‘Strong’ and ‘powerful’ were the words Trump used to describe Putin at the Helsinki Summit last Monday while ‘disastrous’ and ‘treasonous’ are the words being used to describe Trump’s performance.
In a stunning moment that has brought criticism from across the political spectrum, the controversial President seemed to imply that he trusted the word of Putin over the information provided to him by his own intelligence agencies. Once again, Trump sided with Putin’s persistent claim that the Kremlin did not intervene in the 2016 U.S. Presidential election, stating ‘I don’t see any reason why it would be [Russia].’ This came directly after he admitted that U.S agents and intelligence officials had informed him to the contrary. So condemned were his comments, that even his most ardent supporters struggled to find a way to defend Trump against this fresh wave of outrage.
Trump’s praise of Putin came on the back of continued attacks levelled at NATO members just one week earlier. Trump blasted the U.S’ closest allies for not paying their fair share to the military alliance whilst once again expressing his overall disdain for the organisation. Trump took particular aim at Germany, decrying their 1% GDP contribution to NATO (as opposed to the U.S’ 2%) and accused them of being ‘beholden’ to Russia; a claim made in relation to the Nord Stream 2 pipeline project which experts strongly refute.
Then came Robert Mueller’s indictments. Just days before Helsinki, Special Council Mueller who is in charge of investigating the Trump campaign’s potential connection to Russian interference, indicted twelve Russian spies accused of hacking and leaking information from the DNC and Hillary Clinton’s campaign. These spies mostly worked for the Russian military and intelligence agencies GRU, and ultimately answer to Putin in their actions. Interestingly, it appears as though this information was gathered with the help of a number NATO allies, making Trump’s antics as the NATO Summit all the more awkward.
Some have questioned whether the timing of these indictments was intended by Mueller to force Trump’s hand on Putin. If so, Trump failed spectacularly. When asked directly to condemn the attacks, Trump could not bring himself to do so.
In the onslaught of criticism that followed Helsinki, Trump unconvincingly tried to take back his remarks claiming that he misspoke. The misunderstanding was the fault of a double negative, he claimed, instead he meant to say he couldn’t see why if wouldn’t be Russia. However, Trump still couldn’t resist muddying the waters by claiming that other parties still could be involved.
So the question remains, why is Trump so hesitant to blame Russia? Trump’s performance has furthered speculation that Putin has some sort of leverage over Trump. His at times almost gushing praise of Putin looks odd in juxtaposition with his bombastic remarks on other world leaders, such as those made at the NATO summit. As to whether any form of collusion has taken place, only time will tell- and Robert Mueller’s investigation.
