Mihail E. Ionescu
Dezbaterile in media internationala referitoare la Summit-ul Trump-Putin din 16 iulie curent la Helsinki sunt in plina desfasurare. Pe de o parte, in SUA este o dezlantuire fara precedent in opinia publica incriminandu-se faptul ca Trump a preferat sa dea crezare - in dauna concluziei propriilor servicii de Securitate - afirmatiei lui Putin ca Rusia nu s-a amestecat in alegerile prezidentiale din America in 2016. De la fostul sef al FBI, Comey, care a evaluat aceasta pozitie ca fiind echivalenta cu o “ tradare” la actualul sef al acestei institituii, care a confirmat din nou existenta dosarului in cauza si concluzia desprinsa de serviciul pe care il conduce, establishmentul intelligence al SUA este unanim in a critica – intr-un fel sau altul - pozitia asumata de presedintele Trump la conferinta de presa de la Helsinki. Indiscutabil, pozitiile din establishmentul politic sunt la fel de transante, inclusiv in cadrul Partidului Republican, doua idei principale desprinzandu-se evident: anume, mai intai, ca Rusia este un adversar/ inamic ( foe ) si nu UE ( cum a afirmat Trump intr-un interviu recent ) sau aliatii din NATO ( aluzie la abia incheiatul Summit al aliantei, unde presedintele american a creat impresia ca SUA se degajeaza de angajamentele in cadrul acesteia ) ; in al doilea rand, ca exista o anumita incertitudine referitoare la intelegerile care au avut loc intre cei doi lideri, despre care nu se stiu inca amanunte sau chiar domeniul de aplicabilitate a lor. Astfel incat intrebari privind, de pilda, ce ar fi putut oferi Putin in schimbul reintrarii Europei de Est in sfera de influenta rusa sau care ar fi raspunsul SUA daca , ipotetic, Rusia ar ataca Polonia ori altele asemanatoare abunda pe retelele de socializare. Imediat dupa Summit, fostul sef al diplomatiei poloneze , Radek Sikorski , se intreba , pe buna dreptate: “ And now, as a U.S. ally, we are supposed to believe that if President Putin launches a hybrid war, or even a nuclear strike against Poland, President
Raspunsul lui Donald Trump la furtuna starnita in media a mericana si mondiala de comportamentul sau la conferinta de presa comuna cu V. Putin se poate lesne desprinde din notatiile sale pe twitter. In dimineata de 17 iulie la intoarcerea din Finlanda a scris ca : “ I had a great meeting with NATO. They have paid $33 Billion more and will pay hundreds of Billions of Dollars more in the future, only because of me. NATO was weak, but now it is strong again (bad for Russia). The media only says I was rude to leaders, never mentions the money!” , o alta notatie intervenind la mai putin de o ora: “ While I had a great meeting with NATO, raising vast amounts of money, I had an even better meeting with Vladimir Putin of Russia. Sadly, it is not being reported that way - the Fake News is going Crazy!” . Dar inca inainte de cel dintai twitter citat, Trump, desigur constient de furtuna cu care se va confrunta, a avut prevederea sa afirme ca : “As I said today and many times before, ‘I have GREAT confidence in MY intelligence people.’ However, I also recognize that in order to build a brighter future, we cannot exclusively focus on the past – as the world’s two largest nuclear powers, we must get along!” . Asadar, reafirmand cu claritate increderea sa in propriile servicii de informatii ale SUA, dar dopotriva aratand ca trebuie privit in viitor pentru a mentine pacea, fara insa a lamuri si trecutul ( “ we cannot exclusively focus on the past “ ) . Daca aceasta afirmatie inseamna ca presedintele este constient ca a facut o cedare in fata lui Putin – asadar constient ca omologul sau nu are dreptate - sau daca astfel afirma astfel desprinderea sa integrala de un trecut care inca marcheaza establishmentul politic american ( si a bagateliza, adresandu-se chiar acestui establishment al intelligence-ului SUA , deci intensitatea furtunii mediatice care a urmat ) depinde de pozitia politica a fiecarui cititor al acestui text .
