Остров свободы

[tijd]

Кристофер Стил внезапно прервал молчание и дал интервью в подкасте Дэмиана Коллинза, консервативного члена британского парламента. Принципиально нового он, правда, ничего не сказал.

In an interview with Conservative MP Damian Collins, he warned that Russia is targeting all political parties.
He added the UK had been "behind the curve" in deterring Russian activity.
Speaking on Mr Collins' podcast, Infotagion, Mr Steele said political parties in the UK are being targeted, whether through donations or cyber-hacking, and must proactively approach the security services for help.
Mr Steele argued that Moscow's aim was "to create great polarity, great partisanship and divisions within political life, the likes of which we have not seen in democracies before".
He said the Kremlin was seeking to shatter consensus and push political debate to the extremes, pointing to Brexit as an example.
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-53685051

🆕 EXCLUSIVE: Ex-MI6 officer Chris Steele joins @DamianCollins, @LukeHarding1968 @Guardian & @CharlesKriel for his 1st ever on-the-record interview 🇷🇺🇺🇸🇬🇧 #RussiaReport

🎙️ Spotify https://t.co/gBeu7TCJf7
🎙️ Apple https://t.co/2ktoiiS0Vh
🎙️ Infotagion https://t.co/DjprkEnJQX pic.twitter.com/CVAs66wvQd
- infotagion (@infotagion) August 6, 2020

Экспертные показания Стила использовались в отчете парламентского расследования о российских операциях, который был опубликован после долгой задержки. В отчете дается четкий диагноз путинской мотивации.

Russia is simultaneously both very strong and very weak. The strengths which Russia retains are largely its inheritances from the USSR and its status as a victor of the Second World War: nuclear weapons, a space presence and a permanent seat on the UN Security Council. By contrast, it has a small population compared with the West; a lack of both reliable partners and cultural influence outside the countries of the former USSR; a lack of strong public and democratic institutions, including the rule of law; and, of course, a weak economy.
Despite its economic weakness, it nonetheless heavily resources its intelligence services and armed forces, which are disproportionately large and powerful. Moreover, Russia is adept at using its apparent weaknesses to its advantage: for example, its poor national brand and lack of long-term global friends appear to feed its enormous risk appetite - perhaps on the basis that it thinks it has nothing to lose; its lack of democracy and rule of law allows its intelligence agencies to act quickly, without constraint or consideration; and its lack of strong independent public bodies and the fusion of government and business allow it to leverage all its intelligence, military and economic power at the same time to pose an all-encompassing security threat.
The security threat posed by Russia is difficult for the West to manage as, in our view and that of many others, it appears fundamentally nihilistic. Russia seems to see foreign policy as a zero-sum game: any actions it can take which damage the West are fundamentally good for Russia. It is also seemingly fed by paranoia, believing that Western institutions such as NATO and the EU have a far more aggressive posture towards it than they do in reality. There is also a sense that Russia believes that an undemocratic ‘might is right’ world order plays to its strengths, which leads it to seek to undermine the Rules Based International Order - whilst nonetheless benefitting from its membership of international political and economic institutions.
Russia’s substantive aims, however, are relatively limited: it wishes to be seen as a resurgent ‘great power’ - in particular, dominating the countries of the former USSR - and to ensure that the privileged position of its leadership clique is not damaged.
https://docs.google.com/a/independent.gov.uk/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=aW5kZXBlbmRlbnQuZ292LnVrfGlzY3xneDo1Y2RhMGEyN2Y3NjM0OWFl

Click to view

В отчете пишется о недостаточных усилиях британских спецслужб, которые не только не смогли предотвратить российскую атаку на голосование о Брекзиту, но и опубликовать отчет об этой атаке, подобный отчету американской разведки об атаке на выборы 2016. Там также отмечается опасность проникновения российских олигархов в Британию вместе с отмыванием ворованных денег и коррупционной активностью.

