Did Russia elect Trump?

As readers know, world politics is buzzing with news that Russian intelligence services helped elect Trump. If the claim, hitherto unproven, is true, then it will go down in history as the greatest intelligence operation in the history of humanity. So far, however, there are contradictory claims and a lot of strings that are unattached.

Here's what happened. The CIA came out with a report that Russia intervened in the 2016 election to help Donald Trump win the presidency. That's a shift from the claim that Russia intervened in U.S. elections to undermine faith in the democratic process.

Apparently, according to the Washington Post, which came out with the scoop, intelligence agencies identified individuals with connections to the Russian government, who provided WikiLeaks with hacked emails from the Democratic National Committee and from other accounts, including that of Hillary Clinton's campaign chairman. According to a U.S. intelligence report, which was provided to the senators, the actors behind these selective leaks are known to the wider intelligence community and therefore can be attributed to covert state actions.

It seems implausible, and I'm not the only one who thinks that way. In fact U.S. intelligence community, including the FBI and CIA, itself is divided on this. Adding to that, the Trump's team has now railed against its own intelligence saying these guys brought about the Iraq fiasco.

How likely is it that Russia helped to elect Trump? For a start, imagine yourself planning an intelligence operation. You identify a likely agent, who might or might not serve your purpose. You then decide and order hacks on info, then give it to your agents to selectively disseminate, on the assumption that that will spread through social media and affect certain sections of people who might or might not then vote to elect this aforementioned agent. For anyone researching intel and military strategies, this would sound absurd.

Trump won because of simple reasons. First of all, dissatisfaction with the direction of the foreign policy of U.S. It is a proven fact that the U.S. population is not interested in wars of choices, democracy promotion and wars of interventions. According to PEW surveys, the majority of Americans were opposed to Libyan intervention that toppled Gaddafi, as well as any involvement in Syrian fiasco. A majority of Americans are opposed to paying for NATO defending rich European countries. A majority of Americans want a grand alliance with Russia against Islamic terrorists. A majority of Americans want better trade deals, and more Americans voted for Trump than for McCain or Romney.

Maybe Russians did hack and disseminate biased intel. Great powers interfere in other countries intelligence affairs and elections. Spy agencies are there for... well... spying. I am old enough to remember when Time magazine came out with a cover boasting how U.S. intel operators helped Yeltsin. It would be na?ve to think any great power acts benevolently and without interests.

Having said that, it is also na?ve to think that Russia was capable of altering an entire election for Trump. Trump is an American manifestation of the global phenomenon of a far right surge, a surge which was the result of 25 years of internationalist, Universalist, Wilsonian liberal foreign policy. If the structural problems are not solved and pundits keep on blaming Russia for all of America's problems, it would just amount to sweeping the dust under the carpet.