Trump’s Loose Lips and America’s Intelligence Relationships

May 19, 2017 Kent Harrington

Like telling a secret to a friend, sharing intelligence with an ally is an act of faith. By disclosing intelligence provided by a US ally to the Russian foreign minister and ambassador last week, President Donald Trump indicated that he cannot safely be trusted – and thus caused profound damage to US national security.

ATLANTA – Telling someone a secret is an act of faith. Sharing intelligence with an ally is no different. By disclosing intelligence provided by a US ally to the Russian foreign minister and ambassador in an Oval Office meeting last week, President Donald Trump indicated that he cannot safely be trusted – and caused profound damage to US national security.

Every intelligence relationship has its rules and regulations. But, while written agreements are often part of the protocol, intelligence sharing isn’t based on any fine print. Rather, it rests on mutual confidence built over years, including by protecting secrets each side acquires through hard and often dangerous work.

Trust between intelligence services is a perishable commodity; indeed, there is an implicit threat that a betrayal, or even a mistaken disclosure, can sever the relationship then and there. Last week, Trump risked precisely that, as he demonstrated to intelligence services around the world that he hasn’t got a clue what trust means.

To continue reading, register now.

Subscribe now for unlimited access to everything PS has to offer.

As a registered user, you can enjoy more PS content every month – for free.

Already have an account? Log in

Subscribe to PS Digital

Access every new PS commentary, our entire On Point suite of subscriber-exclusive content – including Longer Reads, Insider Interviews, Big Picture/Big Question, and Say More – and the full PS archive.

Subscribe Now

new comment has been posted. new comments have been posted.

0 Comments on this paragraph, 34 Comments on this article

Gog Magog Jun 14, 2017

How exactly is Trump's intelligence sharing with Russia, "history"? Following 9/11, Vladimir Putin offered the US full cooperation in the War on Terror and intelligence sharing was routine. In fact, Russia warned the US about the activities of the Tzarnaev brothers in Georgia, that they may have been radicalised and could pose a threat, a warning that apparently went unheeded, before the Boston bombing. Its only the ramped up propaganda after the Ukraine coup, and the now discredited Russian Hacking and collusion narrative, that suddenly its "history", to share information with Russia that may have saved many lives. Of course we know who backs Project Syndicate, so such a story is understandable.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
j. von Hettlingen May 24, 2017

Kent Harrington shares the worries of the intelligence community, which has every reason to worry about Trump's deplorably loose tongue. What's worse is that he doesn't seem to learn from past mistakes, especially the one he made on May 10th, when he gave sensitive information to his two Russian guests - Sergey Lavrov and his Washington ambassador, Sergey Kislyak - in the Oval Office.
The White House refused to comment on reports that Israel was the source of the intelligence, Yet during a news conference that he held in Israel with Benjamin Netanyahu he embarrassed his host, by volunteering a confession: “Just so you understand,” Trump announced, “I never mentioned the word or the name Israel in conversation. Never mentioned it during that conversation. They are all saying I did. So you had another story wrong. Never mentioned the word Israel.”
Not only did Trump insist that he had "absolute right" to share information with a hostile power, like Russia, he even confirmed that Israel was the unnamed ally that had provided sensitive intelligence to the US, that Trump then handed over to Russia. Israeli officials were concerned that if the source were identified, it would jeopardise the intelligence network or put the lives of informants at risk. Benjamin Netanyahu put on a brave face, suggesting ties with the US had not been affected by Trump's letting the cat out of the bag. But the intelligence community is hugely annoyed that Trump lacks the judiciousness to tell what is the right or wrong thing to do under certain circumstances.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Michael H. May 22, 2017

is there a better way for a candidate/president who put the slogan “America First” at the center of his campaign/presidency to prove his commitment to Americans than to defraud thousands of Americans under the "Trump University" scam ?

For Trump, lying is a way of life and a way of governing. Fortunately, the media has so far prevented Trump from turning the U.S. into a republic banana.
- Hank Bones May 22, 2017
  
  If only we had an honest politician in that office, like Hillary Cli-... Oh wait. I mean Barack Oba-... Oh wait. I mean Bill Cli-.. Hmm.
  
  One nice thing about Trump: even the tiniest lie he tells, everybody knows it. If he says last night he left the White House at 9:15 PM but he actually left at 9:25, it'll be front page in every newspaper, and they'll be running 24/7 coverage on it on all the news channels.
  
