Battlegrounds Page 9

  Although it is challenging to scale up efforts of small countries like Estonia and Finland to a country the size of the United States, their examples demonstrate the potential for collaboration not only between government and industry, but also with academia and civil society.

  Karen Edwards, a Silicon Valley executive who helped build the Yahoo brand, one of the prime internet companies, knew that defensive measures were inadequate to counter Russian disinformation. She was angry about what was happening to her country as Russians and extremist groups polarized society and created a crisis of confidence in democratic processes and institutions. Present at the creation of the first Silicon Valley boom in the 1990s, Edwards was, even then, both enthusiastic about the promise of the internet and wary about how it might be abused by nefarious actors. Two decades later, the Stanford University and Harvard Business School graduate had an idea of how a good offense in the presentation of information might extend beyond defense and preempt elements of cyber-enabled information warfare. Edwards and her business partner, Raj Narayan, started a company called Soap AI in Palo Alto, California. The company is based on an innovative solution that combines the positive potential of the internet with emerging artificial intelligence technologies to defeat those using disinformation and propaganda to polarize American society. After diagnosing the problem as information overload, mistrust of media, and a lack of diverse perspectives, Edwards, Narayan, and their team designed a machine-learning platform that allows users to understand better what is happening in the world by accessing verified sources of information, reducing the clutter associated with clickbait, and ensuring access to a range of perspectives.32 Soap AI uses a “scrub cycle” in which artificial intelligence sorts stories from verified sources across a range of perspectives. Soap presents multiple opinions on an event or story so readers can make their own judgments based on correct information.33 A dynamic combination of offensive, defensive, and preemptive solutions to the disinformation dimension of Putin’s playbook could turn what the Kremlin and other authoritarian governments consider a vulnerability—that is, America’s inherent decentralization and resistance to authoritative direction from the center—into a strength.34

  Education is vitally important, not only to alert citizens to the dangers of Russia’s disinformation campaigns but also to restore confidence in democratic principles, institutions, and processes. A Russian proverb describes education as light and ignorance as darkness. A public informed about challenges to national security and to issues that adversaries use to sow dissension, such as race, gun control, and immigration, will prove less vulnerable to manipulation. Education inoculates society against efforts to foment hatred and incite violence on the basis of race, religion, politics, sexual orientation or any other sub-identity.

  Finally, education combined with the restoration of civility in public discourse can reduce the vitriol that widens the fissures in society that Russia and others exploit. A renewed focus on civics education in the United States and other Western societies is important to deter and defeat Russia’s campaigns of disinformation and denial. While keeping in mind the importance of self-criticism, civics curricula in Western nations might emphasize the virtues of those nations’ free, open, and democratic societies. For example, while acknowledging that the American experiment is flawed and incomplete, curricula in the United States might ensure that citizens appreciate the nobility of an unprecedented multi-century effort to ensure democracy, individual rights, equal opportunity, and liberty for all. Political leaders and the media have a vital role in that connection; as do citizens, who might resolve, whenever they discuss points of disagreement, to give at least equal time to points of agreement. Cindy McCain, the widow of Senator John McCain, initiated a program to promote civility in public discourse. As in cyber defense, improving education and restoring civil discourse will take broad public involvement.

  All these efforts are especially critical on the European continent, which remains on the front lines of Putin’s aggressive ambitions. The United States and European and other democratic nations must recognize that parrying Putin’s playbook requires strong collective action. The first step is to regain self-respect not only within individual nations, but also among them as free and open societies.

  Europe needs to regain psychological as well as physical strength. The European Union will be only as strong as its members. Europe’s larger states could and should lead; in the next decades, Germany and France are particularly critical to the strength of Europe and the strength of the transatlantic alliance. So are the states that won freedom after the Iron Curtain fell. Will European culture sustain the common identity essential to generating the will to defend itself? The Kremlin is betting that the answer is no. In 2019, Putin declared that liberalism had “become obsolete.”35 It will depend on European leaders and their citizens to prove him wrong.

