Christopher Smart
Christopher Smart was Special
Assistant to the President for International Economics and is currently a
senior fellow at the Mossavar-Rahmani Center for Business and
Government at Harvard University’s Kennedy School of Government.
Previously, he managed investments in global emerging markets, includ… read more
CAMBRIDGE
– It is entirely possible that when Russian President Vladimir Putin
gazes up at the stars at night and imagines the world of his dreams, he
smiles at the thought of Donald Trump as US President. He may like the
idea of an American leader who is focused on law and order at home
rather than democracy-building abroad. He may even admire Trump’s
swaggering leadership style, so reminiscent of his own.
But when he wakes
from his reverie, Putin understands that it cannot possibly be in
Russia’s interest for Trump to win in November. That’s why there cannot
possibly be a serious Kremlin plan – relying on cyber or other means –
to help orchestrate it.
Of course, it’s not
hard to imagine that Russian hackers did find a way into the Democratic
National Committee’s servers, or those used by Hillary Clinton’s
campaign, as part of espionage efforts that target government,
corporate, and political organizations of all kinds. In the twenty-first
century, the Kremlin’s intelligence services would be accused of
professional negligence if they weren’t vigorously attempting such
attacks.
Russian leaders also
have a long history of agitation and propaganda, or “agitprop” as their
Soviet predecessors called the overt and covert campaigns to shape
public opinion in foreign countries. But these efforts have a decidedly
mixed record of success, and Putin has a heightened understanding that
Russian meddling can easily backfire. Thus, it remains unclear just how
much the timing and content of the recent leaks were determined by
Russia itself or by WikiLeaks, where the documents actually appeared.
What remains
absolutely certain, however, is that any clear-eyed assessment by the
Kremlin must conclude that a Trump victory is not in Russia’s interests.
It may be fun to watch the US body politic squirm, and to gloat as
America’s allies wring their hands, but a President Trump would make
Putin’s life far more difficult.
Russia’s central
national interest is primarily economic, as it reels from the combined
blows of the collapse in oil prices, weak European growth, and Western
financial sanctions. To be sure, Russia’s interests also include
political dominance over its neighbors,
which is what drove the ham-handed intervention in Crimea that Trump
now describes in such sympathetic terms. These interests also include
maintaining Russia’s historic involvement in the Middle East and
tweaking the United States wherever possible. In this respect, the
current effort to prop up the Syrian government counts as a twofer.
But raising Russian
living standards remains central to Putin’s grip on power and his
long-term legacy. Even before intervening in Ukraine, Putin was failing
to deliver on his grand promise, made in 2003, to double the size of
Russia’s economy within a decade. In terms of nominal per capita GDP,
Russia still fares little better than Mexico. Signature efforts to
diversify and modernize the economy failed, because disruptive
technologies and business strategies cannot be decreed from the top.
While the oil market
is the largest determinant of Russia’s near-term economic prospects,
accounting as it does for half of export revenues, long-term growth
requires Russia to re-enter international capital markets, attract
foreign investment (and stem capital flight), and reintegrate with the
global economy. All of this requires a global economy that is stable and
predictable. A Trump presidency would mean the opposite.
Trump’s fiscal plans,
which involve massive tax cuts without credible reduction in spending,
could cause US interest rates to spike, fueling turmoil in financial
markets. His casual suggestions that US debt might be renegotiated could
trigger dramatic losses in the value of Russia’s foreign-currency
reserves, which have been its anchor in the economic storm that has hit
the country since 2014. His threats to launch a trade war against
“unfair” foreign competition seems likely to draw in Russia’s steel
exports. And his unpredictability on key security and geopolitical
issues could increase external risks.
Of course, there is a
scenario in which the personal chemistry between leaders brings an
earlier relaxation of Western sanctions. But the European Union’s
restrictions on financing and trade are unlikely to last much longer
in any case, especially now that the United Kingdom’s hawkish views
will no longer shape that conversation. US sanctions may remain on the
books for now, but the Obama administration’s active efforts to
discourage global banks from financing Russia from European subsidiaries
will be difficult to continue indefinitely.
A President Clinton
would not make Russia’s international agenda significantly easier, but
at least the terms of engagement would be known. Notwithstanding the
temptation to embarrass America’s leaders with more cyber feats, Putin
will not tolerate anything that might even marginally boost the chances
of a Trump victory.
No comments:
Post a Comment