  With the folks from the other team, all you hear about in the media when they get creative with the facts is, "That wasn't a lie; more of a stretching of the truth"... if you even hear about it at all.
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Delia Ruhe May 21, 2017

In my understanding, the real damage was done in the leak, not in the sharing. Those who want the Trump presidency destroyed seem to think that Washington should be destroyed in order to save it --- a well-known American methodology that serves in lots of situations.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
barry stanley May 21, 2017

As always the important issue is avoided by focusing on Trump himself.
So in this case the US was going to put all its allies, and the rest of the world at risk of having their citizens blown out of the sky because its source, Isreal, would be upset and would not share such secrets in the future. What other dangers is the US hiding from its allies?
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
John Doyle May 21, 2017

Trump set off a wave of speculation which the other comments here argue about. It seems the real culprits are the media expanding on the so called sensitive advice Trump was supposed to have leaked. The third party now seems to be Jordan, not Israel. Again, this tit bit comes via the media. It is they who lack the goods.
Mr Harrington's article is nothing beyond speculation and gossip. Was it even worth penning? Basically the media won't pull its head in. So they are really the cause of the whole fiasco.
- John Doyle May 22, 2017
  
  Tim, Yes is my answer in this instance. The criticism is that Trump broke some sort of secrecy and in the brou haha that followed the media spread the secret and addem more stuff to it that Trump did not say. I.E., the media broke more secret stuff and so were very complicit in the secret. Hypocrites.
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
- Tim Bowler May 22, 2017
  
  John Doyle really? reporting what Trump did is wrong? You are being ironic here, I hope
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
- John Doyle May 21, 2017
  
  everyone is doing that, with more or less success, particularly where the MSM is concerned.
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
- Curtis Carpenter May 21, 2017
  
  I believe you're engaging in what is called "shoot the messenger."
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Michael Parsons May 21, 2017

US extraordinary and irrational political neurosis needs sympathetic treatment, like a mid-life crisis when you find your writ no longer runs. No evidence of Russian interference or 'collusion' etc, has been shown - indeed there is much more evidence of Israeli 'interference'! But any country is free to make a case. Americans are renowned for their consumption of anti-depressants etc, which may at last be taking its toll: perhaps they need to give up on the pills and chill out? Or is it that he whom the gods wish to destroy they first send mad?
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Kenneth Almquist May 20, 2017

McMaster didn't claim that Trump hadn't “revealed” any sources or methods. He claimed that Trump hadn't “discussed” sources and methods. That doesn't contradict reporting that he discussed the information in sufficient detail that the Russians would be able to figure out what sources/methods were used to obtain it.
- Michael H. May 21, 2017
  
  Just like Trump used Rosenstein’s memo as a pretext for Comey's dismissal (for which Rosenstein threatened to resign), he tarnished McMaster's reputation by having the Army three-star general defended his revelation of national security info to the Russians in their meeting at the Oval Office where the Russian media were allowed but American journalists barred.
  
  The only way for McMaster to rehabilitate his integrity is to resign, just as Rosenstein regained his integrity by appointing former FBI Director Robert Mueller as special counsel for the Russia investigation.
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
john roberts May 20, 2017

Complaining about these Trump leaks is looking more and more like the people decades ago who complained about Deep Throat and the Pentagon Papers leaks.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
john roberts May 20, 2017

Trump's administration leaks more in one day than Obama's administration did in eight years. The Trump administration's leaks come at every level from White House staffers to very powerful and knowledgeable individuals in the IC. All of the leaks are due to complete panic about the state of the WH. Those leaks are from very desperate individuals. If Trump could inspire any loyalty among his soldiers these leaks would not be happening.
- Hank Bones May 22, 2017
  
  It's impossible for Trump to inspire many of these Obama soldiers. Any more than the Dalai Lama could inspire the soldiers of ISIS if he suddenly found himself in charge of the IS Caliphate.
  
  The best thing for him to do is gradually bring his own people in, while working to identify the most zealous of the resistance, bring them up on charges, and make public examples of them to dissuade the rest of the ideologically opposed. After a few leakers find themselves jailed on felony charges, we should see a reduction in government employees running this scorched earth campaign against their marching orders.
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
- Anthony DeAngelis May 21, 2017
  
  You are correct in the fact that the Obama administration was a tight ship as far as leaks to the press go. That being said, the press is constantly attacking Pres. Trump and these leaks are all from "unnamed" sources. Now obviously, all sources will be based on anonymous tips, but when you have sources reporting information that is almost instantly refuted, you need to start questioning these sources.
  
