Why was the CIA chief in Moscow?
The head of the US Central Intelligence Agency John Ratcliffe was in Moscow on Tuesday for talks. The visit was unofficial and unannounced, but a large US military cargo aircraft flying from Washington to Moscow did not escape public attention. The Kremlin later confirmed the visit, saying there had been "talks between the intelligence services". Most media outlets see a connection with the war in Ukraine.
Ratcliffe's job was to assauge Putin’s anger
De Standaard speculates that the US is seeking to prevent an escalation of the war in Ukraine:
“Ratcliffe's visit comes at a time when the war in Ukraine is intensifying and looking increasingly hopeless. ... Ballistic missile strikes, in particular, are hitting Ukraine hard. But Ukrainian drone attacks on Russian territory are also becoming increasingly brazen. More and more Russian civilians are being killed. And that is making Putin angrier and angrier. Last weekend he said that Ukraine had opened Pandora's box: 'Russia's measures will become more painful and destructive. There will always be retaliation.'”
Intervention to thwart a nuclear attack?
Ratcliffe's visit was driven by fears of an unprecedented threat, writes La Repubblica:
“In recent days, reports have emerged suggesting that the Kremlin is planning a provocation against Nato and intends to test the alliance's cohesion: these are reports that have been circulating in Europe for months, but this time they were attributed to US intelligence and not denied. Bloomberg goes even further. It quotes Russian officials talking of a missile escalation against Ukrainian cities. And they even go so far as to suggest that Putin might be considering using a tactical nuclear bomb.”
The Kremlin needs military success
Writing on Facebook, political scientist Alexander Morozov links Ratcliffe's visit to a potential intensification of the fighting in Ukraine:
“The year 2026 has created a new political situation: it is no longer possible to declare publicly that 'The special operation is going according to plan and the objectives are being met.' Putin now needs an interim success. Preferably by 18 November, when he flies to the APEC summit [in China] where he will meet Trump. A new phase of bloodshed in the Donbas is therefore to be expected. It will not begin only 'after the election' (this has nothing whatsoever to do with military planning), but as early as mid-September. This may well be the background to the CIA director's trip: we see your intentions; we see the preparations.”
Going on the offensive is Kyiv's only way out
Ukraine also seems to be preparing for an escalation, Ukraine expert Balázs Jarábik notes in Új Szó:
“The preparations for the winter are currently going better than they did a year ago and the strain on the energy system is lower due to the slump in industrial consumption. As a result there is a sense of cautious optimism in Kyiv. ... Yet each new crisis exacerbates the others: the situation on the front is having a negative impact on the economic outlook, the fiscal deficit is increasing dependence on foreign countries and internal political struggles are undermining the state's ability to act. Ukraine continues to resist, but Kyiv sees no other way out than to go on the offensive. ... Following this logic, however, the war can only continue to escalate.”
Seeking a way out of the Iranian deadlock
The visit was probably about Iran rather than Ukraine, sociologist Igor Eidman suspects on Facebook:
“Many are wondering why CIA Director Ratcliffe made such an unexpected and urgent trip to Moscow. Some are even pinning their hopes on it – that Russia might be forced to make peace. Sadly I thing these hopes are in vain. In reality, Ratcliffe probably didn't fly to Moscow because of Ukraine but because of the deadlock situation in which Trump now finds himself in the war with Iran. ... That is why Trump, like a drowning man, now seems prepared to grasp at any straw.”
Deliberately obvious
In any case the visit was certainly not intended to be secret, notes La Repubblica:
“Had CIA Director John Ratcliffe preferred to keep a low profile, he could have used other means to travel to Moscow in secret. ... It therefore remains unclear why the head of the US intelligence services made his first visit to Russia so public, and for what purpose he spent four hours in the capital. Speculation ranges from warnings to Putin that he had better not extend the invasion of Ukraine to Nato member states to more innocuous and relatively routine negotiations regarding the exchange of prisoners.”
Secret service as troubleshooter?
The visit could be a sign of a genuine crisis, warns Corriere della Sera:
“The involvement of intelligence chiefs does not necessarily mean that a major agreement is in the pipeline. Sometimes it can actually mean the opposite: relations have deteriorated to such an extent that a confidential channel is required to prevent incidents, convey warnings and discuss issues such as terrorism, nuclear weapons or prisoner exchanges. Shortly before Ratcliffe's trip, the intelligence services revealed Putin's plans to carry out new mass mobilisations and threaten the Suwalki Corridor, which separates Russia [Belarus] from the Kaliningrad exclave, sandwiched between Poland and Lithuania – all bad news as far as Nato is concerned.”