Whilst the Russian elite have developed ties with a number of countries in recent years, it would appear that the UK has been viewed as a particularly favourable destination for Russian oligarchs and their money. I t is widely recognised that the key to London’s appeal was the exploitation of the UK’s investor visa scheme, introduced in 1994, followed by the promotion of a light and limited touch to regulation, with London’s strong capital and housing m arkets offering sound investment opportunities. The UK’s rule of law and judicial system were also seen as a draw. The UK welcomed Russian money, and few questions - if any - were asked about the provenance of this considerable wealth. It appears that the UK Government at the time held the belief (more perhaps in hope than expectation) that developing links with major Russian companies would promote good governance by encouraging ethical and transparent practices, and the adoption of a law-based commercial environment. What is now clear is that it was in fact counter-productive, in that it offered ideal mechanisms by which illicit finance could be recycled through what has been referred to as the London ‘laundromat’. The money was also invested in extending patronage and building influence across a wide sphere of the British establishment - PR firms, charities, political interests, academia and cultural institutions were all willing beneficiaries of Russian money, contributing to a ‘reputation laundering’ process. In brief, Russian influence in the UK is ‘the new normal’, and there are a lot of Russians with very close links to Putin who are well integrated into the UK business and social scene, and accepted because of their wealth. This level of integration - in ‘Londongrad’ in particular - means that any measures now being taken by the Government are not preventative but rather constitute damage limitation. It is not just the oligarchs either: the arrival of Russian money resulted in a growth industry of enablers - individuals and organisations who manage and lobby for the Russian elite in the UK. Lawyers, accountants, estate agents and PR professionals have played a role, wittingly or unwittingly, in the extension of Russian influence which is often linked to promoting the nefarious interests of the Russian state. A large private security industry has developed in the UK to service the needs of the Russian elite, in which British companies protect the oligarchs and their families, seek kompromat on competitors, and on occasion help launder money through offshore shell companies and fabricate ‘due diligence’ reports, while lawyers provide litigation support.



Как бы в насмешку над этим отчетом Борис Джонсон выдвинул в лорды своего приятеля Евгения Лебедева, сына мутного олигарха Александра Лебедева, бывшего сотрудника ПГУ КГБ СССР. Вечеринку празднования дня рожденья Лебедева-старшего Джонсон посетил на следующий день после победы на выборах 2019.

Boris Johnson has never made any secret of his enduring friendship with Evgeny Lebedev, the Russian-born newspaper owner with a reputation for throwing decadent parties.
He has just been less keen to discuss what happens at these glamorous events, many of which have taken place at Lebedev’s restored castle in Perugia, Italy.
The pair first got to know each other in 2009 when Lebedev, then a man-about-town in his late 20s and best known in the tabloids for dating Joely Richardson and Geri Haliwell, bought the London Evening Standard with the help of his father, Alexander, a former KGB agent.
Lebedev, advised by the future Daily Mail editor Geordie Greig, decided to turn London’s biggest newspaper into a freesheet, giving him substantial influence over the capital’s politics. As a result Johnson, as mayor, was a regular social guest of Lebedev, aware of the influence of the hundreds of thousands of Evening Standards strewn over the commuter network.
When Johnson narrowly won re-election over Ken Livingstone in 2012, it was aided by an unusual front page Evening Standard editorial urging voters to back the “right choice for London”.
In 2015, Johnson and Lebedev spent a night on London’s streets together to highlight the issues of homelessness and rough sleeping.
Lebedev has often used the Evening Standard to promote his social circle, appearing in charity photoshoots and putting himself in the gallery of pictures from the newspaper’s annual theatre awards.
He is a noted animal lover and in 2012 told the Guardian: “I’ve got a flat in Italy, and I have a wolf there. His name is Boris. He likes to nibble on people’s backsides. And consumes a lot of kilos of meat a day.”
For Lebedev’s weekend parties at his restored Perugia mansion, guests were often flown from London on private jets.
Johnson is reported to have gone at least four times; on one visit he had allegedly been a guest alongside the model Katie Price. After another visit, while serving as foreign secretary, he refused to answer questions from the Guardian about whether he had kept his security detail while in the castle - although a picture of a dishevelled Johnson was provided by a member of the public.
Lebedev has always enjoyed the social spotlight. The Guardian has revealed how in 2018 he hosted the Saudi crown prince, Mohammed bin Salman, for a private dinner with high-profile guests including Richard Branson.
In December 2019 he hosted a birthday party for his father, which the prime minister attended the day after celebrating his general election victory.
https://www.theguardian.com/media/2020/jul/31/johnson-peerage-for-lebedev-crowns-mutually-beneficial-friendship



