Image for Classified Russian Document Recalls Spy vs. Spy
Russian President Vladimir Putin undertakes disinformation campaign to upset U.S. global leadership and turn tide against Ukraine defense.

Russia Disinformation Offensive Seeks to Undermines U.S. Global Leadership

Those who grew up reading Mad magazine recall the antics of Spy vs. Spy who tried to outsmart each other with booby traps and sinister schemes. Kids found it comical. Adults saw it as a parody of the Cold War between East and West.

Spy vs. Spy popped to mind this week after a classified addendum to Russia’s official foreign policy was leaked revealing an “offensive information campaign” to unsettle the United States and its allies. The timing of the release coincided with an announcement the House will vote this weekend on long-delayed national security spending measures.

As reported by The Washington Post, the Russian document says, “We need to continue adjusting our approach to relations with unfriendly states. It’s important to create a mechanism for finding the vulnerable points of their external and internal policies with the aim of developing practical steps to weaken Russia’s opponents.”

That’s the kind of thing you would expect to hear from “The Leaders” who gave instructions to Black Spy and White Spy.

On cue, House votes this weekend on aid to Ukraine, Israel and Taiwan.

Offensive Information Campaign
The document calls for an “offensive information campaign” and other measures spanning “the military-political, economic and trade and informational psychological spheres” against a “coalition of unfriendly countries” led by the United States.

That offensive campaign includes disinformation about Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. According to the document, the outcome of Russia’s war in Ukraine will “to a great degree determine the outlines of the future world order”. It describes “multipolar” geopolitics in which Russia is more tightly aligned with China, Iran and North Korea, forming a counterbalance to NATO and other U.S.-led alliances.

You could imagine this scenario played out between Black Spy and White Spy, except it’s not a cartoon, it’s real.

Russia’s Foreign Ministry asked Russian academics to suggest policy options based on the classified addendum. The Post reported Vladimir Zharikhin, a leading paleontologist based in Moscow, urged Russia to “continue to facilitate the coming to power of isolationist right-wing forces in America,” “enable the destabilization of Latin American countries and the rise to power of extremist forces on the far left and far right there,” as well as facilitate “the restoration of European countries’ sovereignty by supporting parties dissatisfied with economic pressure from the U.S.”

Zharikhin previously told The Post that the United States miscalculated global support for its position to defend Ukraine. “This demonstrates the single polar world is over,: he said, “and the U.S. doesn’t want to come to terms with this.”

Other suggestions from academics encouraged Russia to stoke conflict between the United States and China over the future of Taiwan and “to escalate the situation in the Middle East around Israel, Iran and Syria to distract the United States.” Spy vs. Spy was a spoof, but it  also may foreshadow a comedy turned into dramedy.

The Post story carried remarks by Mikhail Khodorkovsky, a harsh critic of Russian President Vladimir Putin. “For Putin, it is absolutely natural that he should try to create the maximum number of problems for the U.S.,” he said. “The task is to take the U.S. out of the game, and then destroy NATO. This doesn’t mean dissolving it, but to create the feeling among people that NATO isn’t defending them.”

Khodorkovsky added, “The Americans consider that insofar as they are not directly participating in the war in Ukraine, then any loss is not their loss. This is an absolute misunderstanding. A defeat for Ukraine means that many will stop fearing challenging the U.S. and the costs for the United States will only increase.”

Johnson Schedules Military Aid Vote
After months of inaction, House Speaker Mike Johnson has scheduled Saturday night votes on a package of bills that separately provide aid to Ukraine, Israel and Taiwan. There also will be a fourth bill that includes a TikTok ban, treating some of the aid to Ukraine as a loan and empowering the Administration to seize Russian assets to pay for Ukrainian aid. Apparently the bill won’t seek to block Biden’s proposed freeze on new liquified natural gas exports, as Johnson had hinted earlier.

Johnson’s four-bill strategy reflects a political tightrope in managing his own caucus. Two House Republicans have publicly called for what amounts to a vote of confidence on Johnson, who has had to rely on Democratic votes to avoid a government shutdown and approve current fiscal year appropriations.

It will take Democratic votes to pass the Ukraine aid bill. Congressman Bob Good, chairman of the House Freedom Caucus, said, “Every true conservative America First patriot in the House should vote against the rule for this borrowed foreign aid bill with no border security.”

President Biden endorsed the package and urged swift passage. “I strongly support this package to get critical support to Israel and Ukraine, provide desperately needed humanitarian aid to Palestinians in Gaza, and bolster security and stability in the Indo-Pacific,” Biden said. “I will sign this into law immediately to send a message to the world: We stand with our friends, and we won’t let Iran or Russia succeed.”

Johnson signaled the Ukraine aid bill will total $60 billion, which is comparable to what the Senate approved earlier. Another $26 billion would go to Israel, with $9.2 billion of that reserved for humanitarian aid and $8 billion will be for Indo-Pacific defense.

Mayorkas Impeachment Quashed
As expected, Democrats on party-line votes dismissed both impeachment counts against Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas as unconstitutional by failing to reach the standard of “high crimes and misdemeanors”. Democrats claimed Mayorkas was impeached over border policy disagreements.