Russia-United States Flash Report for 14 FEB 2024 14:00 PST - A 'Serious National Security Threat'

The House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence Chairman, Congressman Mike Turner (R-OH), released a statement on Twitter (also known as X) that Russia poses a serious national security threat and requested the White House declassify the information.

"Today, the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence has made available to all Members of Congress information concerning a serious national security threat."

"I am requesting that President Biden declassify all information relating to this threat so that Congress, the Administration, and our allies can openly discuss the actions necessary to respond to this threat."

Turner also sent a letter to every member of the House, saying it was an urgent matter about a "destabilizing foreign military capability."

Who is Mike Turner?

Mike Turner is a member of the Republican Party and has been a Congressman since 2003. He holds a degree in Political Science and has his Juris Doctorate. He is a lifelong politician, starting as mayor of Dayton, Ohio, in 1993.

Turner has an extensive background in international politics, soft power, and national security. His credentials include,

• U.N Special Envoy for Hunger Issues
• Served on the House Veterans Affairs Committee
• President of the NATO Parliamentary Assembly from 2014 to 2016
• Member of the House Armed Services and Government Reform Committees

His political positions and voting history are interesting and show someone who has loyalty to former President Donald Trump while crossing the aisle on political issues. More simply put, he appears to be very in tune with his voting base. He could be described as a hawk and heavily focused on national security.

• He was one of three Republicans who investigated then-President Donald Trump and whether he withheld military aid to Ukraine - he called Trump's first impeachment an assault on the electorate
• Even after it was debunked, Turner continued to push the conspiracy theory that the Durham Report supports that then Presidential candidate Hilary Clinton spied on Trump's 2016 campaign
• In 2023, he told the U.S. news agency Fox News that the classified documents that former President Trump took with him were "more like a bookkeeping issue than it is a national security threat"
• In 2010, Turner called for the re-establishment of missile defense sites on the east coast of the United States to defend against missile strikes from Iran
• In 2011, he voted against the Affordable Care Act 
• In 2019, he was supportive of hypothetical legislation that would ban the "sales of military-style weapons to civilians"
• In 2020, he voted to more than double the number of H-2B work visas issued by the federal government
• He voted to prohibit Immigration and Customs Enforcement from cooperating with Health and Human Services to detain and remove undocumented immigrant sponsors of unaccompanied undocumented minors
• He voted for the Respect for Marriage Act, which protects same-sex marriage under federal law
• He voted against a 2023 House Resolution that would have forced the Biden Administration to remove all U.S. troops from Syria
• He co-authored a November 2023 report that, while containing very partisan language and at least one glaring intelligence error, concluded that no equipment or funds sent to Ukraine have been misappropriated and continued support aligned with national security interests
• He and three members of the House Intelligence Committee traveled to Kyiv last week, and vowed that Congress would pass continued funds for Ukraine
• He has consistently seen China, Russia, Iran, and North Korea as serious threats to national security

His peers on both sides of the aisle describe Turner as calm, focused, and not someone to make exaggerations. His ability to advocate for federal projects in Ohio, for good and bad, indicates he is highly persuasive.

What do we know about the threat?

We know the same things you know that are out in the public domain. The information has been made available to all members of Congress - both the House and Senate. The Biden Administration has been asked to declassify the information so it can be made available to the public and U.S. allies. It is widely expected the information will be declassified, but that process takes more than a stroke of the pen.

Multiple sources state that it is related to the Russian Federation. We're not fans of "unnamed sources," but there are so many sources on this one point we are confident the issue is with Russia. Another source on the Intelligence Committee said that the threat is "a highly concerning and destabilizing" Russian capability. Another person on the committee called the information "very sensitive."

The U.S. news agency Politico, citing unnamed sources, reported that the security threat is related to space. We're skeptical about this (more on that in a minute).

Speaker of the House, Mike Johnson (R-LA), said that he was aware of the threat, but there was "no cause for alarm."

