The Brief, August 2017


Share this FacebookTwitter

August  14, 2017

A Rift in U.S.-Russia Relations


U.S. President Donald Trump vowed to improve U.S.-Russia relations, but Johns Hopkins SAIS experts said re-engagement could have dangerous consequences on foreign policy and global order.

Roger Hertog Distinguished Practitioner-in-Residence Eric Edelman wrote The Weekly Standard that the first meeting between President Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin was “not a success, but was likely a disaster for U.S.-Russia relations and global order.” Read more

Dean Vali Nasr wrote in The New York Times that “when Mr. Trump sat down with President Vladimir Putin of Russia in Germany, the American president virtually handed the keys to the (Middle East) region to his adversary by agreeing to a cease-fire in Syria that assumed a lasting presence of Russian influence in that conflict.” Read more

Distinguished Practitioner-in-Residence John McLaughlin wrote in The New York Times that Putin’s goals are “unchallenged dominance at home; heavy influence over his neighbors; a weakening of Western institutions like NATO and the European Union; and 'great power' influence in key regions like the Middle East.” Read more

Senior Advisor to the Dean Shamila N. Chaudhary told CNN that Russia is increasing its intelligence on the U.S. because “they definitely see a lot of vulnerabilities coming out of the Trump administration. After the election, they have a lot more data to work with.” Read more

Although there is consensus from the intelligence community of Russian interference in the U.S. elections, Adjunct Professor of European and Eurasian Studies Dana H. Allin told CBC News that “there's been almost a hysterical denial by the president that this should be something he should take seriously because any word of it tarnishes the beauty of his victory.” Read more

European and Eurasian Studies Adjunct Professor Matthew Rojansky told The Christian Science Monitor there is “a serious rift in U.S.-Russia relations where we have gone back to a tit-for-tat mode of bilateral interaction where each side feels compelled to retaliate for perceived or actual attacks from the other,” but both sides will eventually have to cooperate to “limit the possibility of unintended escalation of conventional or even nuclear conflict.” Read more

The Brief highlights Johns Hopkins SAIS expertise on current events and is produced monthly by the Office of Marketing, Communications, and Strategic Initiatives. Like The Brief? Share it on Facebook and Twitter, forward to a friend, or subscribe