PORTLAND - Over time several of President Trump’s statements and actions have aroused suspicion that he may have become compromised by the Russian (Soviet) intelligence services in the 1980s and that he may knowingly or unknowingly have been acting as a Soviet asset for some time, increasingly so in his second term as president.

(https://medium.com/@wesodonnell/is-trump-compromised-75012fc3fc54) While such assertions are widespread, there is no definitive proof. The list of assertions to support such a claim include: (i) his 1987 advertisements attacking America’s foreign policy and its support of European allies (largely members of NATO); (https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/ilanbenmeir/that-time-trump-spent-nearly-100000-on-an-ad-criticizing-us) (ii) numerous interactions of his closest advisors (including Donald Trump Jr., Jared Kushner, Paul Manafort, Michael Flynn, Jeff Sessions and Michael Cohen) with Soviet officials; (iii) the fact that during his first term Trump invited Russian foreign minister Lavrov to the Oval Office to share classified information; and (iv) his meeting with Vladimir Putin (also in his first term), with no aides or official minutes but a translator who had to hand over all notes at the end of the meeting. More recently, Trump has been even more open in his support of Putin (i) by falsely claiming that Ukraine started the war with Russia; (ii) by stating that Zelensky did not want peace although Russia had earlier signed a ceasefire deal that Putin abrogated; (iii) by continuing to praise Putin to no end, “here’s a guy that says, you know, ‘I’m gonna declare a big portion of Ukraine independent’ – he used the word ‘independent’ – ‘and we’re gonna go out and we’re gonna go in and we’re gonna help keep peace.’ You gotta say that’s pretty savvy;” (iv) by supporting Russia at the United Nations, to the chagrin of European allies, twice siding with Russia in votes to mark the third anniversary of the Russian invasion of Ukraine, opposing a European-drafted resolution condemning Moscow's actions and supporting Ukraine's territorial integrity and by having the U.S. draft and vote for a resolution at the UN Security Council which called for an end to the conflict with no criticism of Russia;(v) by cutting off  military aid and intelligence sharing with Ukraine; and (vi) by calling for the payback of past U.S. aid to Ukraine and insisting on access to Ukraine’s mineral resources in support of his demand. While this is a mountain of corroborating assertions to support the claim that Trump has been compromised, it is still not definitive proof that America’s president is acting in the interests of Putin and Russia. 

Although America is still the world’s premier military power, it has been rapidly losing much of its soft power. It can bully and use force but its persuasive powers have been eroding rapidly. Why should a country trust a U.S. president when at the drop of a hat he abandons his country’s allies, who the country has supported and who in turn have supported the country, all this in the middle of a war where its closest allies see an existential threat from Russia? Is America friend or foe when its president threatens annexation of an ally’s territory or resources? Can America ever be trusted again after unilaterally withdrawing from an agreement it signed with other major powers (the Iran nuclear agreement or the JCPOA) and assassinating a leading general (Soleimani) in a foreign land (Iraq)? Why would Iran come back to the negotiating table with an untrustworthy U.S., as demanded by the same president who reneged on the deal America had signed and who assassinated its top general? A country that protects Israel’s nuclear arsenal and says in the same breath that everyone should do away with nuclear arms? Even Canada, arguably America’s biggest backer in recent years is turning away from its friend after the imposition of tariffs and threats of taking over Canada as its 51st state, prompting the newly elected Canadian Prime Minister, Mark Carney, to say of its southern neighbor, a "country we can no longer trust." America, a country that was universally admired after WWII is now not trusted and even despised in much of the world. Military power and economic coercion in the form of tariffs and unilateral sanctions alone are insufficient to keep America safe and prosperous. America still needs friends, especially in a world of rapidly changing military technology and asymmetric warfare. 

Russia’s invisible hold on Trump is quite obvious, but how has Trump handled domestic pressures in the United States? 

The fact that campaign donors heavily influence areas of domestic policymaking is quite well known, but do they also control our foreign policy? Consider the Adelsons’ donations to Trump in 2016 to move the U.S. embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem (something that past presidents had resisted for over 50 years as it would adversely affect long-term peace in the Middle East) and to similarly recognize the annexation of the Golan Heights by Israel, both also illegal under international law. What about Miriam Adelson’s 2024 contributions allegedly for the eventual annexation of the West Bank by Israel, or at least giving Israel a free hand to expand West Bank settlements and for a veto to an eventual two-state solution. Such concessions to donors by those seeking political office have existential implications for the United States, affecting wars and the lives of millions around the world, changing the course of human history for years into the future. Such concessions with no assessment of the long-term fallout for future generations! All for a few million dollars in campaign contributions! But the Adelson contributions to Trump, supported by the Israeli lobby, not only control America’s Middle East policy, but seem to have seeped directly into the lives of Americans in the United States. American universities have clamped down on pro-Palestinian rallies, even expelling foreign students who express sympathy for  Palestinians. We now ban any criticism of Israel’s murderous campaign against Palestinians as hatred and anti-Semitic. Freedom of speech has become severely limited in the United States. Under President Trump, the government is totally committed to reining in all campus criticisms of Israel’s ongoing war. The Trump administration has rescinded about $400 million in grants to Columbia University and on March 8, agents from the Department of Homeland Security “entered a student residential building at Columbia University in uptown New York and detained Mahmoud Khalil, [a legal American resident and holder of a Green Card and] one of the lead negotiators on behalf of pro-Palestine protesters at 2024’s Gaza solidarity encampment. In a sweeping attack on the First Amendment, the Trump administration said this week that it would begin revoking visas of ‘Hamas sympathizers,’ specifically citing Columbia University students. The detention followed a two-day targeted online campaign against Khalil by pro-Israel groups and individuals, including Columbia’s high-profile pro-Israel professor, Shai Davidai.” 

