So Ukraine elected a billionaire chocolate maker as their new President, yes? Big mistake, you guys. Send ten crates of these delicious ice cream treats to the Kremlin by Friday or it is fucking invasion time.
Why hasn’t the Russian establishment been hit by a right-wing populist opposition?
There are enough war dead that Russia’s establishment should be having real problems. The Russian establishment has put the country under enough strain that Russian voters should be looking for an alternative.
Russians might be conservative nationalists, but they, more than anyone, should be weary of military adventurism, diplomatic confrontation, corruption, and the cynicism and casual brutality of their political class.
Now, it’d be easy to paint liberal cosmopolitans as foreign puppets. That’s fine. The Russian opposition doesn’t have to be liberal or cosmopolitan. It can be conservative and nationalist. It just needs to be anti-establishment, anti-corruption, and anti-militarist.
So why hasn’t that happened?
I don’t know much about Russian politics, but I think that Vladimir Zhirinovsky is the problem. Zhirinovsky occupies the right-wing populist space, where a better politician could effectively challenge Putin. Unfortunately, the man himself is … a bit much.
There’s some of that muchness below the jump. It’s worth reading. But consider this your content warning.
Hi. I’m from Ukraine and I want to tell you something. this shit with election happened to us once. We had a strong and clever woman by the name Yulia Timoshenko running against Victor Yanukovich, the worst person ever. The Jerk actually won and EVERYONE regretted it. And he got Yulia Timoshenko in jail on false charges. Than we had the worse presidency which led to Maidan revolution. The only reason we got rid of Yanukovich it because we united and made him run to Russia with tail between his legs. Timoshenko was released from prison. Yanukovich is wanted for high treason.
“Trump can’t do all of this awful stuff, he will be checked”
Yeah, sure. i hope it won’t take hundreds of people dead before you see, that limitations only work when people want them to.
Yanukovich’s actions’ aftermath is Russians invading Ukraine.
I escaped from that shit, I came to America and hoped to be safe.
I guess people are not so different in different countries as everyone thinks.
Early last August, an envelope with extraordinary handling restrictions arrived at the White House. Sent by courier from the CIA, it carried “eyes only” instructions that its contents be shown to just four people: President Barack Obama and three senior aides.
Inside was an intelligence bombshell, a report drawn from sourcing deep inside the Russian government that detailed Russian President Vladimir Putin’s direct involvement in a cyber campaign to disrupt and discredit the U.S. presidential race.
But it went further. The intelligence captured Putin’s specific instructions on the operation’s audacious objectives — defeat or at least damage the Democratic nominee, Hillary Clinton, and help elect her opponent, Donald Trump.
At that point, the outlines of the Russian assault on the U.S. election were increasingly apparent. Hackers with ties to Russian intelligence services had been rummaging through Democratic Party computer networks, as well as some Republican systems, for more than a year. In July, the FBI had opened an investigation of contacts between Russian officials and Trump associates. And on July 22, nearly 20,000 emails stolen from the Democratic National Committee were dumped online by WikiLeaks.
But at the highest levels of government, among those responsible for managing the crisis, the first moment of true foreboding about Russia’s intentions arrived with that CIA intelligence.
The material was so sensitive that CIA Director John Brennan kept it out of the President’s Daily Brief, concerned that even that restricted report’s distribution was too broad. The CIA package came with instructions that it be returned immediately after it was read. To guard against leaks, subsequent meetings in the Situation Room followed the same protocols as planning sessions for the Osama bin Laden raid.
It took time for other parts of the intelligence community to endorse the CIA’s view. Only in the administration’s final weeks in office did it tell the public, in a declassified report, what officials had learned from Brennan in August — that Putin was working to elect Trump.
[Putin ‘ordered’ effort to undermine faith in U.S. election and help Trump, report says]
Over that five-month interval, the Obama administration secretly debated dozens of options for deterring or punishing Russia, including cyberattacks on Russian infrastructure, the release of CIA-gathered material that might embarrass Putin and sanctions that officials said could “crater” the Russian economy.
But in the end, in late December, Obama approved a modest package combining measures that had been drawn up to punish Russia for other issues — expulsions of 35 diplomats and the closure of two Russian compounds — with economic sanctions so narrowly targeted that even those who helped design them describe their impact as largely symbolic.