В подкасте Коллинза принимал участие также Люк Хардинг, автор новой книжки "Shadow State: Murder, Mayhem, and Russia's Remaking of the West", которая пытается увязывать различные российские спецоперации в единый контекст. Из рецензии другого известного британского журналиста-расследователя Джона Свини:

This necessary book starts, as it must, with the Salisbury poisonings two years ago: the attempt by Russian military intelligence, the GRU, to assassinate one of their traitors, Sergei Skripal. They failed but they did kill Dawn Sturgess, an entirely innocent Wiltshire woman, and for a time wrecked ordinary life in a quiet cathedral town. Ludicrously, the two gormless suspects claimed they had gone to Salisbury during a bitter cold snap - the beast from the east - to inspect the cathedral, “famous for its 123-metre spire”.
Then our weird but brilliant nerd army, Bellingcat, went to work on their laptops and scoured Russia’s open and not-so-open media sources, and through dogged deduction managed to out the real names of the two suspects, Anatoliy Chepiga and Alexander Mishkin.
The critical detail in all this was the method, Novichok, a nerve agent only manufactured by Russia’s secret state. Anyone who has spent time in Russia will know that a hit of this kind could only happen with the say-so of the master of the Kremlin. Two years on, note the failure of western leaders to bring Vladimir Putin properly to account for the Salisbury poisonings.
In Shadow State, Luke Harding’s mission is to explain the reasons for this failure and tell the broader story of how the Kremlin has triumphed in the post-cold war era. Harding, the Guardian’s former Moscow correspondent, knows his snow on their boots. He was effectively expelled from Russia in 2011 for the crime of getting under the Kremlin’s skin, something too many Moscow correspondents fail to do. That episode led to his book, Mafia State, followed by works on the Litvinenko poisoning and on Trump-Russia, the bestseller Collusion. Shadow State reads like a thriller, but he hasn’t made it up.
Six months after the GRU men screwed up in Salisbury, their boss, Igor Korobov, died in mysterious circumstances. Harding interviews a former GRU officer, Viktor Suvorov, who says: “My spy instinct tells me that Korobov was murdered. Everyone sitting inside GRU would understand this, 125%.” If this all feels like a rejected Bond script, one should note Catherine Belton’s story in her book, Putin’s People, that the Russian president spent his formative years as a KGB officer, running far-left terrorists in the Red Army Faction active in West Germany from his base in Dresden in East Germany. Putin is only doing now what he knows best: running infiltration agents to sow chaos in the west.
Harding sets out the evidence that Putin’s best agent could be the president of the United States; that Donald Trump is, perhaps, the biggest, the most powerful traitor in modern history. He talks to Christopher Steele, MI6’s former top officer in Moscow, whose infamous report points to a number of sources saying Trump hired two sex workers to urinate on the bed in the fancy Moscow hotel where the Obamas had once stayed. Trump, when challenged about this, hit back: “I’m a germaphobe.” True, but he could have enjoyed the show while sitting well back.
Harding’s thriller-for-real gets bleaker yet when he sets out the scene for the summit between Putin and Trump in Helsinki in 2018. He writes: “As every sentient human being was aware, Trump denied collusion with Russia. And yet his behaviour with Putin seemed, well, furtive. There was no other word for it.”
https://www.theguardian.com/books/2020/jul/05/shadow-state-by-luke-harding-review-putins-poisonous-path-to-victory