After Turner's announcement, National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan said he had reached out to set a meeting with the Gang of Eight before the warning. Sullivan said that the capability represents a "serious national security threat.”

To be blunt, no one on the analyst team is a fan of Sullivan. From 2013 to 2014, Sullivan was then-Vice President Biden's National Security Advisor during the Obama Administration. We perceive Sullivan as timid and one of the key architects of the Obama Administration's response to Russia's 2014 invasion of Ukraine. We also see him as one of the primary drivers of the slow trickle of military aid to Kyiv, appeasement to Moscow, and one of the voices against ATACMS, electronic warfare systems, and fighter aircraft for Ukraine. In our assessment, our beliefs are well-placed. As an example, a number of key allies refused to support Operation Prosperity Guardian in the Red Sea, specifically due to the rules of engagement imposed by Washington. 

The White House expressed surprise and frustration that Turner took what is considered an extraordinary step before the Gang of Eight briefings.

What's the threat?

Everything past here is little more than a hot take. It is rooted in what we understand of Russian military capabilities both in hybrid and kinetic warfare. Presented in no particular order.

• Direct Energy Weapons - space lasers: extremely unlikely. The amount of power required to produce an effective laser to strike surface targets on Earth is enormous. Further, you can't change the laws of physics. Clouds would render a space laser useless. It is an impractical weapon based on existing technology.
• Anti-Satellite Technology: boring. Russia, China, and the United States already possess the ability to shoot down satellites and disable them using ground-based electronic warfare, and all three nations have tested their systems. Russia's 2021 test drew international ire because of the low-earth-orbit debris field it created, and China's 2007 test created the largest manmade debris field in space.  
• Space-Based Nuclear Launch Platform: that's significant. if the correct answer is space, this is the most likely answer. The fear of space-based nuclear launch platforms has existed since Russia orbited Sputnik. The benefit of such a platform is nuclear weapons could reach their targets within a few minutes, providing almost no time for evaluation or response. The downside of such a system is satellites have predictable orbits and it takes a lot of fuel to change course. If Russia has put nuclear weapons in space, it has broken a 65-year global taboo.
• Confirmation the Zircon Hypersonic Missile is Real: boring. Russia stated it was operational in 2017, then walked it back and said in 2020 it would be operational "soon." Then said it was deployed. The United States intelligence community was already in knots about the Kh-47 Kinzhal, which was revealed to be nothing more than an air-launched ballistic missile. Literally, 1950s technology. U.S. allies are already aware of Zircon.
• Russia has Provided Nuclear Warheads or ICBM Technology to Iran and/or North Korea: somewhat boring. Iran already has ICBM capability and its own space program. North Korea also has ICBM capability. Russia providing technology to make them better wouldn't be a "destabilizing foreign military capability." North Korea already has its own nuclear weapons program, and the International Atomic Energy Agency has watched Iran move closer to producing its own weapon for years.
• Cuban Missile Crisis II or Venezuela, or Nicaragua: a dangerous possibility. Could Russia have positioned nuclear weapons and launch capabilities in Cuba? Extremely unlikely as the current regime has maintained its relationship more out of convience. What about Nicaragua or Venezuela? That's a possible scenario, with Venezuela the most likely candidate. This presents a smaller threat to space-based nuclear launch platforms. The placement of nuclear weapons in Central or South America would violate the 1800's Monroe Doctrine, which the U.S. has defended each time it's been challenged. However, this wouldn't be the same level of threat the Cuban Missile Crisis created in October 1962, with one twist. Nikita Khrushchev was a complicated Soviet Leader who was ultimately deposed in a soft coup. While history remembers him for banging his shoe on a U.N. podium, declaring, "We will bury you," history also shows he was a rational leader. The world doesn't have that in Vladimir Putin. One other issue: this is a threat to the United States, not our allies.