  In reality, both sides hate the fact that Trump was elected. He's neither Democrat or Republican and all the big donors hate this.
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
d clark May 20, 2017

Which might be worse, Trump’s intelligence indiscretions (if true) or leakage by U.S. intelligence agencies? Kent Harrington mentions Manning and Snowden divulging hurtful intelligence to the world. They are public figures. But how many yet undisclosed Mannings and Snowdens are there? An internal platoon of Trump-hurters leak intelligence, real or not, seemingly daily to the media. And the media, unhappy with Trump, dutifully (within its own system of ethics) spreads the real or not information.
But who believes that the intelligence sieve opens only to American recipients? Surely, a la Manning and Snowdon, there is just as much undisclosed and unknown treachery from American intelligence to American enemies (and friends) from not only Trump-haters but the more traditional foreign plants. With a hundred thousand intelligence employees and contractors (does anyone know?), even at the upper nodes, the American intelligence “community” must represent an ungainly collection of ways and means and people.
Obama paid for Manning’s sex change operation and pardoned Manning after serving a fifth of her 35-year sentence. Not good to deter future intelligence betrayers. Harrington is right that presidents should be conscious of what they say (ie do). And Trump is learning. But to think that he should act as Obama or any other president has acted is looking backward. Times, threats, intelligence, friends and enemies change—and so do presidents and their ways.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Michael H. May 20, 2017

As Trump departed for his "American First" foreign trip, there were media reports that Trump told Russian officials in the Oval Office last week that “I just fired the head of the FBI. He was crazy, a real nut job. I faced great pressure because of Russia. That’s taken off.”, and that the Mueller-led investigation into possible coordination between the Trump campaign and Russia has tagged a current White House official as a “significant person of interest”.

Would that significant person of interest” be Stephen Bannon who was the executive chairman of Breibart and vice president of Cambridge Analytica owned by Robert Mercer, given that the Trump campaign hired Cambridge Analytica to politically microtarget voters using its data mining and data analysis expertises with a view of changing voters' behaviors, which has occurred at the same time the Russians interfering in the electoral process ?
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Peter Schaeffer May 20, 2017

The U.S. and Europe were already banning laptops on plane flights well before the Trump meeting. The laptops bans were quite public. Anyone, anywhere could have figured out that the U.S. and Europe has specific intelligence to support the ban. Given that Russia has lost several planes to onboard bombs, the U.S. had plenty of reason to provide this information to the Russians.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Henry Rech May 20, 2017

A giant cat amongst the pigeons:

https://youtu.be/Yyy7S3oIEuo
- Henry Rech May 21, 2017
  
  @BS
  
  Not at all. I was just pointing out that there might be other forces at play.
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
- British Sausage May 21, 2017
  
  @Henry Rech
  The Fox 'expert' (self appointed - I suspect) and you seem to miss the point entirely. The leak gives rise to the perception that Trump is an idiot who wants to brag about knowledge he has, and the Russians haven't. Anyone who is going to supply info. to the CIA (or whoever) in the US, now believes that there's an idiotic loudmouth in the White House.
  
  And they would be right.
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Steve Hurst May 19, 2017

So its about the ownership of secrets. I'll tell you something but you mustnt tell anybody unless I approve. Is that it. Keep your secrets to yourself then. Nope that doesnt work because they have no value unless you tell somebody. What a load of nonsense. As for IS its not hard to work out what they are up to surely. Please stop talking as though they are super intelligent, they are not. Exploding laptops, exploding shoes, exploding underpants. 911 happened because the US domestic airlines lobbied hard for walk on walk off minimal security and Clinton gave it against security advice. How much intel did that need. Nice wouldnt have happened if a few concrete blocks had been drop in place during what was supposed to be a French national emergency. How many of these events happen with guys who are not on the radar, yet they still happen
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Anthony DeAngelis May 19, 2017

Hyperbole.

Sir, I respect the service you've provided to this country and I will never know all the things you've done to keep this nation safe. But the fact of the matter is that the President has the right to declassify information as he sees fit, Russia has the same issues with airline safety as the US (they lost a civilian airliner in Egypt) and Trump was showing that he could provide information and hopefully get some.

Do not forget that it was Russia that warned the US about the Boston Bombers. Terrorism impacts both our nations. Trump was showing good faith.