Numai ca, asa cum se intampla in urma unor asemenea mega - intalniri sistemice nu au intarziat sa apara detaliile. Daca cineva sa va fi mirat de timpul in care Trump si Putin au putut sa ajunga la intelegeri in atat de multe si extreme de importante dosare ale scenei politice globale de azi (la conferinta au fost listate de ambii presedinti chbestiunile discutate , ele vadindu-se covarsitoare ca numar , atunci trebuie reaminsitit un episod istoric povestit de chiar unii dintre protagonistii unui astfel de asemenea ‚ mega- deal’ . Iata cum povesteste premierul britanic Winston Churchill intalnirea sa cu liderul sovietic Iosif Stalin in 9 octombrie 19144 , cand au fost stabilite amanuntele impartirii Europei de Est in sfere de influenta: “At ten o’clock that night we held our ﬁrst important meeting in the Kremlin./../The moment was apt for business, so I said, ‘ Let us settle about our affairs in the Balkans. Your armies are in Roumania and Bulgaria. We have interests, missions, and agents there. Don’t let us get at cross—purposes in small ways. So far as Britain and Russia are concerned, how would it do for you to have ninety per cent. predominance in Roumania, for us to have ninety per cent. of the say in Greece, and go ﬁfty—ﬁfty about Yugoslavia?’ /…/While this was being translated I wrote out on a half—sheet of paper/…/I pushed this across to Stalin, who had by then heard the translation. There was a slight pause. Then he took his blue pencil and made a large tick upon it, and passed it back to us. It was all settled in no more time than it takes to set down./…/After this there was a long silence. The pencilled paper lay in the centre of the table. At length I said, ‘ Might it not be thought rather cynical if it seemed we had disposed of these issues, so fateful to millions of people, in such an offhand manner? Let us burn the paper.’ ‘No, you keep it,’ said Stalin.”
Asadar, pentru astfel de mega - intalniri istorice, timpul deciziilor de mare importanta este extrem de scurt, ceea ce nu inseamna ca sunt solid motivate, din perspective intereselor celor implicati. Este apoi treaba consilierilor si expertilor sa ‘ traduca’ in limbaj politico-diplomatic deciziile respective.
In cazul reuniunii de la Helsinki nu a fost nevoie sa se astepte prea mult pentru a se cunoaste public o astfel de mega – decizie. Totul a inceput a doua zi dupa reuniune , cand procuratura generala a Rusiei a emis, potrivit agentiilor de presa ruse , un document in care afirma clar ca: “ called the former US Ambassador to Russia Michael McFaul among those who/…/ are involved in the illegal activities of the founder of the Hermitage Capital Foundation, William Browder . /…/in 2009-2010, / Mc Faul-n.n./compiled a memorandum to the US State Department from Moscow on the progress of the investigation into the Magnitsky case/…/.McFaul has repeatedly supported Browder. In particular, after the cancellation of the American visa of the founder of Hermitage Capital, the former ambassador called on US President Donald Trump ‘not to join Putin's campaign’ against him. After the detention of Browder in Spain (soon he was released), the former diplomat said that Russia should be removed from Interpol.” Importanta acestui document, emis a doua zi dupa reuniunea de la Helsinki, nu poate scapa celor familiari cu relatiile ruso-americane in anii precedenti, cel putin de la razboiul din Georgia ( august 2008 ). ‘ Cazul Magnitki” , dupa numele avocatului rus al lui Browder, mort in inchisoare in Rusia in cursul investigatiei schemelor spalarii de bani de catre afaceristul american , a determinat o dura replica a administratiei Obama, pe asa- numita ‘ lista Magnitki’ fiind trecuti oficialii rusi, care au fost implicati in investigatie si supusi sanctiunilor adoptate post-anexarea Crimeei de catre Rusia in 2014 ( martie ). Ramificatiile cazului sunt ample, dar momentan este importanta reactia lui Michael Mac Faul la anuntul rusesc din 17 iulie a.c. .