• Poseidon Nuclear Torpedo is Real: boring. The world has known about these claims for years. The U.S. experimented with using nuclear weapons to create tidal waves and concluded that it was a technological dead end. So much so that some of the information on the tests are publicly available. Yes, you can use a nuclear weapon to create tidal waves, but you're not going to create one 500 to 1,000 meters high. Pure fantasy. Further, our allies already know about Poseidon. 
• Burevestnik is Real: interesting but doesn't meet the criteria. Russia claims that the 2023 test of the 9M730 Burevenstnik nuclear-powered cruise missile was a success. That's the same missile that, in 2019, blew up in Nyonoksa, spreading radiation and killing some of Russia's top engineers and scientists. Russia claims that the missile has unlimited range, can fly for months or years, and carries a massive warhead. Based on the past performances of previously revealed Russian Wunderwaffe, these capabilities seem very doubtful. Like Poseidon, our allies already know about this technology.
• Russian Super Soldier Ironman Body Suits: straight no. Russia's Ratnik body armor program was a complete fraud. If it existed and worked even half as well as advertised, we'd be seeing it in Ukraine. Next.
• Previously Undisclosed Wunderwaffe: more realistic. Intelligence concluding that Russia has a new capability around a previously undisclosed weapon system, conventional or nuclear, would be a possible candidate. It would have to go beyond stealth fighters, drones, etc.
• Hybrid Warfare Capability or Ongoing Attack: a place no one is looking. What hybrid warfare technique would represent "a serious national security threat?" Deep hacking into critical and classified information systems to the point they are completely compromised. Using immigration as a weapon in the Americas, as Russia has in Europe, but at a much larger scale and backed by the Russian military. The other ideas start requiring tinfoil hats.
• High-Level Government Officials Compromised: adjust your tinfoil hats and incredibly unlikely. Why? If Russia developed a "Manchurian Candidate" program and there are people in the Pentagon or Congresspersons just waiting for their activation phone call, informing everyone in Congress, "We know about you," isn't logical. This also doesn't fall into the realm of military capabilities.
• Russia has Restarted Biological or Chemical Weapons Programs: interesting, but the world already knows Russia is unafraid to use chemical weapons. Russia has used the nerve agent Novichok for assassinations inside and outside of Russia, most famously in Salisbury, U.K., in 2018. Does restarting their programs represent a "destabilizing foreign military capability?"
• Russia has Developed a New Family of Chemical Weapons: an interesting possibility. Unlike restarting the industrial production of chemical weapons, developing a new weapon that can't be detected and makes existing CBRN protection and treatment ineffective would meet the criteria. But does this represent "destabilization?" 
• Russia has Gained the Technology or Developed Modern Semiconductor Forges: would that fall under military? There are numerous problems with this theory. First, it costs about $10 billion and takes up to a decade to build a modern semiconductor factory. After its completion, the forge has a 50/50 chance of producing enough viable chips. If China "gave" Russia this technology, it would also represent an economic threat. Further, if Russia had its own semiconductor capability now, it wouldn't be dodging sanctions to purchase chips from the pathetic and weak, technologically behind West.
• Turner is Exxagerating an Intelligence Nugget to Push Ukrainian Aid: very unlikely. Turner's record does not reveal a man who makes wild claims to get what he wants. Yes, the idea that the United States should install active missile defense systems on the East Coast seemed unreasonable in 2010. Fourteen years later, there's a strong argument that he was right and the work should have started years ago. A 20 year political record doesn't show Turner as someone who likes to grab unwarranted headlines.

House Speaker Mike Johnson said, "no cause for alarm," could he be right? And what do Donald Trump, Vladimir Putin, and Tucker Carlson have to do with the events of the coming days?

Personal note: You have no idea how much I loathe the fact that national security and aid to Ukraine have become completely politicized to the point of threatening national security.