Obama also approved a previously undisclosed covert measure that authorized planting cyber weapons in Russia’s infrastructure, the digital equivalent of bombs that could be detonated if the United States found itself in an escalating exchange with Moscow. The project, which Obama approved in a covert-action finding, was still in its planning stages when Obama left office. It would be up to President Trump to decide whether to use the capability.
In political terms, Russia’s interference was the crime of the century, an unprecedented and largely successful destabilizing attack on American democracy. It was a case that took almost no time to solve, traced to the Kremlin through cyber-forensics and intelligence on Putin’s involvement. And yet, because of the divergent ways Obama and Trump have handled the matter, Moscow appears unlikely to face proportionate consequences.
Those closest to Obama defend the administration’s response to Russia’s meddling. They note that by August it was too late to prevent the transfer to WikiLeaks and other groups of the troves of emails that would spill out in the ensuing months. They believe that a series of warnings — including one that Obama delivered to Putin in September — prompted Moscow to abandon any plans of further aggression, such as sabotage of U.S. voting systems.
Denis McDonough, who served as Obama’s chief of staff, said that the administration regarded Russia’s interference as an attack on the “heart of our system.”
“We set out from a first-order principle that required us to defend the integrity of the vote,” McDonough said in an interview. “Importantly, we did that. It’s also important to establish what happened and what they attempted to do so as to ensure that we take the steps necessary to stop it from happening again.”
But other administration officials look back on the Russia period with remorse.
“It is the hardest thing about my entire time in government to defend,” said a former senior Obama administration official involved in White House deliberations on Russia. “I feel like we sort of choked.”
The post-election period has been dominated by the overlapping investigations into whether Trump associates colluded with Russia before the election and whether the president sought to obstruct the FBI probe afterward. That spectacle has obscured the magnitude of Moscow’s attempt to hijack a precious and now vulnerable-seeming American democratic process.
Beset by allegations of hidden ties between his campaign and Russia, Trump has shown no inclination to revisit the matter and has denied any collusion or obstruction on his part. As a result, the expulsions and modest sanctions announced by Obama on Dec. 29 continue to stand as the United States’ most forceful response.
“The punishment did not fit the crime,” said Michael McFaul, who served as U.S. ambassador to Russia for the Obama administration from 2012 to 2014. “Russia violated our sovereignty, meddling in one of our most sacred acts as a democracy — electing our president. The Kremlin should have paid a much higher price for that attack. And U.S. policymakers now — both in the White House and Congress — should consider new actions to deter future Russian interventions.”
The Senate this month passed a bill that would impose additional election- and Ukraine-related sanctions on Moscow and limit Trump’s ability to lift them. The measure requires House approval, however, and Trump’s signature.
This account of the Obama administration’s response to Russia’s interference is based on interviews with more than three dozen current and former U.S. officials in senior positions in government, including at the White House, the State, Defense and Homeland Security departments, and U.S. intelligence services. Most agreed to speak only on the condition of anonymity, citing the sensitivity of the issue.
The White House, the CIA, the FBI, the National Security Agency and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence declined to comment.
The secrecy extended into the White House.
Susan Rice, Avril Haines and White House homeland-security adviser Lisa Monaco convened meetings in the Situation Room to weigh the mounting evidence of Russian interference and generate options for how to respond. At first, only four senior security officials were allowed to attend: Brennan, Clapper, Attorney General Loretta E. Lynch and FBI Director James B. Comey. Aides ordinarily allowed entry as “plus-ones” were barred.
Gradually, the circle widened to include Vice President Biden and others. Agendas sent to Cabinet secretaries — including John F. Kerry at the State Department and Ashton B. Carter at the Pentagon — arrived in envelopes that subordinates were not supposed to open. Sometimes the agendas were withheld until participants had taken their seats in the Situation Room.
Throughout his presidency, Obama’s approach to national security challenges was deliberate and cautious. He came into office seeking to end wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. He was loath to act without support from allies overseas and firm political footing at home. He was drawn only reluctantly into foreign crises, such as the civil war in Syria, that presented no clear exit for the United States.
Obama’s approach often seemed reducible to a single imperative: Don’t make things worse. As brazen as the Russian attacks on the election seemed, Obama and his top advisers feared that things could get far worse.
