WASHINGTON: Decades ago, the CIA recruited and cultivated a midlevel Russian official who began advancing through governmental ranks. Eventually, American spies struck gold: The longtime source landed an influential position that came with access to the highest level of the Kremlin.
As US officials began to realise that Russia was trying to sabotage the 2016 presidential election, the informant became one of the CIA’s most important — and protected — assets. But when intelligence officials revealed the severity of Russia’s election interference with unusual detail later that year, the news media picked up on details about the CIA’s Kremlin sources. CIA officials worried about safety made the arduous decision in late 2016 to offer to extract the source from Russia.
The move brought to an end the career of one of the CIA’s most important sources. It also effectively blinded American intelligence officials to the view from inside Russia as they sought clues about Kremlin interference in the 2018 midterm elections and next year’s presidential contest.
The person’s life remains in danger, current and former officials said, pointing to Moscow’s attempts last year to assassinate Sergei Skripal, a former Russian intelligence official who moved to Britain.
The informant was instrumental to the CIA’s most explosive conclusion about Russia’s interference campaign: that President Vladimir Putin ordered and orchestrated it himself. As the US government’s best insight into the thinking of and orders from Putin, the source was also key to the CIA’s assessment that he affirmatively favoured Donald Trump’s election and personally ordered the hacking of the Democratic National Committee.
The decision to extract the informant was driven “in part” because of concerns that Trump and his administration had mishandled delicate intelligence, CNN reported. But former intelligence officials said there was no public evidence that Trump directly endangered the source, and other current American officials insisted that media scrutiny of the agency’s sources alone was the impetus for the extraction.
A CIA spokeswoman called the assertion that Trump’s handling of intelligence drove the reported extraction “misguided speculation”. Some former intelligence officials said the president’s closed-door meetings with Putin and other Russian officials, along with Twitter posts about delicate intelligence matters, have sown concern among overseas sources. “We have a president whois willing to use sensitive, classified intelligence however he sees fit,” said Steven L Hall, a former CIA official who led the agency’s Russia operations. “He does it in front of our adversaries. He does it by tweet.”
As US officials began to realise that Russia was trying to sabotage the 2016 presidential election, the informant became one of the CIA’s most important — and protected — assets. But when intelligence officials revealed the severity of Russia’s election interference with unusual detail later that year, the news media picked up on details about the CIA’s Kremlin sources. CIA officials worried about safety made the arduous decision in late 2016 to offer to extract the source from Russia.
The move brought to an end the career of one of the CIA’s most important sources. It also effectively blinded American intelligence officials to the view from inside Russia as they sought clues about Kremlin interference in the 2018 midterm elections and next year’s presidential contest.
The person’s life remains in danger, current and former officials said, pointing to Moscow’s attempts last year to assassinate Sergei Skripal, a former Russian intelligence official who moved to Britain.
The informant was instrumental to the CIA’s most explosive conclusion about Russia’s interference campaign: that President Vladimir Putin ordered and orchestrated it himself. As the US government’s best insight into the thinking of and orders from Putin, the source was also key to the CIA’s assessment that he affirmatively favoured Donald Trump’s election and personally ordered the hacking of the Democratic National Committee.
The decision to extract the informant was driven “in part” because of concerns that Trump and his administration had mishandled delicate intelligence, CNN reported. But former intelligence officials said there was no public evidence that Trump directly endangered the source, and other current American officials insisted that media scrutiny of the agency’s sources alone was the impetus for the extraction.
A CIA spokeswoman called the assertion that Trump’s handling of intelligence drove the reported extraction “misguided speculation”. Some former intelligence officials said the president’s closed-door meetings with Putin and other Russian officials, along with Twitter posts about delicate intelligence matters, have sown concern among overseas sources. “We have a president whois willing to use sensitive, classified intelligence however he sees fit,” said Steven L Hall, a former CIA official who led the agency’s Russia operations. “He does it in front of our adversaries. He does it by tweet.”
more from times of india news
Get the app