'We need to take action' on Russian election hack, Obama says

President Obama said the US will retaliate 'at a time and place of our choosing' to hacking that interfered with the US presidential election. 

Andrew Harnik/AP/File
President Obama (l.) shakes hands with Russian President President Vladimir Putin before a bilateral meeting on Sept. 28, 2015, at the United Nations headquarters in New York. Mr. Obama has ordered intelligence officials to conduct a broad review on the election-season hacking that rattled the presidential campaign and raised new concerns about foreign meddling in US elections, a White House official said Friday.

The controversy surrounding Russia’s role in hacking the US presidential election has taken yet another turn.

"When any foreign government tries to impact the integrity of our elections ... we need to take action," President Obama said an interview with NPR on Thursday. And the US will respond, he added, "at a time and place of our own choosing."

The president’s statements Thursday come after the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) said they have “high confidence” that Russia was involved in the election, and two US intelligence agents told NBC that Russian President Vladimir Putin was personally involved. President-elect Donald Trump has also been criticized for his involvement, with White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest saying the Trump campaign's behavior "might be an indication that he was obviously aware" of the hacking.

When the president-elect logged on to Twitter Friday morning, he seemed to praise Russia’s meddling:

Trump’s tweet refers to an email hacked from the Democratic National Committee and sent to WikiLeaks in which Democratic strategist Donna Brazile gives the Clinton camp a heads up on a debate question before the Democratic debate between former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Sen. Bernie Sanders (I) of Vermont, in Flint, Michigan. 

“One of the questions directed to HRC tomorrow is from a woman with a rash,” Ms. Brazile titled her email. Ms. Brazile also wrote to John Podesta, Mrs. Clinton’s campaign chairman: “Her family has lead poison and she will ask what, if anything, will Hillary do as president to help the ppl of Flint.” 

Trump has written off any allegations of his involvement in Russian election hacking. In fact, Trump denies that Russia had any involvement in the election whatsoever. 

His presidential campaign manager Kellyanne Conway criticized Mr. Earnest’s allegations of Trump’s involvement on Thursday, calling it “just remarkable,” and “breathtaking.” 

“[H]e essentially stated that the president-elect had knowledge of this, maybe even fanned the flames,” said Ms. Conway. “It’s incredibly irresponsible and I wonder if his boss, President Obama, agrees.”

However regardless of Trump’s direct involvement, President Obama also explained how he views the Republican party’s present inaction against electoral hacking as hypocritical.

“The irony of all this, of course, is that for most of my presidency, there’s been a pretty sizeable wing of the Republican Party that has consistently criticized me for not being tough enough on Russia,” he said. “Some of those folks during the campaign endorsed Donald Trump, despite the fact that a central tenet of his foreign policy was we shouldn’t be so tough on Russia. And that kind of inconsistency I think makes it appear, at least, that their particular position on Russia on any given day depends on what’s politically expedient.”

But instead of finger-pointing, the issue of cybersecurity between the US and Russia can also hold great promise, the Monitor Editorial Board wrote Thursday.

"By 1964, the United States and Soviet Union started discussions that led to the first agreement to place restraints on nuclear and missile systems. More pacts followed as well as one for peaceful use of nuclear power. Might Russia and the US be at a similar point in setting international norms to prevent cyberwarfare – and the promotion of cyberstability? The groundwork has been laid for such agreements."

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

QR Code to 'We need to take action' on Russian election hack, Obama says
Read this article in
https://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/2016/1216/We-need-to-take-action-on-Russian-election-hack-Obama-says
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today
https://www.csmonitor.com/subscribe