The purpose of CIA Director John Ratcliffe’s visit to Moscow this week was to warn Russia not to attack NATO member states, according to multiple people familiar with the matter, amid U.S. intelligence assessments that Russia could try to test NATO.

  • metermatic26@lemmy.worldOP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    43
    ·
    25 days ago

    The last time a CIA director had direct talks with his Russian counterpart, it was to warn the Russians not to use nuclear weapons in Ukraine. The last time before that, it was to warn the Russians not to invade Ukraine.

    Russia is presumably behind the incidents in Leipzig and Rome earlier this month, which constitute direct attacks on NATO military assets and are a severe escalation of the conflict.

    In addition Russia has placed ballistic missile launchers in Belarus, has started bombing the border crossing between Moldova and Ukraine, has started engaging in routine airspace violations into NATO territory, all while laying the political groundwork for a massive and forced mobilization.

    It seems very reasonable that Ratcliffe’s visit is in response to either the recent attacks or new intelligence pointing to further escalation.

    • ThePrimitive@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      24 days ago

      The last time a CIA director had direct talks with his Russian counterpart, it was to warn the Russians not to use nuclear weapons in Ukraine. The last time before that, it was to warn the Russians not to invade Ukraine.

      Irrelevant. Both of those were when we didn’t have a Russian puppet in office.

  • Buffalox@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    25 days ago

    USA has very close to zero influence on either Ukraine, Russia or Europe.
    Why the fuck does he think it matters what someone from the Trump administration says? Especially since they change their minds constantly.
    Seems to me that Putin has a way bigger influence on Trump, and the job was to take a message back to trump that needed to be 100% sure not to be intercepted.
    It is very clear that USA would not aid Europe or NATO if Putin attacked, the same way USA isn’t aiding Ukraine, despite they promised to do so for Ukraine giving up their nukes.
    Maybe Putin needed to remind Trump that he still has the P-tapes, P as in pedo.

    • tabarnaski@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      25 days ago

      This has nothing to do with influence. The US doesn’t want to intervene in Europe, but they are bound by NATO. Trump could decide he doesn’t care, but the consequences of not helping a NATO country would be far more damaging to the US, a country the whole world hates right now (apart from Israel maybe).

      Ratcliffe knows this and my guess is he’s trying to convince Moscow that Trump doesn’t call all the shots.

      • Buffalox@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        25 days ago

        they are bound by NATO

        I honestly don’t think he gives a shit. He will just claim that this wouldn’t have happened if NATO allies and Europe had increased defense budgets earlier like he demanded. And that Russia attacking NATO is the fault of the NATO allies, and btw NATO isn’t helping USA in Iran.

        Ratcliffe knows this and my guess is he’s trying to convince Moscow that Trump doesn’t call all the shots.

        This would be nice if true, but I don’t believe Trump would ever allow that. Trump is managing the administration as if it was an autocracy.

          • Buffalox@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            24 days ago

            Yes but even though we aren’t obligated by article 5, almost all NATO countries traditionally help USA in their stupid wars because we are were allies.
            But this time, all allies were very quick to declare the war illegal, which makes it illegal for most countries to help USA because they have laws that forbid participation in illegal wars.

  • minorkeys@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    25 days ago

    But what exactly constitutes an attack? Russia is a master of incremental conflict escalating, never doing anything significant enough to warrant a significant response. I don’t even know if NATO has a runbook for dealing with this kind of aggression, I hope so, but I don’t see it.

  • 🌸𝓯𝓵𝓸𝔀𝓮𝓻🌸@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    25 days ago

    “Like, dude, don’t attack any EU country. I heard that b* von der Leyden is giving out a billion in subsidies for the first county to reach Moscow and everyone is complaining the Poles have a headstart when the race starts. They’re saying next year, they’re going to parade you in the red square. So think hard on this! Alright gotta go bye!”

  • DaddleDew@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    25 days ago

    I feel like that during that “secret” meeting Russia tried to convince him to let them attack a NATO country.