Lindsey Graham has diverged from Donald Trump's stance on Russia and specifically Vladimir Putin. Graham proposed making Russia a state-sponsored terrorism under US law in response to the killing of Alexei Navalny. This designation would enable the Navalny family to sue Putin's Russia in US courts for the murder. Graham emphasized that such a move would be a game-changer, allowing for more sanctions and legal actions.
Contrasting with Trump's approach, Graham expressed concerns about Russia's potential attacks and emphasized the need for a strong response. He criticized Trump's lenient stance towards Putin, highlighting the importance of holding Russia accountable for its actions.
Former CIA station chief in Moscow, Dan Hoffman, supported Graham's comments on Putin's role in Navalny's murder but suggested that Putin may not fear the US court system. Hoffman proposed providing Ukraine with necessary support to combat Russia's invasion effectively.
Hoffman also noted the reluctance of some Republicans to criticize Russia due to Trump's stance. He emphasized the historical Republican commitment to national security and the values of liberty, freedom, and democracy, contrasting them with the lack of such freedoms in Russia under Putin's regime.
Hoffman expressed concerns about the lack of strong leadership in countering Putin's actions, particularly from Trump, who he believes should take a more assertive stance against Russian aggression.
In conclusion, the diverging views on Russia within the Republican Party reflect broader debates on national security and foreign policy. Graham's proposal to designate Russia as a state sponsor of terrorism and the calls for stronger action against Putin's regime underscore the complexities of US-Russia relations and the challenges of maintaining a unified stance in the face of Russian aggression.
