Military veterans split over Trump’s Russia approach

Military veterans across the country are divided over President Trump’s recent comments during his meeting with Russian President Vladimir, with some calling his remarks "a tragedy" and others seeing the benefits of a closer US-Russia relationship. 

Ben Finley/AP
James Flaskey, a US Army veteran, discusses the Helsinki summit at a barbershop in Norfolk, Va., on July 17, 2018.

Iraq War veteran Chris Sheppard fumed as he watched President Trump's joint news conference with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Helsinki, Finland.

The former combat engineer with the US Marine Corps sat glued to his cellphone screen in his downtown Seattle office, watching live on Monday as the American president suggested he believed Mr. Putin's denial that his agents interfered in the 2016 US elections. Mr. Trump also declined to say whether he believed the US intelligence community's conclusion that Russia interfered.

Mr. Sheppard, who left the military after 13 years in 2005 and is now a tax attorney, couldn't believe his ears.

"It's like I'm watching somebody commit treason," he said of Trump.

But former US Marine Boe Bostjancic, a Virginia resident, said while he didn't particularly care for Trump's performance in Helsinki, the president was acting like the same politically incorrect leader he voted for and still supports.

"At least I can respect the fact that he was honest with us," Mr. Bostjancic said.

Sheppard and Bostjancic represent the mixed views among former members of the US military to Trump's comments: Some say they are a betrayal, with the commander in chief giving more credence to Putin's word than to the conclusions of US intelligence agencies and creating a hardship for those who serve and put their lives on the line. Others say Trump's relationship with Putin, whatever it may be, is positive for the United States, and won't change their minds about their president.

Trump on Tuesday said he simply misspoke in Helsinki and accepted the conclusions by US intelligence agencies that Russia was behind the election hacking, but then on Wednesday he appeared to defend his original remarks.

Those who spoke with The Associated Press largely didn't buy his change in tone – or said it didn't matter.

Sheppard, a self-described reluctant Democrat who became disenfranchised with the Republican party during the Iraq War, characterized Trump's performance in Helsinki as "a national tragedy."

"I honestly felt like Trump wasn't representing the collective interests of Americans. He looked like he was representing the interests of Vladimir Putin."

Kate Handley, a Navy veteran whose husband is still on active duty, said Trump's reluctance to fully support American intelligence agencies also undermines the US military.

"He's throwing the military under the bus when he throws the intelligence community under the bus," said Ms. Handley of Chesapeake, Va. "Everything we do – every deployment – is based on a reason. And it's often based on [information] the intelligence community has."

Handley, who retired as a chief petty officer, said she started serving under President Ronald Reagan.

"Just because the Soviet Union broke apart, doesn't mean they stopped being our enemy," she said of Russia. "What has Russia done to advance the US's interest? They go against US interests."

But James Flaskey, a Norfolk, Va., veteran who served in the US Army during the height of the cold war with Russia, sees it a bit differently.

"Back then it seemed like they were our enemy. We couldn't trust them," Mr. Flaskey said as he sat in a Norfolk barbershop.

But now the dynamic with the former Soviet Union is different, he said, and because of that he trusts that Trump is doing the right thing, even if the end game isn't exactly clear.

"I think he's got a reason to be friends with Putin," Flaskey said. "And I think it'll be to our advantage, just like with North Korea."

Aron Axe, a combat-decorated Marine infantry officer with 25 years in uniform, feels anything but trust for his president after witnessing his performance in Helsinki.

"I felt like I'd spent a career defending the principles and the freedoms of this country," said Mr. Axe, who lives in Annapolis, Md. "And in just a few moments I watched a president hand over any semblance of pride or respect for what so many people like me in uniform have been fighting for and potentially been dying for over the last several decades."

Axe, who retired in 2016 and recently made an unsuccessful bid in a Democratic primary for a Maryland state House seat, said the issue has little to do with political party and "everything to do with the person who is in the office of commander in chief."

Kim Samayoa, a research operations manager at a biotech firm in South San Francisco who served as a hospital corpsman in the US Navy for three years, said Trump's words and actions make her and her active-duty friends nervous.

"All this backtracking is frustrating because we've seen with Trump that if a button gets pushed, he really doubles down and escalates things," she said. "If we do end up needing to support a conflict, what this means for some people in the military – these are life and death matters."

This story was reported by The Associated Press. 

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.