  * * *

  AS THE United States, NATO, and others counter Russian efforts that fall below the threshold of a military response, they should not underestimate the danger of Russian conventional military and nuclear capabilities. NATO conventional and nuclear strength remains an important deterrent of further aggression, as an emboldened Kremlin could miscalculate and take actions that spark a disastrous military confrontation. It is for this reason that NATO member states should fulfill the pledge made at the Wales Summit in 2014 to invest the equivalent of 2 percent of their GDP in defense. After the end of the Cold War, Europe’s military power atrophied because of the belief that great power competition was a relic of the past. Because Putin is trying to collapse the alliance, it is possible that he could, based on an assessment of weak resolve within NATO nations, precipitate a crisis in the Baltics or elsewhere. He might actually want a target nation to invoke Article 5 of the NATO Charter, which states that “an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all,” and then attempt to dissuade other NATO nations from recognizing the attack. That failure would deliver a hard psychological blow to the alliance.

  The United States and its NATO allies must also develop and field capabilities that counter Russia’s disruptive military technologies, including its new nuclear weapons. The United States and NATO are behind in countering Russian capabilities in electronic warfare, layered air defense, and a range of other disruptive capabilities designed to close the gap in advanced military technologies.36 Important conventional capabilities include missile defense, long-range precision fires, and air defense against drones. The U.S. withdrawal from the 1988 Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty in response to Russia’s violation was necessary to maintain deterrence in Europe and make clear that Russia’s irresponsible doctrine of escalation control could only lead to catastrophe for all parties. And should Russia and other nations, such as China, agree to negotiate a treaty limiting or eliminating types of intermediate-range weapons, as the INF Treaty did in 1988, or to preserve New START, the treaty signed in April 2010 (and the follow-up to START I, which reduced the number of strategic nuclear missile launchers by half and established an inspection and verification regime), the United States should remain ready to enter into verifiable agreements that limit the scale and scope of the most destructive weapons on earth. As the United States and NATO invest in future military systems, they should keep Russian countermeasures in mind and design simple, less expensive systems that degrade gracefully, rather than complex, expensive systems susceptible to catastrophic failure.

  The combination of actions, initiatives, and capabilities to parry Putin’s playbook should aim to deter Russia by denial—that is, by convincing the Kremlin that it cannot accomplish its objectives through its pernicious form of aggression, the use of military force, or nuclear extortion under its doctrine of escalation control. Should Russian aggression continue or expand, however, the United States and like-minded nations should be prepared to exploit the Kremlin’s many vulnerabilities. Those include Putin’s and the Siloviki’s perso
nal vulnerability to public scrutiny, the Russian people’s growing desire for a say in how they are governed, and the frailty of an economy overburdened by corruption, self-imposed isolation, and a demographic time bomb.

  * * *

  TRUTH AND transparency are important offensive as well as defensive weapons to defeat the Kremlin’s use of lies and obfuscation. Putin’s brash actions internationally belie both his weakness and his fear of losing power. His rule, extended by sham elections, has grown old. When he returned to the presidency after a break as prime minister that was meant to give the illusion that he respected the Constitution, he encountered massive protests. People were angry in part because Putin raised the retirement age even as more Russians became aware that he had become a billionaire many times over only by looting the country.37 By 2019, protests were a regular occurrence in Russian cities as Putin’s popularity dropped. In regional elections in September of that year, Alexei Navalny, an anticorruption activist and lawyer, developed what is known as a “smart-voting” strategy. Creating a list of candidates across the country who he believed could defeat those backed by Putin’s United Russia party, he urged opposition-minded citizens to vote for those on that list. The strategy resulted in victories for a record 160 candidates across the country38 and showed that, even as Putin controls the media and restricts the opposition, elections still matter in Russia.39 Exposing Putin’s personal finances and the finances of the Siloviki who surround him may further embolden a Russian opposition movement that has survived despite brutal Kremlin repression and absolute control of the media, parliament, courts, and security services. Support for opposition groups, anticorruption organizations, and surviving investigative journalists in Russia is an appropriate counter to Putin’s playbook and a way to communicate support for the Russian people while countering Kremlin aggression.

