Putin has a Much Larger Goal than the Victory of Any Given US Presidential Candidate, Kirillova Says

Paul Goble

            Staunton, February 27 – Many Americans have tied themselves in knots trying to figure out which US presidential candidate Vladimir Putin will again deploy his internet trolls to support, forgetting that the Kremlin leader’s goal has never been the victory of this or that individual but rather the undermining of the American political system, Kseniya Kirillova says.

            The US-based Russian journalist tells Rosbalt observer Aleksandr Zhelenin that what Putin wants is “to see in the White House an individual who will bring as much chaos into the American system as possible” and thus allow Moscow to act with impunity because the Americans will be unable to unite against him (rosbalt.ru/world/2020/02/27/1830196.html).

            What Putin wants first of all is to “distract Americans from thinking about interfering in Russia’s sphere of influence,” a region that includes not only “the entire post-Soviet space” but “even in part Eastern Europe.”  If the US is focused on chaos and other problems at home, it won’t be able to block him, Putin believes.

            Further, the Kremlin leader is committed to undermining the influence of the American intelligence community, a group which is closely allied to the US establishment which overwhelmingly opposes Trump and has strong doubts about Sanders. Thus promoting either or both leads Trump at least to lash out at the intelligence community and weaken its influence.

            In order to understand what is going on, Kirillova says, one must recognize that the US today is divided not in two camps as was the case in 2016 but in three. The first consists of the supporters of Trump; the second of moderate Democrats and Republicans who oppose him. And the third includes “socialists and supporters of more leftist ideas.”

            Their leaders are Bernie Sanders in the first instance but also Elizabeth Warren.

            It is that pattern that Moscow is taking advantage of rather than seeking to back someone who can be counted on to be pro-Moscow. Trump, “despite his declarations of toughness toward the Russian Federation does relate to it in a very friendly fashion … because he trusts Vladimir Putin” and believes that it was Ukraine, not Russia which interfered in the 2016 elections.

            As far as Sanders is concerned, “he, as an extreme American liberal, has never displayed a negative attitude toward Russia. After Putin invaded Ukraine, Sanders even suggested that “we need a new NATO with the participation of Russia,” hardly the position that would have given the Kremlin leader any pause.

            But Putin’s support of either or both arises from his view that both have the capacity to weaken the United States by sparking controversy among Americans and that, rather than the victory of either, is the Russian leader’s overriding goal, Kirillova concludes.