В США между тем не прекращаются отчаянная активность по попыткам дискредитации досье Стила и расследования контрразведки ФБР. Главную скрипку играет Линдси Грэм, глава юридической комиссии Сената, который в сотрудничестве с генпрокурором Барром, рассекречивает документы ФБР.

В рассекреченном докладе ФБР Конгрессу говорится о показаниях в ФБР одного из источников Стила и о соответствующем выводе ФБР о том, что Стил не выдумывал своего досье, а с профессионализмом разведчика собирал информацию от источников.

At minimum, our discussions with [...] confirm that the dossier was not fabricated by Steele. Our discussions with [...] confirmed that he operates within high level academic and government circles, maintains trusted relationships with individuals who are capable of reporting on the material he collected for Steele, and that Steele and [...] utilized reasonably sound intelligence tradecraft.
https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/FBI%20SSCI%20Briefing%20Document%202018.pdf



Эта публикация позволила энтузиастам вычислить имя секретного источника. Им оказался Игорь Данченко.

The F.B.I. had approached the expert, a man named Igor Danchenko, as it vetted the dossier’s claims. He agreed to tell investigators what he knew with an important condition, people familiar with the matter said - that the F.B.I. keep his identity secret so he could protect himself, his sources and his family and friends in Russia.
But his hope of remaining anonymous evaporated last week after Attorney General William P. Barr directed the F.B.I. to declassify a redacted report about its three-day interview of Mr. Danchenko in 2017 and hand it over to Senator Lindsey Graham, Republican of South Carolina and chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee. Mr. Graham promptly made the interview summary public while calling the entire Russia investigation “corrupt.”
The report blacked out Mr. Danchenko’s name and other identifying information. But within two days, a post on a newly created blog entitled “I Found the Primary Subsource” identified him, citing clues left visible in the F.B.I. document. A pseudonymous Twitter account created in May then promoted the existence of the blog. And the next day, RT, the Kremlin-owned, English-language news and propaganda outlet, published an article amplifying Mr. Danchenko’s identification.
The decision by Justice Department and F.B.I. leaders to divulge such a report was highly unusual and created the risk it would help identify a person who had confidentially provided information to agents, even if officials did not intend to provide such a road map. The move comes at a time when Mr. Barr, who is to testify before lawmakers on Tuesday, has repeatedly been accused of abusing his powers to help Mr. Trump politically.
Former law enforcement officials said the outing will make it harder for F.B.I. agents to gain the trust of people they need to cooperate in future and unrelated investigations.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/25/us/politics/igor-danchenko-steele-dossier.html



Данченко прославился в прошлом раскрытием плагиата в липовой кандидатской диссертации Путина.