They were concerned that any pre-election response could provoke an escalation from Putin. Moscow’s meddling to that point was seen as deeply concerning but unlikely to materially affect the outcome of the election. Far more worrisome to the Obama team was the prospect of a cyber-assault on voting systems before and on Election Day.
They also worried that any action they took would be perceived as political interference in an already volatile campaign. By August, Trump was predicting that the election would be rigged. Obama officials feared providing fuel to such claims, playing into Russia’s efforts to discredit the outcome and potentially contaminating the expected Clinton triumph.
Before departing for an August vacation to Martha’s Vineyard, Obama instructed aides to pursue ways to deter Moscow and proceed along three main paths: Get a high-confidence assessment from U.S. intelligence agencies on Russia’s role and intent; shore up any vulnerabilities in state-run election systems; and seek bipartisan support from congressional leaders for a statement condemning Moscow and urging states to accept federal help.
In an envelope from the CIA shown to just former President Obama and 3 other aides of his in August 2016, the letter revealed that Putin had a gameplan: defeat (or least severely weaken) Hillary and elect Trump as the 45th President.
Last month, allegedly United Arab Emirates-backed hackers planted a false, inflammatory story on Qatari news sites that contributed to the disruption of Middle East relations. Last year, a Russian hacking and disinformation campaign targeted the US presidential election. Ukraine has been under constant strain of cyberattack for years now. And yet despite these clear and present dangers, the US State Department plans to shutter its Cyber Security branch, according to multiple reports and confirmed independently to WIRED by a person familiar with the matter.
The move doesn’t just potentially weaken America’s ability to cope with increasing cyber threats at home and abroad. It also underscores the State Department’s blindness to the current global state of affairs. In 2017, cyberhacking serves not only as a pointed tool for nations and nation-state-backed hackers to take down power grids, but an easily accessible tool available to whoever wants to wreak world havoc by targeting information. Disinformation campaigns like the one that rocked Qatar go one step further, threatening to undermine base reality. The dangers that cyberattacks present require exactly the kind of coordinated, international response that the State Department should invest in, not bury in a bureaucratic backwater…
Tillerson plans to place the office under the umbrella of the economic bureau, sending the message that cybersecurity is a business matter, rather than integral to national and international stability. Christopher Painter, well-respected leader of the cybersecurity team, is being forced out at the end of the month, taking with him much-needed expertise…
Experts across the political spectrum describe this as a bad idea.
Republicans would like to stabilize the Ukraine, help their economy. Fair enough. It’s the fact that they did the exact opposite in America in their attempts to destabilize our economy and hurt the US Auto Industry.
Vote out these obstructionist bastards in 2014 and 2016.
KIEV, UKRAINE - MAY 22: Kiev’s mayoral candidate for the Internet Party, ‘Darth Vader’ arrives to speak to the media on Volodymyrska Hill on May 22, 2014 in Kiev, Ukraine. Ukraine’s Presidential elections are to be held on Sunday 25 May. (Photo by Dan Kitwood/Getty Images)
UKRAINE, Kiev : A man wearing the outfit of iconic movie villain Darth Vader ®, who announced he was running for president as the official candidate of the Ukrainian Internet Party (UIP), meets with Ukrainian soldiers within a protest action in front of the Central Election Commission building in Kiev on April 3, 2014. The Sith Lord, or at least an unnamed protester dressed up as him who has often been seen on Kiev’s Independence Square during the winter protests flanked by his loyal Stormtroopers, has been chosen as the official candidate of the Ukrainian Internet Party (UIP) which has become known for its theatrical public stunts. Ukraine is holding a snap presidential election on May 25, 2014 after parliament ousted pro-Moscow leader Viktor Yanukovych following months of protests. AFP PHOTO/ SERGEI SUPINSKY
The Ukrainian elections are Sunday, and there’s still uncertainty that they will actually take place in eastern Ukraine. VICE News correspondent Simon Ostrovsky travels around the eastern part of the country to gauge the vibe before election day.
UKRAINE, Kiev : A girl walks past booths at a polling station in Kiev on October 25, 2014, on the eve of the country’s parliamentary elections. Ukrainian leaders made final appeals to voters ahead of snap parliamentary elections on October 26 that are intended to give impetus to democratic reforms, but are overshadowed by deepening conflict with Russia and pro-Russian rebels. AFP PHOTO/ VASILY MAXIMOV