This weekâs passage of a military aid package to Ukraine means that Donald Trumpâs efforts to block American provisions for Kyiv have, for the first time in months, faltered. But while isolationism and appeasement may have played a role in Trumpâs moves to strangle support for Kyiv, itâs worth tracking back exactly how Trumpâs anti-Ukraine animus first beganâand who first whispered sweet nothings of Ukraineâs supposed crusades against Trump in the former presidentâs ear. Because while the supposed intellectuals of the MAGA movement try to spin Trump as some kind of defender of American interests, the seeds of Trumpâs campaigns against Ukraine have far simpler, and far shadier, roots which connect all the way back to a long-disgraced Trump campaign official who may be returning to Trumpâs fold.
Cast your mind back, if you dare, to 2016. Following Trumpâs unexpected rise to the Republican nomination, Russia and its proxies began unleashing the fruits of Moscowâs hacking campaign to the world, flooding audiences with internal communications from both the Democratic National Committee and John Podesta, Hillary Clintonâs campaign manager. Signs immediately pointed to Russian culpabilityâand questions immediately emerged about whether, and how, the Trump campaign was aware of the stolen emails. Given the fact that Trump had publicly called for Russia to âfindâ Clintonâs emails, it wasnât much of a leap to assume there had been some kind of coordination.
This is when Paul Manafort, who was then serving as Trumpâs campaign manager, intervenedâand first planted the idea in Trumpâs mind that Ukraine, rather than Russia, sought to destabilize American elections and thwart Trumpâs rise. As Manafortâs former associate, Rick Gates, later told FBI investigators, Manafort floated an idea that the Russians were not in fact involved in the hack. Instead, Manafort was âinsistentâ that it was the Ukrainians who were responsible, and that the Russians were being slandered unfairly. As Gates revealed, Manafort claimed that âthe hack was likely carried out by the Ukrainians, not the Russians.â
Manafort did not lay out any evidence for his theory, and it remains unclear how often he pushed the idea to Trump. But he wasâand again, as Trumpâs campaign managerâthe first American to proffer the idea that Kyiv may have been bent on undermining American politics and smearing Trumpâs campaign. He was the first member of Trumpâs orbit to push an anti-Ukraine agendaâan agenda that later blossomed not only into Trumpâs fealty toward Putin, but toward his willingness to bar aid to Ukraine, damn the consequences.
Manafort has never publicly commented on his theory, let alone whether he still believes it to be so. But there are two other pieces of evidence that illuminate the path he took to first spark the anti-Ukraine position Trump still occupies.
Chiefly, there was Manafortâs own experience in Ukraineâand, specifically, what he personally dealt with in 2016. Having worked for years as a consigliere for Ukrainian thug Viktor Yanukovych, Manafort stood shocked when Ukraineâs protesters tossed Yanukovych from power in 2014. But it wasnât just that Manafort had lost access to power in Kyiv. Ukrainian investigators later discovered a so-called âBlack Ledgerâ that detailed millions of dollars in off-the-books payments from Yanukovychâs party to Manafortâillicit payments whose revelation forced Manafort to resign from Trumpâs campaign.
Manafort reacted by mounting the kind of âfake newsâ defense that would later become the Trump administrationâs stock-in-trade. To Manafortâs mind, rather than provide detailed reams of evidence on Yanukovychâs kleptocracyâand on the role Manafort played thereinâthe documents were âtotally falseâ: forgeries created whole-cloth by âClintonâs Ukrainian allies ⌠to tar Manafort and undermine Trump,â as The New York Times reported. They werenât, of course; they eventually helped lead to the prosecution and jailing of Manafort himself.
But thereâs also the person who first came up with the Ukraine-as-anti-Trump theory in the first place. While Manafort may have been the first American to peddle the idea, he doesnât appear to be the author of this invention. That honor belongs to Manafortâs close associate, a Russian national named Konstantin Kilimnik. According to the Treasury Department, Kilimnik is a âknown Russian agentâ tasked with âimplementing [pro-Russian] influence operationsâ; according to a Republican-led Senate report, Kilimnik is a âRussian intelligence officer.â
He was also, as federal investigators later discovered, one of Manafortâs closest associates during the 2016 campaignâone who Manafort not only passed internal campaign documents to, but one with whom Manafort went to incredible lengths to conceal conversations. As that aforementioned GOP-led report detailed, Manafort and Kilimnik used âsophisticated communications security practices,â including âencryption, burner phones, and âfolderingââwriting emails as drafts in a shared account.â The two further routinely scrubbed their tracks, with some messages âdeleted ⌠daily.â
It was in this context that Kilimnik, as Gates also recalled, began framing anti-Ukraine narratives for Manafort and others. As Gates told investigators, Manafort may have been the first American to push the idea, but he was just âparrot[ing] a narrative Kilimnik often supported.â
The exact chain of events from there remain murky. We still donât know when Kilimnik initially pitched the idea of Ukraineâs supposed anti-Trump efforts to Manafort, or exactly when Manafort relayed the idea to Trump. Much of Manafortâs roleâas well as the full details of his relationship with Kilimnikâremains classified. But that could soon change. A recent letter from Senator Ron Wyden to the U.S. director of national intelligence said it was âcriticalâ that the details of Manafortâs ties with Kilimnik be declassified, and âbe made public to the greatest extent possible.â
That declassification canât happen soon enoughâand not just because of Manafortâs role in initially seeding Trumpâs anti-Ukraine animus. Last month, The Washington Post reported that Trump was considering bringing Manafort back as a campaign adviser. This, not only after Manafort flamed out of Trumpâs initial campaign, but also after he received multiple felony convictions and a yearslong prison sentence for everything from fraud and conspiracy to failing to register his work as a foreign agentâcharges for which Trump, as one of his final acts as president, pardoned the felon.
Manafort hasnât yet confirmed heâs coming back to work for Trump, but in a sense it doesnât even matter. After all, Manafortâs greatest legacy may not be his specific role in Trumpâs campaign, or even how he helped jump-start interest in foreign lobbying crimes themselves (and, in so doing, became one of the main characters in my forthcoming book on the foreign lobbying industry itself). It may, rather, be a simple theory that he once pushed to Trump: that Ukraine was responsible for interfering in U.S. politics, and for pushing an anti-Trump vendettaâand that, years later, it deserves to lose a war that it never chose.