  It is likely that opposition to Putin will grow with time as he enters his third decade in power. In January 2020, Putin proposed changes in the Constitution designed to extend his rule beyond 2024. The changes stripped power away from the presidency and empowered the Parliament and the State Council. Prime minister Dmitry Medvedev resigned. Medvedev was given a new position that had not existed previously, deputy chairman of the Security Council. Putin’s choice for Medvedev’s successor as prime minister, Mikhail Mishustin, is a technocrat previously tasked with modernizing the Russian Federal Tax Service. Without his own political base, Mishustin seems unlikely to impede Putin’s authority. Indeed, the choice is broadly seen as a way to allow Putin to retain de facto power, perhaps by making policy though the newly empowered State Council.

  Putin is very sensitive to the truth, especially about his personal life and his finances. When a small Moscow paper reported that he had divorced and was engaged to a famous gymnast, he had the paper shut down. When the vast data leak known as the Panama Papers revealed in 2016 how he had secured lucrative deals for his friends in exchange for a cut of the profits, he deflected attention from this by accusing Hillary Clinton of inciting protests in his country.40

  * * *

  RUSSIAN ECONOMIC dependence on its energy sector is another key vulnerability, and the European nations should take advantage of it. Reducing dependence on Russian oil and gas presents an opportunity to impose costs greater than Putin and the stagnant Russian economy can bear. And because it is possible that, faced with continued economic stagnation, Putin will precipitate another crisis to stoke Russian nationalism and distract the Russian people from their discontent, dependence on Russian energy could prove to be a security as well as an economic liability for Germany and other European states.

  Finally, despite Putin’s 2020 proposal to change the Constitution and create a position from which he can continue to wield power, the United States, Europe, and other like-minded nations should think comprehensively about a post-Putin Russia. It is important to recognize that Russian society is still emerging from a traumatic period of transition that witnessed the collapse of the Soviet Union, the birth of a new Russian state, changed borders, and transformation of its economic and political systems. It was, as former U.S. secretary of state Condoleezza Rice observed, simply “too much to overcome.”41 Although the West will have limited influence over how the transition from Putin to a new order occurs and how that new order addresses the challenges and opportunities facing Russia, the United States and other nations might prepare now to play a supportive role.

  Lessons from Russia’s failed transition should inform that support. A post-Putin government would have three options: repression, serious reform, or an incompetent execution of the first two options. The West should approach a post-Putin Russia with the goal of welcoming it into a Euro-Atlantic security system that aims to preserve peace and promote prosperity. If the “power vertical” (i.e., the recentralization of the power of the presidency and federal center) that Putin helped to create collapses, America and other nations, informed by failed efforts in the 1990s, should support democratic and institutional development in Russia.42 Preparation might begin with an expansion of grassroots programs, exchanges, and education programs (such as the Fulbright scholarship) that circumvent Putin’s repression of civil society to reach the Russian people directly. And the failed effort to promote reform in Russia in the 1990s should also lead to the recognition that reform in Russia will depend on the Russian people. Still, as Secretary Rice observed, “Russia is not Mars and the Russians are not endowed with some unique, anti-democratic DNA.”43

  The West must remain open to the possibility, however, that a new government may not abandon the Kremlin’s aggressive policies and may instead perpetuate Putin’s playbook. Under Putin, the Kremlin’s fears are about losing power internally; a rush to allay imagined Russian fears of the West would be foolhardy. Deterrence should remain a top priority for the United States and NATO, so that it is clear to whoever follows Putin that further expansion and continued subversion would be too costly.