BTW - McMaster clearly said what Pres. Trump did was not an issue.
- Curtis Carpenter May 21, 2017
  
  No Peter, at this point McMaster has LOST a small portion of the credibility he once enjoyed (even with someone like me) before he agreed to work for Trump.
  
  I wonder if Trump demanded the same kind of "loyalty oath" from the general that he wanted from directory Comey? I bet so -- and now McMaster has been obliged to "spin" for his boss. I thought he was a better man.
  
  As other commentators have pointed out on several occasions, the people that work for Donald Trump are all diminished by it. And they know it too -- which will eventually produce resignations rather than just "leaks."
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
- Peter Schaeffer May 20, 2017
  
  GC, General McMaster has a lot more credibility than Trump's critics at this point. That includes you and Kent Harrington. Even Brennan has admitted that the media and leaks have done far more damage to U.S. intelligence interests than Trump. This is fake hysteria.
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
- Curtis Carpenter May 19, 2017
  
  Sadly, General McMAster's statements on this matter would seem to suggest that he shares at least a portion of Trump's stunning lack of common sense, judgement -- and honesty.
  
  Trump almost certainly has no clue as to the damage he has done to American security interests in the long run. McMaster, on the other hand, most certainly knows better. He must begin, NOW, to recognize that his boss is a greater danger to the constitution and the American people than anyone else on the planet, with the possible exception of Kim Jong Un.
  
  His soldier's oath puts him in a difficult -- but not impossible -- position, and he has some hard choices to make going forward.
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
- Anthony DeAngelis May 19, 2017
  
  @Paul Ross - You and I do not know if this was vetted with Israel. McMaster said that there was no risk with sharing this information. Furthermore, the USA shares plenty of information with Israel and other countries.
  
  Additionally, your bias is clear in your post. Instead of BMOC, maybe Trump was trying to show respect and generosity in providing information that could impact Russia.
  
  Furthermore, this information was widely reported in papers weeks before. Netanyahu downplayed this "crisis" and reaffirmed his support.
  
  In reality, the outrage and "risk of losing a relationship with Israel" is manufactured by the press who loved reporting on "unnamed" sourced. Sorry, this is not a crisis.
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
- Paul Ross May 19, 2017
  
  Off Topic.
  
  The point is not if Trump could disclose information, it is THAT he disclosed information that was not our own work. AS clearly noted here by Mr. Harrington and elsewhere, the unspoken rule is you don't disclose information to a third party without the originators consent. No one has indicated Trump discussed this with Israel.
  
  That is the damage his loose lips may cause. Oddly Israel has an embassy in Moscow, if they had wanted to share the information, they could have. They did not.
  
  This is about Mr. Trump feeling a need to be the Big-Man-On-Campus. There was no reason for the disclosure that holds water, unless you give in to Russia-phobia. Why not share with European Allies? Why off the cuff/script?
  
  No it is Trump needing to be BMOC... And that makes him an unreliable partner if you are sharing secrets. He likes to blab.
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Michael Public May 19, 2017

Regardless of the technicalities he is the president, i.e. the executive branch of the US government, and if he can't make decisions like this about passing on information, who can? Trump has done a lot of things that are just plain wrong, but I am not convinced this is one of them.
- Michael Public May 20, 2017
  
  I agree that Trust is highly untrustworthy but I am taking the Devils advocate position here that sharing information on potential plane bombs with Russia is harmless to Israel and saves peoples lives, possibly even American lives. It is not an outright untrustworthy act in any sense - at best it is a little grey. Look to everything else he does for the source of his untrustworthiness.
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
- Curtis Carpenter May 19, 2017
  
  Then you really haven't understood a bit of Mr. Harrington's article here. This isn't about Trump's legal authority -- it's about the ability of others to place any trust whatsoever in the man's judgement and commitment to use that authority responsibly.
  
  Perhaps psychologist can explain why people like yourself are so willing to accept any gross breach of trust from Donald Trump, no matter how dangerous to the long term security of all of us. It remains a mystery to me.
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.

https://prosyn.org/sSlJeaY

Trump’s Loose Lips and America’s Intelligence Relationships

Subscribe to PS Digital

New Comment

Contact us

Handpicked to read next

Trump’s Strongman Weakness

Log in/Register

Trump’s Loose Lips and America’s Intelligence Relationships

Subscribe to PS Digital

Handpicked to read next

Edit Newsletter Preferences

Set up Notification