Why GOP lawmakers want action on Russian-Afghanistan intel now

On Monday, the White House briefed eight Republican lawmakers on year-old reports of Russian bounties for the lives of U.S. troops in Afghanistan. Lawmakers on both sides of the aisle expressed alarm over Russia's activities.

|
Rahmat Gul/AP
American soldiers wait on the tarmac in Logar province, Afghanistan on Nov. 30, 2017. Top White House officials were aware of intelligence reports of Russian bounties on U.S. troops in early 2019, a full year earlier than previously reported.

Eight Republican lawmakers attended a White House briefing about explosive allegations that Russia secretly offered bounties to Taliban-linked militants for killing American troops in Afghanistan – intelligence the White House insisted the president himself had not been fully read in on.

Members of Congress in both parties called for additional information and consequences for Russia and its president, Vladimir Putin, and eight Democrats were to be briefed on the matter Tuesday morning, a day after the Republicans' briefing. Still, White House press secretary Kayleigh McEnany insisted Mr. Trump had not been briefed on the findings because they hadn't been verified.

The White House seemed to be setting an unusually high bar for bringing the information to Mr. Trump, since it is rare for intelligence to be confirmed without a shadow of doubt before it is presented to senior government decision-makers. Ms. McEnany declined to say why a different standard of confidence in the intelligence applied to briefing lawmakers than bringing the information to the president.

Republicans who were in the briefing Monday expressed alarm about Russia's activities in Afghanistan.

Rep. Michael McCaul, the ranking member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, and Rep. Adam Kinzinger were in the briefing led by Director of National Intelligence John Ratcliffe, White House chief of staff Mark Meadows, and national security adviser Robert O’Brien. Mr. McCaul and Mr. Kinzinger said in a statement that lawmakers were told “there is an ongoing review to determine the accuracy of these reports.”

“If the intelligence review process verifies the reports, we strongly encourage the Administration to take swift and serious action to hold the Putin regime accountable,” they said.

Rep. Liz Cheney, R-Wyo., and Texas Rep. Mac Thornberry, the top Republican on the House Armed Services Committee, said, “After today’s briefing with senior White House officials, we remain concerned about Russian activity in Afghanistan, including reports that they have targeted U.S. forces.”

Senators reviewed classified documents related to the allegations Monday evening. The information they received was not previously known, according to one aide who was not authorized to discuss the matter publicly and spoke on the condition of anonymity.

On CNN, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi confirmed the timing of the Democratic briefing but said “it’s no substitute for what they owe the Congress of the United States.” She said that “this is as serious as it gets.”

She speculated that Mr. Trump wasn’t briefed “because they know it makes him very unhappy, and all roads for him, as you know, lead to Putin. And would he tell Putin what they knew?”

The intelligence assessments came amid Mr. Trump’s push to withdraw the U.S. from Afghanistan. They suggested Russia was making overtures to militants as the United States and the Taliban held talks to end the long-running war. The assessment was first reported by The New York Times, then confirmed to The Associated Press by American intelligence officials and two others with knowledge of the matter.

Republican Sen. John Cornyn told reporters Monday, “I don’t think it’s should be a surprise to anybody that the Taliban’s been trying to kill Americans and that the Russians have been encouraging that, if not providing means to make that happen.”

He added: “Intelligence committees have been briefed on that for months. So has Nancy Pelosi, so has [Democratic Senate leader] Chuck Schumer. So, this is ... more leaks and partisanship.”

While Russian meddling in Afghanistan isn’t new, officials said Russian operatives became more aggressive in their desire to contract with the Taliban and members of the Haqqani network, a militant group aligned with the Taliban in Afghanistan and designated a foreign terrorist organization in 2012.

The intelligence community has been investigating an April 2019 attack on an American convoy that killed three U.S. Marines after a car rigged with explosives detonated near their armored vehicles as they traveled back to Bagram Airfield, the largest U.S. military installation in Afghanistan, officials told the AP.

Three other U.S. service members were wounded in the attack, along with an Afghan contractor. The Taliban claimed responsibility for the attack on Twitter. The officials the AP spoke to also said they were looking closely at insider attacks – sometimes called “green-on-blue” attacks – from 2019 to determine if they are also linked to Russian bounties.

One official said the administration discussed several potential responses, but the White House has yet to authorize any step.

Intelligence officials told the AP that the White House first became aware of alleged Russian bounties in early 2019 – a year earlier than had been previously reported. The assessments were included in one of Mr. Trump's written daily briefings at the time, and then-national security adviser John Bolton told colleagues he had briefed Mr. Trump on the matter. Mr. Bolton declined to comment, and the White House did not respond to questions on the matter.

The intelligence officials and others with knowledge of the matter insisted on anonymity to discuss the highly sensitive matter.

The White House National Security Council wouldn't confirm the assessments but said the U.S. receives thousands of intelligence reports daily that are subject to strict scrutiny.

The revelations cast new doubt on the White House’s efforts to distance Mr. Trump from the Russian intelligence assessments. The AP reported Sunday that concerns about Russian bounties also were in a second written presidential daily briefing this year and that current national security adviser Robert O’Brien had discussed the matter with Mr. Trump. Mr. O’Brien denies doing that.

On Monday, Mr. O'Brien said that while the intelligence assessments regarding Russian bounties "have not been verified,” the administration has “been preparing should the situation warrant action.”

Mr. Trump’s Democratic general election rival, former Vice President Joe Biden, used an online fundraiser Monday to hammer the president for a “betrayal” of American troops in favor of “an embarrassing campaign of deferring and debasing himself before Putin.”

“I’m disgusted,” Mr. Biden told donors, as he recalled his late son Beau’s military service. Families of service members, Mr. Biden said, “should never, ever have to worry they’ll face a threat like this: the commander in chief turning a blind eye.”

Asked about the reports on the alleged bounties, Mr. Putin’s spokesman Dmitry Peskov said Monday, “These claims are lies.”

This story was reported by The Associated Press. AP writers James LaPorta; Deb Riechmann in Washington; Deepti Hajela in New York; and Vladimir Isachenkov in Moscow contributed to this report.

Editor’s note: As a public service, the Monitor has removed the paywall for all our coronavirus coverage. It’s free.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
Real news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.
What is the Monitor difference? Tackling the tough headlines – with humanity. Listening to sources – with respect. Seeing the story that others are missing by reporting what so often gets overlooked: the values that connect us. That’s Monitor reporting – news that changes how you see the world.

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 Why GOP lawmakers want action on Russian-Afghanistan intel now
Read this article in
https://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/2020/0630/Why-GOP-lawmakers-want-action-on-Russian-Afghanistan-intel-now
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today
https://www.csmonitor.com/subscribe