It was a blockbuster about Russia’s return to the imperial “Great Game” in Afghanistan. The Kremlin had spread money across the ancient battlefield of Central Asia for militants to kill the remaining US troops. It caused enormous outrage from the Democrats and their # resistance reinforcers over the treacherous Russian puppet in the White House whose admiration for Vladimir Putin had endangered US forces.
But on Thursday, the Biden administration announced that US intelligence had “low to moderate” confidence in the story after all. Translated from spyworld jargon, this means that the intelligence agencies have found the story to be unproven at best – and possibly untrue.
“The United States intelligence community assesses with little to moderate confidence that Russian intelligence officers tried to encourage Taliban attacks by US and coalition personnel in Afghanistan in 2019 and perhaps earlier,” said a senior government official.
US intelligence had only “low to moderate” confidence in the story. Translated from spyworld jargon, this means that the intelligence agencies have found the story to be unproven at best – and possibly untrue.
“This information places a burden on the Russian government to explain its actions and take steps to address this troubling pattern of behavior,” said the official, indicating that Biden is unprepared to fully reverse the story.
Significantly, the Biden team announced a series of penalties on Thursday. But those sanctions, targeting Russia’s sovereign debt market, are motivated only by Russia’s interference in the 2020 elections and its alleged role in SolarWinds’ cyber-espionage. (In contrast, officials at the Biden administration said their assessment of attributing the breach by technology company SolarWinds to hackers of Russia’s foreign intelligence agency was “high confidence.”)
“We have taken note of our conclusion of the evaluation we conducted on the premiums issue and we have delivered strong, direct messages on this issue through diplomatic, intelligence and military channels, but we are not specifically linking the actions we are taking today that matter, ”a senior administration official told reporters in reference to the premium claims.
According to officials on Thursday’s call, news of alleged “bounties” came from “reporting prisoners” – raising the specter of someone telling their US-affiliated Afghan jailers what they thought was needed to get out of a cage come. In particular, the official cited “information and evidence of links to criminal agents in Afghanistan and elements of the Russian government” as sources for the intelligence agencies’ assessment.
Without additional confirmation, such reporting is notoriously unreliable. Inmate reported from a man known as Ibn Shaikh al-Libi, torn from torture, infamous and seemingly fueled a claim by the Bush administration used to invade Iraq about Saddam Hussein training al-Qaeda to make poison gas .
The senior Biden official added on Thursday that the “difficult work environment in Afghanistan” complicates US efforts to confirm what amounts to a rumor.
“I am not surprised that the review has led to an obscure low to moderate confidence finding. While it is clear that Russia and other adversaries have provided assistance to their proxies in Afghanistan, identifying the type and amount of such assistance with great specificity has been the ongoing challenge, ”said Jason Campbell, an Afghan policy officer in the Obama Pentagon. , to The Everyday Beast.
From the outset, there were reasons to question the story. Not only did the early stories emphasize the basics of inmate reporting, but the bounties represented a qualitative shift in recent Russian engagements with Afghan insurgents. Russian agents have long been suspected of transferring money to various Afghan militants: a disgraced former Taliban official told The Daily Beast that Russia gave them cash for years. But the Russians were not suspected of outright sponsoring attacks on US forces – an escalation that risked a confrontation with the US that happened long after it could have made a difference in the war.
Also, there did not appear to be a “causal relationship” with any actual US deaths, said General Frank McKenzie, the senior US general for the Middle East and South Asia. Former US diplomats and intelligence officers told The Daily Beast last summer that they are skeptical about the bounties. A retired diplomat suspected, “Someone has leaked this to delay the withdrawal of the troops.”
Former US diplomats and intelligence officers told The Daily Beast last summer that they are skeptical about the bounties. One suspected: “Someone leaked this to slow down the withdrawal of the troops.”
Rarely discussed was the main reason for believing the story: the CIA actually did fund Afghan guerrillas to kill Russian troops during the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan in the 1980s.
The Pentagon said at the time that its massive intelligence apparatus, which includes both battlefield intelligence and the world’s most advanced surveillance network, did not spawn the story of bounties. In September, McKenzie said the intelligence was not confirmed. “It just hasn’t been proven to a level of certainty that satisfies me,” he told NBC News.
But the Democrats went along with the election narrative. The then-candidate Biden called it a “horrifying revelation” if it were true. Senior Democrat on the Senate Foreign Affairs Committee, Robert Menendez (D-NJ), introduced a measure to sanction Russia for the alleged premiums. Congressional Democrats claimed to be insufficiently informed about the bill, which Trump’s White House has called a “hoax,” and suggested that a cover was underway. When Trump himself denied having been briefed on the story, Adam Schiff (D-CA), chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, commented, “Is this a problem where they can’t tell the president what he doesn’t want to hear when it comes? about Vladimir Putin and Russia? ? “
House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-MD) added in June, “I think we knew the White House perspective, what we need to know is the intelligence perspective.” Now he knows.