Iata sirul comentariilor fostului ambasador la Moscova Michael MacFaul:
1.I hope the U.S. government that I served faithfully for five years will stand up and defend us with public outrage over these ridiculous accusations. cc:
2. – “Hey WH press Corps, can you confirm tomorrow with
3 “ TASS-- an official agency of the Russian government-- has stated that the Russian authorities are seeking to arrest several US government officials in connection with alleged Browder money laundering scheme to help Clinton campaign. Sorry, but that is a very serious accusation.” 7,22 PM- 17 iulie ;
4.” Absolutely crazy: "The Russian agency’s official spokesman, Alexander Kurennoi, told the news agency Interfax on Tuesday that McFaul is one of the Americans suspected of involvement in Browder’s illegal activities." 17 iulie, orele 8,07 PM ;
5. “ I am not an "associate" of Bill Browder. I am the former US ambassador to Russia. Putin is seeking to arrest a former Ambassador. Please understand how outrageous this act is, discussed no less between our two presidents” - ora 7, 47PM -este
intrebat de un follower ( Scott Fulton III): “Sir, let me make sure I'm getting the implications correct: Is
6. Mac Faul raspunde acestuia dupa 2 minute: Scott M. Fulton III“ That is what is sound like to me, yes. On Trump, I dont know if he is playing along or not. I hope not.” ;
7. “As I discuss in detail in From Cold War to Hot Peace, Putin has been harassing me for a long time. That he now wants to arrest me, however, takes it to a new level. I expect my government to defend me and my colleagues, in public and private.”- 8,10 PM , 17 iulie ;
8- “Even during the Stalin era, the Soviet government never had the audacity to try to arrest US government officials. Think about that.” 9,57 PM , 17 iulie ;
9.- “Exactly. The Trump administration needs to speak out loudly as a matter of principle. Very slippery slope if they do not.- 9,59, PM , 17 iulie;
10.” It's most certainly a tactic of intimidation. As
11 MacFaul retwitted: Michael Weiss-“Make no mistake: the reason Putin feels emboldened to target
12. Exactly. Putin feels that he has an ally in
Michael McFaul added,
Replying to @michaeldweiss @McFaul @realDonaldTrump
“Putin felt emboldened to harrass Ambassador AND his family in Moscow even under Obama. The difference is he doesn't feel the need to hide it anymore, after the Trump's fiasco in Helsinki.” - 11:09 PM - 17 Jul 2018 ; 
13. Mac Faul retweeted: “Andrew Bennett @IRgetsreal
Cannot endorse this strongly enough. Press needs to ask if Trump did or will push back on Russia's smear campaign against former US Ambassador
14. “ I really hope Trump did not agree with this "great deal" with Putin in Helsinki: "Russia wants to question Christopher Steele, Michael McFaul, top politicians for aiding Bill Browder" — RT World News- -11,31 PM-17 iulie;
Aceasta ultima notatie pe twitter a lui MacFaul ne trimite la un articol aparut pe ‘Russia Today’, semnificativ intitulat ‘ Russia wants to question Christopher Steele, Michael McFaul, top politicians for aiding Bill Browder’ . Daca este sa credem cele afirmate in acest articol- si nu avem prea multe motive sa nu facem acest lucru, atunci Rusia vrea , nici mai mult, nici mai putin, sa investigheze , pe langa numitii MacFaul si Bill Browder, pe un anume Christopher Steele. Ni se dezvaluie astfel o prima ‚mega-intelegere’ Putin-Trump. Steele este fostul membru al serviciilor secrete britanice , care a alcatuit dosarul privind legaturile ilegale dintre candidatul prezidential Donald Trump si Rusia in timpul campaniei electorale si alegatiile cuprinse in el stau la baza acuzatiilor adresate si azi presedintelui Trump, ceea ce el numeste permanent un ‚witch hunt’ . Rolul lui Steele in intreaga afacere este inca nelamurit deplin- se afirma ca a fost platit de adversarii politici ai lui Trump- , dar ancheta se pare ca , cel putin acum, dupa Helsinki, se afla abioa in faza incipienta ( vom avea probabil multe surprize ) . Procurorul independent Robert Mueller , care investigheaza alegatiile cuprinse in acest dosar, bineinteles compulsate cu alte informatii ( nu stim cat de multe sau veridice ) a pus sub acuzare 12 ofiteri rusi GRU pentru implicare in influentarea campaniei electorale americane din 1916 cu doar trei zile inainte –poate nu intamplator- de intalnirea de la Helsinki (la 13 iulie ). Cum se stie, Browder este deopotriva unul dintre martorii cheie in investigatia condusa de R. Mueller.
