Thoughts on Trump

C

              

                  Thoughts on Trump

          

                    by Kenneth Bagnell

   

             

                                  

    The most deeply worrisome aspect of Donald Trump’s presidency is his very close relationship with Russia. He’s either deeply naïve or his mind has some issues that just might interest psychiatrists.  How can he possibly claim, in his own words, as he did last Wednesday, that he has had: “Nothing to do with Russia; no deals, no loans, no nothing.” That’s why I think he has a real problem. This man, as the media has reported many times, has been to Moscow often to do what he now denies: deal after deal, plus, of course, his very own Miss Universe Pageant in Moscow. There’s much more but one or two references will suffice.

     A month or two ago he said this to CNN:  “Look at Putin, what great things he’s doing, a great job, rebuilding the image of Russia,” At times his glorification of Russia and its leader becomes not glorification but adulation, something no USA President should ever indulge in.  It left me pondering his intelligence and his stability given Russia’s past history and present wall-to-wall spying. Yet not long ago Trump shouted: “Hats off to the Russians.” Really? Russia has been spying on democracies for generations. It’s simply part of their way of life.

     As early as 1920 the Russians had a spy operation up and running in Washington. The objective was to penetrate the American Department of State, especially the US industrial and financial sector. Hence it formed what it slyly called: “The Federation of Architects, Engineers, Chemists and Technicians.” It sounds so credible, all the way back in the 1920s. My point in just this: spying on outsiders is an historic aspect of the Russian governing culture. So, to me at least, it’s no wonder Mr. Putin’s wears an ever so sly smile when he mentions Mr. Trump.

    In fact long ago, in the early 1960’s when I was the proverbial innocent, I witnessed Russia’s inherent spying characteristic. I went to Russia on a lengthy assignment. I travelled through much of it – Moscow to Central Asia to Siberia — to do articles for The Observer, Maclean’s and a few daily papers. On the way, I paused a couple of days in Prague to attend a “Peace Conference,” headed by a renowned and well regarded socialist-clergyman, Josef Hromaka. Afterward I was to broadcast a commentary on it from Prague to CBC Toronto where it was carried on the network. As I read my script, a quiet gentleman, sat across from me apparently just listening. I didn’t pan the conference but, in passing, I did note its very strong leftist perspective. When I finished, I got up, shook hands and left to take my plane to Moscow.

      All went reasonably well in Moscow which was my locale for travelling here and there. While there, I met two mid-level embassy diplomats, one Canadian, one American, telling each when I met them of the travels ahead and the commentary I had delivered. (Both quietly stroked their chins as they heard the latter.) As I came and went from Moscow, one of them came with me often, as a friendly counsel. (We shared common interests because of our relatively common university curriculum.) I’ll always remember his wry statement as he turned the key in his car to begin our tour of central Moscow. He glanced up at the rear view mirror, nodded slightly, then spoke softly: “Don’t be worried because we’re being followed. We know they follow us. And they know we know they follow us. It’s just the way it is.” (When I spoke with one of these men at his office in the embassy, he’d reach behind wall drapes, to flick a switch. It was a noise machine to obscure our conversation from any spy agency.)

     I expect it may be the same today for embassy people and foreign journalists. It can be tense, even worrying. One afternoon I boarded a passenger plane for Siberia. When it was just about to takeoff, a stewardess walked to the front, picked up a microphone, looked out over the roughly 100 passengers and then asked: “Is the journalist from Canada on board?”  I raised my hand. She nodded. But for a distinct few seconds, she just stared at me.  Now, over 50 years later, I still see the expression on her face. I know, almost for certain, that she was wordlessly saying to me: “For God’s sake be careful.”  I’m reasonably sure that under Putin that atmosphere is still at the heart of the Russian bureaucracy.

     Today the Russian spy agency is clearly exploiting Trump’s crude and rude style. A few days ago, the reliable Associated Press reported this analysis of the Trump leadership in Washington: “The incoming administration has already begun to lay groundwork with Moscow. That effort appears to be moving ahead, even as many in Washington, including Republicans, have expressed outrage over intelligence officials’ assessment that Putin has launched a hacking operation aimed at meddling in in the US election to benefit Trump.” In fact, it’s gotten worse: Trump is appointing a man to the post of National Security Advisor who has worrying credentials for that post. Michael Flynn is his name and he already has biased and very sympathetic relationships with Russia. (He’s a close friend of the Russia ambassador in Washington, he has often appeared on Russia state television and has even flown to a gala in Moscow year ago and – get ready -he sat beside President Putin. This man has now been made the US National Security Advisor.

   Obviously, all this and more, has raised deepening tension not just in the US but other countries: Poland, and Latvia, Denmark and Germany and many more. They have turned to their militia. A number have, under NATO, already taken military steps, not major but symbolic. For example, Canada has been asked by the US, to delegate a militia of about 1,000 to be stationed ins nearby countries, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, and others. To me, this aspect is an extremely delicate issue, one that should be designed with great diplomacy. (Also, concerning it, we have sensitivities in our Canadian population that must be taken into account. For one: we must not appear to be in the pocket of the US, by deploying militia next door to countries from which a great many new Canadians have come.)  At the very least, we’re facing a highly sensitive future.

       Nonetheless the questions that will leave scholars writing books for years to come are these: (a) how in the world did Donald Trump ever become leader of the world’s largest and most influential democracy and (b) what can we do about it? I have one idea only. It’s the wry but wise counsel made years ago by one of history’s truly great men, Winston Churchill. He said this: “If you’re going through hell, keep going.”    

 

     My other blogs and some articles are archived on my website;    your comments are welcome there: www.kennethbagnell.com.