- Расскажите, чем вы занимались в 2006 году, когда обнаружили плагиат в диссертации Путина?
- Я занимался изучением политэкономии на территории СНГ, что продолжаю делать до сих пор. Правда, в 2006 году я больше был сосредоточен на академической среде и работал в крупном научно-исследовательском центре США - The Brookings Institution, это такой think tank. В The Brookings Institution государственных денег ноль, он существует на гранты различных фондов (вроде Карнеги или Макартура) и пожертвования, например, крупных алюминиевых, газовых компаний, которым это создает положительную репутацию. В то время часто возникали вопросы по нефти и газу, стратегии развития России и насколько для нее является определяющим нефтегазовый сектор. Тогда на этот счет еще шли дебаты; это сейчас уже все смирились, что если у России и существует какое-то конкурентное преимущество - это в первую очередь нефть и газ, а страна точно никуда от этого не денется в ближайшие десятилетия.
- Как в таком случае вы решили обратиться к диссертации Путина? Вроде бы она не должна была находиться в сфере ваших интересов.
- Тогда было очень интересно понять, какие мысли в голове у Владимира Путина, человека, который целиком определяет вектор развития России, что им реально движет. В этом, пожалуй, до сих пор толком не разобрались. На Западе до сих пор часто выходят спекулятивные статьи о Путине с вопросом «Who is mister Putin?». Разведчик не разведчик, злодей не злодей; выливают иногда на него грязь. А хороших источников на этот счет тогда было совсем немного: книга «От первого лица», где, кстати, Путин много сказал вполне откровенного, какие-то его редкие интервью западной прессе и стенограммы речей на сайте Кремля. Но при этом было известно, что Путин написал диссертацию, - это должен был быть довольно интересный источник, который необходимо изучить.
- Тем не менее кроме вас этого никто не сделал. Сложно было найти текст диссертации?
- Все газеты-журналы тогда писали, что диссертация Путина недоступна простому смертному, это такая ценная информация, которую нигде нельзя достать. Но я пришел в Ленинскую библиотеку в Москве, там вбил в компьютере слово «Путин», получил результат - там была и диссертация. Я ее взял, заплатил 500 рублей, скопировал и прочитал.
- Когда Путин ее писал?
- В 1997 году, когда уже перебрался в Москву и работал в администрации президента России. Путин защищал ее в Горном институте Петербурга, став кандидатом экономических наук. Его научным руководителем был Владимир Литвиненко, который до сих пор ректор в Горном институте. Он, кстати, постоянно выступал доверенным лицом Путина на выборах. Сейчас Литвиненко владеет 5% акций «Апатита». Зная, сколько акции «Апатита» стоят, можно сказать, что Литвиненко является долларовым миллионером.
- Как вы обнаружили в диссертации плагиат?
- В списке использованной литературы там был указан один западный источник - книга о стратегическом планировании двух профессоров из Питтсбургского университета, которая давно за ненадобностью пылится на полках. Идеей стратегического планирования активно интересовались в Советском Союзе, Андропов искал какие-то гибриды капиталистической и социалистической экономической модели. В 1982 году книгу перевели на русский, и на ее перевод ссылался Путин. На русском языке я поначалу книгу не нашел, но встретил английский оригинал, купил за пять долларов в интернете и начал читать. Открыл там какую-то случайную главу, вторую, что ли, читаю и чувствую: что-то знакомое! И как-то присмотрелся и решил открыть диссертацию Путина - смотрю, а там все то же самое, только по-русски: переписаны одинаково абзац за абзацем, и схемы те же самые, что и у американцев. Тогда я попросил коллегу отксерокопировать пару глав русского издания, а там все слово в слово. Правда, кое-где меняли междометия или запятые переставляли. 16 страниц текста и схем просто copy-paste, copy-paste, copy-paste. Из 216 страниц работы 140 - это методичка по ленинградским минеральным ресурсам, 16 страниц из основных теоретических глав - питтсбургские ученые. Сам Путин, по-видимому, в диссертации написал всего пару страниц. Дальше я этим особо не занимался, никаких политических заметок не публиковал, а с академической точки зрения мне все стало понятно.
https://republic.ru/posts/l/959136



"Научный руководитель" Путина, написавший за него ворованную диссертацию - самый богатый и несменяемый ректор в РФ.

