program in 2019 “identified $394 million in funds that could be put to better use,” meaning nearly half the Air Marshals’ budget was being wasted. LaBosco says this is no surprise. “Think about the overtime, the vouchers, the overnight travel, the per diems. Think of all the wasted resources that we so desperately need right now… We’re not going to find a terrorist following Tulsi Gabbard. We’re not even looking for the bad guys anymore.”

Air Marshals have complained more than once about being asked to spy on Americans. The existence of the program was first exposed on July 28, 2018, when Boston Globe writer Jana Winter published an exposé: “Welcome to the Quiet Skies.” The Globe report said 30 or more people were followed every day by Air Marshals, some of whom told the paper they worried the program “may be unconstitutional.”

https://www.youtube-nocookie.com/embed/Z2SVm4AUmMc?rel=0&autoplay=0&showinfo=0&enablejsapi=0

The Globe story led to a July 30th letter Massachusetts Senator Ed Markey to TSA Administrator David Pekoske, asking about reports that the TSA was “monitoring seemingly innocuous behavior such as whether a person slept on the plane, used the bathroom, or obtained a rental car.” The letter was followed by a remarkable (if mostly unattended) hearing in which Markey questioned Pekoske in September 2018.

When Markey asked if it were true that “innocent” Americans not suspected of crimes were followed under Quiet Skies, Pekoske deflected, then said finally, “I wouldn’t use the term ‘innocent.’” The hearing also disclosed that “thousands” of Americans were in the program. Pekoske later conceded Quiet Skies hadn’t led to a single arrest, nor had it foiled any plots, a fact that is apparently still true:

Three years later in July 2021, in a story out of a Philip K. Dick novel, a Senior Federal Air Marshal with 27 years of experience discovered that his wife had been labeled a “domestic terrorist.” She was reportedly targeted for “Special Mission Coverage” for having attended the January 6th speech by Donald Trump at the Capitol, which she did not enter. When the Marshal told his supervisor, he was advised to “let it play out” as “it was not our investigation.”

Eventually, the Marshal turned to aforementioned whistleblower firm Empower Oversight, which helped him file a protected disclosure with the Office of Special Counsel. The OSC on July 8, 2021 wrote back, declining to refer the matter for investigation to the Inspector General’s office. Empower then wrote directly to the Inspector General’s office, which to date has “provided no public accounting of what it has done.” The Marshal did manage to work with the FBI to have his wife’s name removed from the terror watchlist, though this did not slow the program.

Quite the contrary, according to LaBosco, who says the program has grown “off the charts,” especially since January 6th. “They’re watching 8-year-old children. They’re following 17-year-old cheerleaders that were traveling for cheer competitions, people who lost their legs in combat… TSA is out of control against the American people.”

Gabbard’s recent political career has already been marked by bizarre attacks and harassment. A feature describing her as a favorite of the Putin government was timed to the launch of her 2020 presidential campaign, and Hillary Clinton made waves by denouncing her as a Russian “asset.” After this episode, she intends to fight back. “I’m going to be encouraging former colleagues of mine in Congress who I know are concerned about this to exercise their oversight authorities,” she says.

“These actions are those of a tyrannical dictator. There’s no other way to describe what they’re doing.”

Interview with Geoffrey Roberts on Stalin’s Library: A Dictator & His Books

Circus Bazaar Magazine, Episode 16, 5/26/24

This interview covered much more than Stalin. It included a discussion of the Ukraine war and Roberts elaborates on his recent controversial essay in which he suggests that eventual NATO membership for Ukraine could be part of a negotiated resolution of the war. – Natylie

YouTube link here.