Who really benefits from the CIA chief’s Moscow trip?

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 peace You 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 visit Surely 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