Speaker Johnson is going through a lot of things right now. The Republicans lost the New York District 3 seat held by George Santos (R-NY) to a Democrat, bringing the majority down to three. There was other bad news for the GOP in the vote results, and I'm not going to go into it.

We maintain that Johnson is walking the metaphorical Green Mile, and the only way he can hold the Speakership is by continuing to do nothing.

His motivation for blocking immigration and border security reform and Ukrainian aid is purely political. It's estimated that if the current Supplemental Aid Bill passed by the Senate were put on the House floor, it would pass with more than 300 yes votes. As we wrote yesterday to the 57% who are from outside of the United States - the will of the American people is to continue aid to Ukraine.

It is possible, that the "destabilizing threat" does not fall into an area that requires immediate investment and response. However, if we look at the history of Turner and the history of Johnson, the scales tip to Turner.

Here is Johnson's problem. The truth matters. The Speaker of the House is following the instruction of former President Trump. He is blocking a 2024 budget, immigration, and border security reform, and destroying the United States's reputation as a defender of Democracy due to political motivations. Before you rage cancel your subscription, even members of the Republican party have said aloud that HR2 is unconstitutional and would never stick. Further, multiple members of the Republican party have said aloud that the Senate Bill that got killed was the best bi-partisan immigration reform package ever offered and would never be offered again. Further, we have repeatedly blasted the Biden Administration for appeasing Moscow, slow-rolling military aid, tying Ukraine's hands, and not leveraging Lend Lease in 2023. We're not carrying water for anyone.

If the threat posed by Russia is truly a "destabilizing foreign military capability," continued stalling of military aid to Ukraine becomes untenable. Not only could it be untenable, it could open the case for expansion. Open talk of leaving NATO and non-support of Article V becomes unconscionable.

And the anti-Ukrainian aid wing of Congress has a new problem. Russian state media agency TASS completely threw Tucker Carlson under the bus this morning. This gutted a number of talking points that some Congresspersons and Senators latched onto after his interview with Putin was published.

"Putin admitted that he did not fully enjoy the interview with Carlson, since he deprived him of the opportunity to give sharp answers to pressing questions."

"The Russian President also called American journalist Tucker Carlson a 'dangerous person' because he chose the tactics of a patient listener during an interview with the Russian leader. The head of state shared his impressions with VGTRK journalist Pavel Zarubin."

The Kremlin is now in full damage control mode over the 2-hour-plus interview, which even left many Russian supporters scratching their heads. In true Putin fashion, the inability to "give sharp answers to pressing questions" belongs to Putin, not Carlson. The few times Carlson tried to regain control of the interview was met with anger and mockery. The Kremlin edited out some of Carlon's questions and his pushback to some of Putin's answers.

Our instant hot take was, why did Putin spend the first 50 minutes on a 1,000-year-long history lesson? 

This should close the door to any further speculation on whether the Carlson interview was a win or a loss. The Kremlin is viewing it as a five-alarm fire of complete failure. A tweet by Senator Tommy Tuberville (R-AL*) praising the interview and claiming this was the reason we wouldn't support aid to Ukraine has aged like room-temperature milk.

The continued blocking of aid to Ukraine is reaching an Occam's Razor conclusion - it's purely political to support former President Trump. 

What's next?

Expect a flood of "unnamed sources said" in the news, and take them with big grains of salt. Turner has practically forced the matter into the public domain and the White House has been transparent with classified intelligence when it served the interest of the world and our allies. It is worth noting that Turner's track record shows someone who supports former President Trump. In our final assessment, Turner going public suggests that a clear and present danger exists that breaks the boundaries of partisan politics.

Another indication that the Cold War II is about to get hotter? The growing chorus of European and NATO Alliance voices warning that the continent needs to prepare for war now. We'll be surprised if this turns out to be a nothing burger with a side order of lukewarm tap water.

Meanwhile, in Ukraine, soldiers continue to die due to catastrophic ammunition shortages.