РБК изучил почти 1,3 тыс. антикоррупционных деклараций топ-менеджеров государственных вузов и составил рейтинг их доходов за 2018 год. Ректор Санкт-Петербургского горного университета, бывший глава избирательного штаба Владимира Путина в Санкт-Петербурге Владимир Литвиненко в четвертый раз стал лидером по доходам среди ректоров России.
В 2018 году Литвиненко задекларировал доход 236,9 млн руб. - на 5% меньше, чем в предыдущем году. Зарплата ректора - около 570 тыс. руб. в месяц, или 6,8 млн руб. за год, это только малая часть его доходов. Литвиненко владеет 20,98% акций одного из крупнейших производителей химических удобрений - компании «ФосАгро». Она в 2018 году выплачивала дивиденды четырежды, на общую сумму 13,6 млрд руб.
https://www.rbc.ru/society/31/05/2019/5ced347e9a7947cb88772364

Ольга Литвиненко рассказывает Радио Свобода о том, как была написана эта диссертация и десятки других:
- Начнем с предыстории. Мой отец в 1991 году познакомился с Путиным через Геннадия Белика - председателя Ассоциации ветеранов внешней разведки. Белик руководил незаконным вывозом редкоземельных металлов в западные страны. Мой отец был привлечен в этот бизнес в качестве специалиста по минеральным природным ресурсам. В 1994 году Путин и Белик сделали его ректором. Было оказано определенное давление, где-то даже подкуп представителей профессорско-преподавательского состава, которые входили в ученый совет и имели право голосовать, и таким образом были организованы выборы. Ректором он стал в 1994 году. После того как он стал ректором, он использовал свои должностные полномочия и организовал незаконный бизнес - изготовление диссертаций. Тогда был бум, все хотели стать кандидатами или докторами наук. На основе плагиата делались различного рода диссертации для высокопоставленных лиц. И Рем Вяхирев там защищался, я была на предзащите, и сын Вяхирева, и Виктор Зубков защищался, и Путин воспользовался услугами своего ставленника. Фактически в старейшем техническом вузе страны была организована преступная группировка из уважаемых людей, профессоров, преподавателей, научных деятелей. Я знаю их имена, но называть пока не буду: может быть, они сами признаются. Они организовали такой бизнес, это было на потоке: штамповались фиктивные диссертации с заведомо понятным результатом на защите. "Под ключ" там входила предзащита, защита, потом это все отец проталкивал через Высшую аттестационную комиссию, чтобы не было никаких вопросов к счастливому обладателю высокой научной степени, кандидату или доктору наук. Я там работала помощником ректора и все это видела. Ставки примерно были от 30 тысяч евро за кандидатскую диссертацию, а если мы говорим о докторских, то здесь варьировалось от степени крутости бизнесмена, от 50 до 100 тысяч евро. Очень много людей из "Газпрома" защищались. Каким образом получали деньги? Это просто был кэш, клали под столом. Каким образом получали вознаграждение люди, которые писали диссертации? Не всем же писал мой отец, как Путину, а писала группа из профессорско-преподавательского состава. Соответственно им закрывались договора из внебюджетного фонда института под якобы научную деятельность, им официально выплачивалась зарплата.
А Путину он писал лично эту диссертацию. 1997 год, лето, к нам на дачу завезли ксерокс, мой отец взял отпуск. Путин никогда не появлялся у нас на даче, никогда не консультировался с моим отцом о диссертации, то есть это не было так, что приходит аспирант к профессору: у меня есть такие вопросы, давайте обсудим, перепишите и так далее. Нет, здесь этого совершенно не было. То есть все это написал исключительно мой отец. И вот как это делалось: брались различные книги, какой-то абзац нравился, значит мы кладем эту страничку на ксерокс, потом он вырезал то, что ему понравилось, наклеивал на листы формата А4, добавлял свой комментарий и дальше шел какой-нибудь другой абзац. Все это я видела, это было на моих глазах.
https://www.svoboda.org/a/29076908.html



Специалисты по международной политике указывают на то, что путинский авантюризм может зайти далеко, если его не остановить. Нападки на ФБР и раскрытие источников способствуют запугиванию контрразведки и зеленому свету на новую атаку в 2020.