Pentru a mai adauga o informatie necesara intelegerii intregului episod relatat aici, trebuie spus ca , la conferinta de presa Trump-Putin ( 16 iulie ), a fost ridicata intrebarea daca Trump a spus omologului sau ca este dovedit ca Rusia s-a amestecat in alegerile prezidentiale americane din 2016. Iata , pentru a reda intregul context, transcriptul oficial al acestui episod din aminitita conferinta de presa:
„REPORTER (Jeff Mason from Reuters): Thank you. Mr. President, you tweeted this morning that it’s US Foolishness, stupidity and the Mueller probe that is responsible for the decline in US Relations with Russia. Do you hold Russia at all accountable for anything in particular? If so, what would you consider them that they are responsible for?
TRUMP: Yes, I do. I hold both countries responsibility. I think the United States has been foolish. I think we have all been foolish. We should have had this dialogue a long time ago, a long time frankly before I got to office. I think we’re all to blame. I think that the United States now has stepped forward along with Russia. We’re getting together and we have a chance to do some great things, whether it’s nuclear proliferation in terms of stopping, we have to do it — ultimately, that’s probably the most important thing that we can be working on.
I do feel that we have both made some mistakes. I think that the probe is a disaster for our country. I think it’s kept us apart. It’s kept us separated. There was no collusion at all. Everybody knows it. People are being brought out to the fore. So far that I know, virtually, none of it related to the campaign. They will have to try really hard to find something that did relate to the campaign. That was a clean campaign. I beat Hillary Clinton easily and, frankly, we beat her. And I’m not even saying from the standpoint — we won that race. It’s a shame there could be a cloud over it. People know that. People understand it. The main thing — and we discussed this also — is zero collusion. It has had a negative impact upon the relationship of the two largest nuclear powers in the world. We have 90 percent of nuclear power between the two countries. It’s ridiculous. It’s ridiculous what’s going on with the probe.
REPORTER (Jeff Mason from Reuters): For President Putin if I could follow up as well. Why should Americans and why should President Trump believe your statement that Russia did not intervene in the 2016 election given the evidence that US Intelligence agencies have provided? Will you consider extraditing the 12 Russian officials that were indicted last week by a US Grand jury.
TRUMP: Well I’m going to let the president answer the second part of that question.
As you know, the concept of that came up perhaps a little before, but it came out as a reason why the Democrats lost an election, which frankly, they should have been able to win, because the electoral college is much more advantageous for Democrats, as you know, than it is to Republicans. We won the electoral college by a lot. 306 to 223, I believe. That was a well-fought battle. We did a great job.
Frankly, I’m going to let the president speak to the second part of your question. But, just to say it one time again and I say it all the time, there was no collusion. I didn’t know the president. There was nobody to colluded with. There was no collusion with the campaign. Every time you hear all of these 12 and 14 — it’s stuff that has nothing to do — and frankly, they admit, these are not people involved in the campaign. But to the average reader out there, they are saying, well maybe that does. It doesn’t. Even the people involved, some perhaps told mis-stories. In one case the FBI said there was no lie. There was no lie. Somebody else said there was. We ran a brilliant campaign. And that’s why I’m president. Thank you.
