FROM THE ENVIENT TO NEW YORK. Vladimir Putin is a killer, and he will pay a price for interference in last year’s US elections. Perhaps President Biden went even further than he planned to say during last night’s interview with George Stephanopoulos that aired on ABC television. But his frank and direct judgment shows how the line towards Russia has clearly changed, compared to Donald Trump’s suspicious caution.
Just yesterday afternoon, before the interview, the National Directorate of US Intelligence had published a report accusing Moscow of having tried to influence the 2020 elections, as it had done in 2016. Again the goal was to discredit the Trump’s opponent, this time Biden instead of Hillary Clinton. The document then reproached Iran for having tried the opposite, that is to interfere in the vote to boycott the head of the White House who had come out of the nuclear deal. However, neither country managed to compromise electoral operations, for example by changing the results in some polling stations, while China had not tried to intervene.
Stephanopoulos asked the president to comment on the intelligence report, and he replied: «Putin will pay a price. We had a long conversation, him and me. I know him relatively well. And at the beginning of the conversation I said to him: “I know you, and you know me. If I come to the conclusion that this has happened, prepare yourself.” By that of course he meant to prepare for the consequences, at the price to be paid. Then Stephanopoulos has urged, referring to the treatment of dissidents as Navalny: “So you know Putin. Do you think he’s a killer?” Biden thought for a moment, and then replied: “I believe so.”
The head of the White House did not specify the possible punishments, but added that “we can walk and chew gum at the same time, where it is in our interest to work together. I have demonstrated this by extending the New Start treaty on nuclear weapons ».
The Kremlin immediately responded to Biden’s accusations, rejecting them as “an attack on Russia”. The reality, however, is that the climate and the line have changed. Trump throughout his mandate has always avoided criticizing Putin, for reasons that have not yet been fully clarified. The former president did not want to admit interference in the 2016 election, as that would have questioned the very legitimacy of his victory. Furthermore, there was a suspicion that he had colluded with Moscow in the operations to influence the vote, and that he had personal interests on which his submissive attitude to Vladimir depended. Hence the “Russiagate” investigation, which had not found evidence of collusion, but had not fully clarified Trump’s choices either.
Biden and the Democrats believe that Putin has attacked them, because since the Obama administration, the head of the Kremlin has accused Washington, and in particular Secretary of State Hillary Cinton, of having stirred up protests in Ukraine and Russia to bring him down. Now the old rusts reappear in the relationship between the new administration and Moscow. Added to this, however, is the fact that Biden has placed respect for human rights and the promotion of democracy at the heart of American foreign policy, and this prevents him from tolerating Putin’s abuses, such as the attempt to eliminate his opponent Navalny.
The new line is therefore what the head of the White House summed up in the desire to “walk and chew gum at the same time”. Where it will be possible to dialogue and work with Russia, in the national interest of the US and its allies, it will do so; where there will be differences, however, it will not make concessions. US intelligence, for example, is completing its analysis of recent digital attacks attributed to Moscow hackers, and allegations that the Kremlin had ordered to offer bounties to the Taliban to kill US mission soldiers in Afghanistan. If these hostile acts are confirmed, there will be reprisals.
This new line also poses a dilemma to European allies, such as Germany, which wants to complete the construction of the Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline, or Italy, which has strong energy interests in Russia. The problem is to understand to what extent Washington will be willing to tolerate such relations, and when the allies will have to make a clear choice instead.