Ветеран литературы о разведке Дэвид Игнатиус:

We speak often of the return of the Cold War mentality. Rarely is it demonstrated as clearly as in President Vladimir Putin’s announcement Tuesday that Russia’s coronavirus vaccine will be called Sputnik V, evoking the 1957 Soviet satellite that kicked off the space race.
“I think they view it as some kind of a propaganda coup,” said Sen. Angus King (I-Maine), noting that Russia apparently plans to dispense the vaccine this month before completing the usual safety trials. King, who sits on the Senate Intelligence and Armed Services committees, saw this news as another example of Russia aggressively seeking to expand its influence - at low cost and maximum impact.
The United States is Putin’s main target in this “anything goes” campaign to revive his country’s reputation as a superpower. That includes a new Russian push to support President Trump in the presidential election, repeating the Kremlin’s interference of four years ago, according to William Evanina, head of the National Counterintelligence and Security Center.
“We assess that Russia is using a range of measures to primarily denigrate former Vice President [Joe] Biden and what it sees as an anti-Russian ‘establishment,’ ” Evanina said in a statement last week, adding that “some Kremlin-linked actors are also seeking to boost President Trump’s candidacy.” Evanina warned, too, about Chinese and Iranian election interference, but intelligence professionals say those efforts are less sophisticated and less dangerous than Russia’s.
Putin appears oblivious to risks and consequences, but he may be cannier than that. Trump’s reelection might seem a long shot now, but even if he loses, the post-election discord in the United States will benefit Putin. What if the Sputnik vaccine doesn’t work? Putin can deny the negative results, ignore them, or just steal the version that works. What if GRU bounty hunters in Afghanistan and assassins in Europe are exposed? No matter, Putin has succeeded in intimidating his adversaries.
In his quest for recognition and revenge, Putin keeps defying the norms of international behavior. That’s why the issue of Russian bounties to the Taliban matters - and Trump’s refusal to confront Putin about it should worry us. This Russian leader doesn’t stop until someone challenges him.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/putin-is-reckless-because-we-allow-him-to-be/2020/08/11/2e89b79c-dc17-11ea-b205-ff838e15a9a6_story.html

Похожие мысли у бывшего посла Майкла Макфола:

Trump has not completed a single noteworthy transaction with the Russian president. The two leaders have not signed a nuclear arms control deal or even extended the existing New START Treaty, set to expire next February. Putin has not helped Trump prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon, nor aided Trump’s diplomacy with North Korea. Putin is clearly not facilitating U.S. diplomatic and military objectives in Afghanistan. In our conflicts with China, Putin sides with President Xi Jinping. Trump has not succeeded in ending Putin’s support for insurgents in eastern Ukraine, but instead has done major damage to U.S.-Ukraine relations by pressuring the Ukrainian government to aid his reelection campaign.
The United States and Russia have signed no trade deals. Trump has not succeeded in persuading his Russian friend to allow Americans to adopt Russian orphans again, or to release falsely convicted Paul Whelan from a Russian prison. Last week, former U.S. marine Trevor Reed was sentenced to nine years in jail on the flimsiest of evidence. To the best of our knowledge, Trump has never raised this improper treatment of an American citizen with Putin.
It gets worse. Trump has made several foreign policy decisions that benefit Putin. Last year he ordered U.S. soldiers to leave Syria, allowing Putin to claim a military victory in Russia’s fight against terrorism there. This year, Trump suggested that Russia attend the Group of 7 summit planned for 2020 in the United States, a decision that no other G-7 leader supported. Last month, Trump made official his decision to withdraw 12,000 American troops from Germany.
Given this consistent track record of supporting Putin, it should not be surprising that Putin might misjudge Trump’s commitment to NATO or deterrence more generally. Trump’s latest signal of weakness - refusal to even raise the issue of Russian actions against U.S. soldiers in Afghanistan - can only deepen Putin’s doubts about American resolve. Such doubts in turn can birth dangerous adventurism.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/08/04/why-trumps-complacency-about-putin-is-problem-whatever-his-motives/



Что касается Великобритании, то новый рычаг давление на Трампа и его теневых партнеров по отмыванию денег открывается при более пристальном внимании к гольф-клубам в Шотландии.