U.S. politicians and the Israeli lobby are trampling on everything the United States has claimed to stand for, both domestically and internationally.

Are American politicians so cheap and disloyal to American values and ideals that they will sell its foreign policy for a few dollars? Is it fair to American taxpayers who contribute billions to finance America’s military power to have their hard earned money get trumped by a few casino-derived dollars? It should be noted that Miriam Adelson is a dual citizen of Israel and the United States: “Adelson’s ties to Israel run deep. She was born in Tel Aviv during the British Mandate and speaks fluent Hebrew. She also served as an officer in the Israeli military. Though her business empire is based in the United States, she reportedly spends much of her time nowadays in Israel, where [she] is known as the owner of the country’s largest newspaper, Israel Hayom.”

(https://www.timesofisrael.com/miriam-adelson-gives-100-million-to-trump-

campaign-making-good-on-reported-pledge)

Israel’s war on Palestinians, especially in Gaza, has been condemned by most of the world, including in the case condemning Israel of genocide moving forward at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) and in the arrest warrants issued by the International Criminal Court (ICC) for Prime Minister Netanyahu and former Defense Minister Yoav Gallant for war crimes. Trump, and Biden before him, have threatened both the ICJ and the ICC and their judges with sanctions, in the process undermining the international rule of law, something that we have championed in the past. America is still in danger of getting directly caught up in the ICJ case as complicit in Israel’s alleged genocide as it supports Israel with lethal weapons, intelligence, financial aid and political support at the UN and around the world. America and future generations of Americans will regret this blind and unprincipled support for Israel and the clampdown on free speech criticizing Israel as it will be seen as a shameful episode for the United States. Arab and Muslim rulers relying on U.S. support to hold onto power may be relatively mute on the carnage in Gaza but what of the man and woman on the street? Do Americans think that the millions of Arabs and Muslims who have lost loved ones in the Gaza slaughter and who were evicted from their homes will forget the role played by the United States in support of Israel? In years to come, Americans will ask “how did this happen?” while the answer has been staring them in the face—unlimited flow of private money into politics sold the country to billionaires with their own personal agendas alongside a complicit justice system that set aside the demands of the U.S. Constitution. 

Miriam Adelson is not alone among major donors to have a decisive impact on America’s foreign and domestic policies. Elon Musk, who allegedly donated about $275 million to the 2024 Trump election campaign is today arguably the assistant president, above the vice-president and any member of the cabinet in terms of influence on policy. He has tried to affect U.S. policy to various countries, in particular toward South Africa, the country of his earlier citizenship. His indiscriminate cost cutting and firing of federal employees who worked in most government agencies, research facilities and in the military have been an unprecedented hatchet job that will affect lives in the United States and abroad for years to come in areas such as healthcare, national defense, personal safety, economic prosperity, government oversight and regulation, education, income distribution and inequality. Yet, Musk needed no U.S. Senate scrutiny, approval or confirmation. He has been subject to little or no oversight with many of his actions already entrenched and irreversible. 

Less noticed but equally important in the current climate is the associated conflict of interest and corruption that has permeated our capitalist system and become part and parcel of U.S. government operations. Has the president divested himself of holdings that may entail conflict of interest? How about Musk with his vast business interests and related government contracts? Is Musk simply immune because he has no “official” government position? The fallout from these and numerous other well-publicized allegations draw disdain from our allies who boast not but have much more oversight of the cancer that is corruption. Is our capitalist system eroding into one that would be better called crony capitalism?

The role of money in politics has mushroomed in importance over the last 50 or so years. While some defend this as an important dimension of free speech, we should all wake up and recognize it for what it is, a corrosion of every dimension of our lives. We have moved from a flawed but at least functioning democracy to a plutocracy and maybe even an oligarchy. It may legally be one person one vote, but effectively our government and its policies are increasingly determined by the very wealthy and especially a very few multibillionaires. Some of these policies that are expressly advocated by a handful of rich unelected individuals will shape our future and that of future generations and potentially the future of much of the world. 

Isn’t it time to take stock and reconsider how money in politics has been shaping our lives and national policies?  

Hossein Askari is an emeritus professor of business and international affairs, George Washington University