PUTIN: As to who is to be believed, who is not to be believed: you can trust no one. Where did you get this idea that President Trump trusts me or I trust him? He defends the interests of the United States of America and I do defend the interests of the Russian Federation. We do have interests that are common. We are looking for points of contact.
There are issues where our postures diverge and we are looking for ways to reconcile our differences, how to make our effort more meaningful. We should not proceed from the immediate political interests that guide certain political powers in our countries. We should be guided by facts. Could you name a single fact that would definitively prove the collusion? This is utter nonsense — just like the president recently mentioned. Yes, the public at large in the United States had a certain perceived opinion of the candidates during the campaign. But there’s nothing particularly extraordinary about it. That’s usual thing.
President Trump, when he was a candidate, he mentioned the need to restore the Russia/US relationship and it’s clear that certain parts of American society felt sympathetic about it and different people could express their sympathy in different ways. Isn’t that natural? Isn’t it natural to be sympathetic towards a person who is willing to restore the relationship with our country, who wants to work with us?
We heard the accusations about it. As far as I know, this company hired American lawyers and the accusations doesn’t have a fighting chance in the American courts. There’s no evidence when it comes to the actual facts. So we have to be guided by facts, not by rumors.
Now, let’s get back to the issue of this 12 alleged intelligence officers of Russia. I don’t know the full extent of the situation. But President Trump mentioned this issue. I will look into it.
So far, I can say the following. Things that are off the top of my head. We have an existing agreement between the United States of America and the Russian Federation, an existing treaty that dates back to 1999. The mutual assistance on criminal cases. This treaty is in full effect. It works quite efficiently. On average, we initiate about 100, 150 criminal cases upon request from foreign states.
For instance, the last year, there was one extradition case upon the request sent by the United States. This treaty has specific legal procedures we can offer. The appropriate commission headed by Special Attorney Mueller, he can use this treaty as a solid foundation and send a formal, official request to us so that we could interrogate, hold questioning of these individuals who he believes are privy to some crimes. Our enforcement are perfectly able to do this questioning and send the appropriate materials to the United States. Moreover, we can meet you halfway. We can make another step. We can actually permit representatives of the United States, including the members of this very commission headed by Mr. Mueller, we can let them into the country. They can be present at questioning.
In this case, there’s another condition. This kind of effort should be mutual one. Then we would expect that the Americans would reciprocate. They would question officials, including the officers of law enforcement and intelligence services of the United States whom we believe have something to do with illegal actions on the territory of Russia. And we have to request the presence of our law enforcement.
For instance, we can bring up Mr. Browder in this particular case. Business associates of Mr. Browder have earned over $1.5 billion in Russia. They never paid any taxes. Neither in Russia nor in the United States. Yet, the money escapes the country. They were transferred to the United States. They sent huge amount of money, $400 million as a contribution to the campaign of Hillary Clinton. Well, that’s their personal case. It might have been legal, the contribution itself. But the way the money was earned was illegal. We have solid reason to believe that some intelligence officers, guided these transactions. So we have an interest of questioning them. That could be a first step. We can extend also it. Options abound. They all can be found in an appropriate legal framework.
REPORTER (Jeff Mason from Reuters): Did you direct any of your officials to help him do that?
PUTIN: Yes, I did. Yes, I did. Because he talked about bringing the US/Russia relationship back to normal.”