President Donald Trump appears to have inflated the value of his three golf resorts in Scotland and Ireland in documents filed with the U.S. government, according to a new examination of six years of financial records in the U.S. and Europe. And the group behind the finding wants the discrepancy investigated as part of a sprawling government probe into the Trump Organization‘s finances.
Trump claimed the resorts - Trump International Golf Links Aberdeen and Trump Turnberry, both in Scotland, and Trump Doonbeg in Ireland - brought in a total of about $179 million in revenue on U.S. documents where he is supposed to list his personal income. Records in the United Kingdom and Ireland indicate the resorts‘ revenues were millions of dollars less - about $152 million - and show they actually lost $77 million after accounting for expenses.
Trump claimed the Scottish resorts alone were worth at least $100 million total in 2018 on U.S. documents, but the U.K. records indicate that the resorts aren’t worth anywhere near that because the debts exceeded the assets by about $80 million that year.
The left-leaning American Democracy Legal Fund, a self-described government watchdog group, is asking Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance Jr. to look into whether Trump, who repeatedly brags about his wealth, violated the law by filing false documents with the U.S. government to hide the financial health of himself and his company, according to a letter dated Monday obtained by POLITICO. The group is sending a similar letter to the FBI.
https://www.politico.com/news/2020/08/11/trump-golf-resorts-scrutiny-393223

His large expenditures in Scotland were notable because they came during a rocky financial stretch for Trump. The year before purchasing the Aberdeenshire estate, he was ousted as CEO of his thrice-bankrupted casino business; in 2008, he defaulted on a large Deutsche Bank loan tied to a development in Chicago.
Like other Trump wagers, his Scottish gamble has so far not worked out. Both resorts are bleeding millions annually. Meanwhile, he and his company have spent years viciously skirmishing with various locals and government agencies that resisted Trump’s plans to build luxury housing on the fringes of the resorts, which the Trump Organization seems to view as vital to profitability.
If business was lackluster before, it’s dismal now that the coronavirus pandemic has all but halted the Scottish golf season, at least as far as international travelers are concerned. To make matters worse, as Trump’s hospitality empire grapples with the fallout of COVID-19, it also faces a series of maturing debts, loans amounting to nearly a half-billion dollars, which need to be paid down or refinanced over the next four years.
Recently, a new-and perhaps bigger-threat to Trump has emerged in Scotland. Scottish lawmakers are pushing to peer into Trump’s finances using an anti-money-­laundering statute typically employed against kleptocrats, oligarchs, and crime kingpins. Their question: Where did the hundreds of millions Trump poured into his Scottish courses actually come from? <...>
This February, a group of Scottish Parliament members began making the case that Scotland should use an investigative tool under UK law called an Unexplained Wealth Order (UWO) to scrutinize Trump’s transactions. It can’t be wielded against just anyone; it’s designed to make inquiries into the finances of “politically exposed persons” suspected of money laundering. It has been invoked several times in London; for example, examining how the wife of a jailed ex-Azerbaijani government official had managed to afford a 16 million-pound shopping spree at Harrods.
Patrick Harvie, a Scottish Parliament member and co-leader of Scotland’s Green Party, has led the campaign for a UWO against Trump. “This is not someone who inspires confidence in sound finances and sound business,” he says. “The fact that there are many allegations floating around that the US authorities have investigated, whether it’s in relation to Russia or his political dealings domestically-you don’t have to sniff the air very long to see there’s something that smells.”
https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2020/08/the-biggest-trump-financial-mystery-where-he-came-up-with-the-cash-for-his-scottish-resorts/

Политика, коррупция и шпионаж продолжают переплетаться в тугой клубок и ждать развязки.