  * * *

  IN THE near term, Putin and Russia have forged a “comprehensive strategic partnership” with Chairman Xi Jinping and the Chinese Communist Party. President Putin described China as “our strategic partner.” Chairman Xi reciprocated with “We’ve managed to take our relationship to the highest level in our history.” Additionally, he referred to President Putin as his “best friend and colleague.”44 The two authoritarian regimes aid and abet each other in their mutual effort to collapse the postwar political, economic, and security order.45 In 2017, joint military exercises in the Baltic Sea signaled to the world the start of this new partnership. In 2018, China joined Russia’s annual military exercise in Siberia for the first time. The following year, India and Pakistan were also invited to join the exercise otherwise known as Vostok, meaning “East.” Also, in 2019, hundreds of Russian and Chinese military flights violated U.S. allied airspace from the Baltic Sea to the Sea of Japan. On July 23, 2019, a joint Russian-Chinese flight of bomber aircraft entered the air defense identification zone of South Korea and Japan, triggering intercepts by fighter jets from both countries.46 In December 2019, Russian and Chinese ships joined the Iranian navy for an exercise in the Indian Ocean and the Gulf of Oman. Also, trade between Russia and China increased significantly, growing from $69.6 billion in 2016 to $107.1 billion in 2018, with the increased trade even conducted in the nations’ own currencies as a step toward reducing reliance on the U.S. dollar.47

  The two countries’ warming relationship has resurrected discussions of the Nixon administration’s triangular diplomacy with the Soviet Union and China. Under triangular diplomacy, the United States endeavored to have a closer relationship with each nation than each nation had with the other. Under Putin and Xi, however, the prospects for improved relations are dim. A Russian grand alliance with China is unnatural because Russia would be a minor and weaker party. Putin’s playbook has made clear that great power competition is not a relic of the past. He and Xi are drawn together, in part, because they are both authoritarian leaders who are
determined to undermine free and open societies. Despite Putin’s dangerous aggression against the United States, Europe, and the rest of the free world, the danger from Xi Jinping’s Chinese Communist Party is greater based on the scale of the challenge and the pernicious nature of China’s strategy. For all Putin’s brazen attacks against our country, it is China that in many ways presents the larger, and more complicated, threat to the United States.

  Part II

  China

  NEW CHINA CHARTER STRESSES ECONOMY OVER IDEOLOGY . . . Hide your strength, bide your time . . . TROOPS ROLL THROUGH BEIJING TO CRUSH PROTESTORS . . . CHINA WARNS U.S. TO KEEP AWAY FROM TAIWAN STRAIT . . . A world where the rule of law, not the law of the jungle, governs the conduct of nations . . . TURMOIL IN CHINA: TIANANMEN CRACKDOWN . . . VIETNAM DRILLS FOR OIL IN BLOCK CLAIMED BY CHINA . . . We need to urge China to become a responsible stakeholder in the system . . . The United States is a Pacific power . . . CHINA’S PRESIDENT PLEDGES NO MILITARIZATION IN DISPUTED ISLANDS . . . The Tribunal concluded that there was no legal basis for China to claim historic rights to resources . . . TWO CHINESE HACKERS ASSOCIATED WITH THE MINISTRY OF STATE SECURITY CHARGED . . . After these people are released, their education and transformation must continue . . . BATTLE LINES DRAWN: A FULL-BLOWN TRADE WAR BETWEEN AMERICA AND CHINA . . . I’m getting a lot of money in tariffs its coming in by the billions . . . HUAWEI C.F.O. IS ARRESTED IN CANADA FOR EXTRADITION TO THE U.S. . . . Freedom is only possible when this “virus” in their thinking is eradicated and they are in good health . . . HONG KONG LEADERS REBUFF PROTEST DEMAND . . . If one of these sides is going to lose, it’s going to be the NBA . . . TRUMP AND CHINA SIGN PHASE ONE TRADE DEAL . . . The agreement will work if China wants it to work . . . CHINA SILENCES CRITICS OVER DEADLY VIRUS OUTBREAK . . . Taiwan is showing the world how much we cherish our democratic way of life . . . CHINA’S RULERS SEE THE CORONAVIRUS AS A CHANCE TO TIGHTEN THEIR GRIP . . .