Atrag atentia, in lungul citat reprodus din transcriptul conferintei de presa de la Helsinki , asupra celor cu format marit. Este adus in discutie cu amanunte cazul omului de afaceri american Browder. A se retine ca liderul Kremlinului afirma ca poate subventia de 400 milioane de dolari SUA pentru campania lui H. Clinton a fost legala, dar banii castigati din care a fost virata aceasta suma au fost dobanditi si transferati illegal din Rusia . Mai mult, ca ar exista suspiciuni ca in aceasta afacere au fost implicaie ofiteri de intelligence ( trimitere directa la servicii secrete americane ) si ca exista un interes al Moscovei ( dar nu numai ) in interogarea lor ( de aici si primul anunt din 17 iulie al procuraturii generale rusesti ) .
Trebuie sa mai mentionam ca aceste lucruri au fost afirmate de Putin in prezenta lui Trump, care nu a schitat niciun gest de negare , ceea ce poate fi intepretat ca o tacita aprobare. Iar daca luam in calcul ca , chiar a doua zi, reprezentantul procuraturii ruse a facut public cele anterior aratate nu putem sa nu desprindem concluzia preliminara , desigur intemeiati pe o combinare speculativa a faptelor relatate , ca aici rezida unul dintre marile mega- dealuri asumate de cei doi lideri in cursul intalnirii lor ‘fata in fata ‘ . Investigarea in amanunt a cazului Bowder ,pe care o presupune acest ‘ deal’ , trebuie pusa in contextul in care Putin se declara de acord cu interogarea , in anumite conditii, a celor 12 ofiteri GRU rusi , acuzati de catre comisia Mueler, dar si cu inistenta cu care Donald Trump a facut aluzie- atunci cand a fost chestionat in legatura cu amestecul serviciilor rusesti in campania prezidentiala americana din 2016- la faptul ca au disparut si par de negasit de catre anchetatori peste 30 000 de mail-uri de pe serverele dnei H. Clinton ( este un repros deschis adresat serviciilor americane secrete ) .
Ceea ce aduce in plus articolul din ‘Russia Today’ , dar cu o rapiditate care arata cat de importanta este chestiunea de lamurit , este faptul ca in intregul dosar apare si numele lui C. Steele, fost membru al serviciilor secrete britanice . Cine dintre lectorii acestui text este cat de cat familiarizat cu acest nume va intelege imediat implicatiile acestui ‘mega- deal’ intre cei doi presedinti. Steele este cel care a alcatuit, in circumstante care vor fi lamurite neindoielnic in viitorul apropiat, intregul dosar , care a fost si este baza a ceea ce si azi, cand scriem aceste randuri, presedintele Trump numeste a fi un ‘ witch hunt’ , anume suspiciunea ridicata asupra sa de legaturi ilegale cu Rusia in perioada anterioara accederii la Casa Alba. Vreme de aproape doi ani de zile, presedintele Trump a avut a se lupta aproape zilnic cu aceasta actiune de rezistenta a adversarilor politici ai mandatului sau . Cine are rabdarea sa citeasca cele 57 de pagini care detaliaza practice continutul dosarului Steele poate sa inteleaga mai in amanunt miza aflata in joc in jurul acestui dosar. 
PS Nu este exclus ca , in zilele urmatoare, sa apara amanunte despre alte mega- intelegeri la Helsinki intre cei doi presedinti, dupa cum este posibil ca despre altele sa nu fie deloc stiuta chiar existenta lor ( nu si amanunte ) pe parcursul generatiei noastre. Ceea ce trebuie sa retinem la sfarsitul acestei analize este ca pe notatiile sale pe twitter, in contextul furtunii neobisnuite de pe scena politica americana, el fiind acuzat de pactizare cu inamicul ( Rusia ) D. Trump a afirmat azi urmatoarele:
‘While the NATO meeting in Brussels was an acknowledged triumph, with billions of dollars more being put up by member countries at a faster pace, the meeting with Russia may prove to be, in the long run, an even greater success. Many positive things will come out of that meeting”.
3:08 AM - 18 Jul 2018
“Some people HATE the fact that I got along well with President Putin of Russia. They would rather go to war than see this. It’s called Trump Derangement Syndrome!”
4:27 AM - 18 Jul 2018
18 IULIE 2018