Trump's breathtaking surrender to Russia - By Michael Gerson
In the normal course of events, the revelation of attempted collusion with Russia to determine the outcome of a presidential election might cause an administration to overcorrect in the other direction. A president might find ways to confront the range of Russian aggression, including cyber-aggression, if only to avoid the impression of being bought and sold by a strategic rival.
But once again, President Trump after extended personal contact with Vladimir Putin and the complete surrender to Russian interests in Syria acts precisely as though he has been bought and sold by a strategic rival. The ignoble cutoff of aid to American proxies means that Putin won in Syria, as an administration official was quoted by The?Post. Concessions without reciprocation, made against the better judgment of foreign policy advisers, smack more of payoff than outreach. If this is what Trumps version of winning looks like, what might further victory entail? The re- creation of the Warsaw Pact? The reversion of Alaska to Russian control?
There is nothing normal about an American presidents subservience to Russias interests and worldview. It is not the result of some bold, secret, Nixonian foreign policy stratagem the most laughable possible explanation. Does it come from Trumps bad case of authoritarianism envy? A fundamental sympathy with European right-wing, anti-democratic populism? An exposure to pressure from his checkered financial history? There are no benign explanations, and the worst ones seem the most plausible.
There is no way to venture where this approach ends up, except that it involves greater Russian influence and intimidation in Eastern Europe and in the Middle East (where Iran, the Syrian regime and Hezbollah are winners as well). But we can already count some of the costs.
Trump is alienating Republicans from their own heroic foreign policy tradition. The conduct of the Cold War was steadied and steeled by Ronald Reagan, who engaged with Soviet leaders but was an enemy of communism and a foe of Soviet aggression. In fact, he successfully engaged Soviet leaders because he was an enemy of communism and a foe of Soviet aggression. There is no single or simple explanation for the end of the Cold War, but Republicans have generally held that the United States strategic determination played a central role.
more
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/trumps-breathtaking-surrender-to-russia/2017/07/20/bde94e10-6d6c-11e7-96ab-5f38140b38cc_story.html