Ratcliffe’s hush-hush visit may be less about Moscow than helping turn Baltic alarm and Brussels money into new business for US arms makers
Speculation abounds over the reason for CIA Director John Ratcliffe’s recent trip to Moscow. Which probably could have been an email. Or a social media post. Just like everything else this administration does.
Oooh, don’t tell me! He went to demand that Russian President Vladimir Putin not help Iran! Or he went to ask whether they’re still up for more speed dating to talk peace in Ukraine! Or maybe just to talk about swapping prisoners. Which happens fairly regularly. And doesn’t require a personal visit. Or maybe Ratcliffe just had a jonesing for that ice cream at the GUM mall in Red Square. Who really knows.
So I’d like to personally take the opportunity to add to the theories, which can only really be evaluated sometime down the road in hindsight.
The thing that strikes me the most about this trip is the sudden secrecy. Specifically from an administration with a penchant for blabbing about everything. If Trump wanted to tell Putin or Russian intelligence something, he’d do it himself on Truth Social Instead, he was uncharacteristically vague, calling the trip semi-routine. When is this guy tight-lipped about anything? It’s so far out of character for the American President that one is almost obligated to look for a motive for the secrecy.
So with that in mind, it seems reasonable to ask whether there is any financial or political constituency that stands to benefit from the message being sent by this unusually secretive trip.
Well, it turns out that it just happened to take place at the same time as the European Union was meeting to set its new 7-year budget, and Eastern European Baltic nations were making a massive push for cash from Brussels.
Read more Scott Ritter: The CIA never comes to Russia in peaceYou know what they say: if you have a pet that starts in with some nasty habits, like chewing the furniture to get your attention, then you really have to nip that in the bud real quick. Otherwise, there’s a risk that, next thing you know, your other pets will learn from it and start gnawing on the couch or the table legs, too.
So here you have Europe, that’s been sitting there while Kiev says 'gimme money', and 'I deserve it because I’m defending all of Europe for you. Oh, and even better, actually, defending DEMOCRACY for you lazy bums'. And instead of whacking it on the nose and going, 'NO, BAD! Brussels just goes, 'Wanna treat?'
So now, what do you know, here comes Latvia, who’s been watching this whole charade, seeing that Ukraine goes from begging to getting tossed a bone every single time, and now they too are like, 'Woof, woof, I’m defending all of Europe for you. Where’s my money? 7 BILLION EUROS, specifically'.
And it’s not like Latvia is even bothering to come up with its own twist on Ukraine’s pitch. It’s not like they’re saying, 'Ukraine’s pitch to Brussels is, ‘Look, we’re being invaded. You’d better give us what we want because we’re the only thing standing between Putin showing up in Europe with a neck pillow for an Interrail tour of Europe.’ So we, Latvia, need to come up with something else. Especially since we aren’t actually being invaded – we just need some emotional-support money'.
No, instead, they’re just basically saying the exact same sort of thing minus the existential threat – that Latvia is the bouncer at the Baltic door keeping Putin on the other side of the velvet rope.
Read more Deal, warning or spy swap? What Russian media are saying about the CIA chief’s Moscow visitSurely it can’t possibly have anything to do with the fact that Latvia’s economy could use the kind of economic boost that can only come from having Brussels dump a ton of cash into its defense industry, right? Because everything’s going so well for Latvia economically, ever since this conflict in Ukraine went hot in 2022 and Riga cut itself off from Russian trade: from just over €2 billion a year back then, to just €193 million last year – an almost 90% reduction in the value of trade between the two countries, according to Latvia’s own foreign affairs ministry.
And now energy prices are going back up again, too – an 83% spike in gas prices since the beginning of this year in Latvia, and 24% over just the past month. An established trend since the EU cut everyone off from Russian fuel and now Trump’s cutting everyone off from fuel from the Middle East with his apparently endless 'mine’s bigger' standoff with Iran.
Oh look, here comes Lithuania now, too. What a surprise! Another guy watching from the cheap seats and going: 'Hang on. We’re also next to Russia. We have security problems, infrastructure costs, and defense bills. Where is OUR cash handout?'
Turns out that Lithuania has just gone directly to Brussels with the invoice, essentially saying: You keep telling us the eastern flank is crucial to European security. Wonderful. Please prove this commitment using the traditional European unit of measurement: euros.
When it comes to Eastern Europe, the EU’s seven-year budget plan is starting to look like a group dinner where everyone suddenly remembers that the guy at the end of the table has a corporate credit card.
Read more CIA chief proposed trilateral talks during Moscow visit – AxiosBut the real question is whose bills would Brussels ultimately be paying? Surely it’s just a mere coincidence that major beneficiaries of Latvian and Lithuanian defense spending include Trump’s America, as the largest supplier of major conventional arms to Latvia and Lithuania, according to the most recently available Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) arms transfer data.
All this comes after the western press reported that the CIA director flew to Moscow this week to tell Russia not to attack NATO countries. Which is actually great marketing for the cause of Eastern European countries shaking down Brussels and basically launching a grant program. They’re behaving now as though a potential future hypothetical Russian attack on NATO is serious enough to justify enormous new expenditures, but the benefit of Brussels’ largesse risks going to Washington as the top weapons supplier.
The trip is remarkably convenient for governments seeking to turn fears about Russia into a case for vastly increased European defense spending – and for the American defense industry that stands to benefit from a big chunk of that spending.
But hey, who really cares if everyone’s barking out for treats when you’re Brussels and all you ever need to do is reach into the pockets of the taxpayer. Even if you then run straight back to Uncle Sam with it and drop it in his lap.
Hence then, the article about who really benefits from the cia chief s moscow trip was published today ( ) and is available on Russia Today ( News ) The editorial team at PressBee has edited and verified it, and it may have been modified, fully republished, or quoted. You can read and follow the updates of this news or article from its original source.
Read More Details
Finally We wish PressBee provided you with enough information of ( Who really benefits from the CIA chief’s Moscow trip? )
Also on site :