As former President Donald Trump intensifies his 2024 campaign rhetoric praising Russian President Vladimir Putin and downplaying Moscow’s adversarial actions, U.S. allies are quietly grappling with a fraught question: Can they continue sharing sensitive intelligence with Washington if a potential second Trump administration pivots closer to Russia?
Members of the Five Eyes alliance—the U.S., U.K., Canada, Australia, and New Zealand—as well as key partners like Israel and Saudi Arabia, are reportedly weighing whether to restrict intelligence flows to American agencies over fears that critical information, including the identities of foreign assets, could inadvertently reach Moscow. The discussions, described by current and former intelligence officials familiar with the matter, underscore deepening anxiety about how Trump’s perceived loyalty to Putin might compromise decades-old intelligence partnerships critical to global security.
---
The Five Eyes Pact: A Bedrock of Trust Under Strain
The Five Eyes network, forged in the aftermath of World War II, is built on a foundation of unparalleled trust. Its members share signals intelligence (SIGINT), human intelligence (HUMINT), and other classified data to counter threats ranging from terrorism to cyberattacks. The alliance has been pivotal in operations against ISIS, thwarting plots in Europe, and countering Chinese espionage.
“The Five Eyes relationship is the gold standard of intelligence sharing,” said Angela Wright, a former MI6 officer now with the Royal United Services Institute. “But trust is its currency. If allies suspect that intelligence could be misused or exposed, the entire system risks unraveling.”
Concerns among member states spiked during Trump’s first term, when he reportedly disclosed classified Israeli intelligence about ISIS to Russian officials in a 2017 Oval Office meeting. While the incident was downplayed by allies at the time, Trump’s recent rhetoric—including calling Putin’s invasion of Ukraine “smart” and vowing to end U.S. military aid—has reignited fears.
“There’s a palpable sense of déjà vu,” a European intelligence official told *[Publication]* on condition of anonymity. “The worry is that under Trump, the U.S. could become a liability rather than a reliable partner.”
---
‘Human Assets Could Pay the Price’
At the heart of allies’ trepidation is the safety of foreign assets—informants, double agents, and undercover operatives—whose identities are often shared with U.S. counterparts to coordinate missions. If such information were leaked to Russia, either deliberately or through lax security, the consequences could be dire.
“Human assets are the lifeblood of intelligence work,” said retired CIA officer John Sipher. “Exposing them doesn’t just risk lives; it burns networks that took years to build.”
Israeli and Saudi officials, whose intelligence agencies collaborate closely with the U.S. on Iran and regional stability, are particularly uneasy. Israel’s Mossad, for instance, relies on U.S. support for operations against Iranian nuclear facilities, while Saudi Arabia shares counterterrorism intelligence related to Yemen and extremist groups.
“If the Saudis suspect their sources on the ground in Syria might be compromised, they’ll stop sharing,” said a former Pentagon official with knowledge of Middle East operations. “That directly undermines efforts to monitor groups like Hezbollah or Iranian proxies.”
---
The Ghosts of 2017 and Classified Document Scandals
Allies’ anxieties are compounded by Trump’s track record of handling classified material. During his presidency, he was accused of casually discussing sensitive intelligence, including details about a covert Israeli operation in Syria. More recently, the FBI’s 2022 seizure of classified documents from Mar-a-Lago raised alarms about his adherence to security protocols.
“The Mar-a-Lago case wasn’t just a domestic issue,” said a Five Eyes diplomat. “It made partners question whether the U.S. can be trusted to safeguard their secrets.”
While Trump denies wrongdoing, the Justice Department’s indictment alleges he stored classified documents in unsecured areas accessible to staff and visitors. For allies, the case underscores a pattern of behavior that could endanger shared intelligence.
---
A Delicate Balancing Act for Intelligence Agencies
U.S. intelligence leaders now face a dilemma: How to maintain collaboration with foreign partners while preparing for a potential administration that may deprioritize—or even oppose—their work.
“The career professionals at the CIA and NSA are in an impossible position,” said Beth Sanner, a former deputy director of national intelligence. “Their foreign counterparts are asking, ‘Will you still be calling the shots if Trump returns?’”
Some allies have already taken precautionary measures. After 2017, European agencies began “compartmentalizing” intelligence shared with the U.S., withholding details about asset identities or operational methods. Similar steps could expand under a second Trump term, reducing the depth and frequency of intelligence exchanges.
“We’re not cutting off the U.S., but we’re being more selective,” a Canadian intelligence official said. “It’s about risk management.”
---
The Ripple Effects of Distrust
Reduced intelligence sharing could have cascading effects on global security:
1. **Counterterrorism**: Collaborative efforts to track groups like ISIS or Al-Qaeda would suffer, increasing vulnerabilities to attacks.
2. **Cybersecurity**: Five Eyes agencies jointly combat state-sponsored hackers from China and Russia. Fragmented intelligence could weaken defenses.
3. **Ukraine War**: U.S.-provided intelligence has been vital to Ukraine’s battlefield success. If allies withhold data over fears of Russian exposure, Kyiv’s efforts could be hampered.
“This isn’t just a theoretical risk,” warned Alexander Vershbow, a former NATO deputy secretary general. “Losing access to allied intelligence would blindside U.S. policymakers and embolden adversaries.”
---
A Political Firestorm in Washington
The debate has also ignited partisan clashes in the U.S. Democrats accuse Trump of jeopardizing national security for personal gain, while Republicans dismiss allies’ concerns as hyperbolic.
“President Trump always put America first, and that included protecting our intelligence,” said Jason Miller, a senior Trump campaign advisor, in a statement to *[Publication]*. “Any suggestion otherwise is fake news pushed by the deep state.”
Yet bipartisan national security veterans urge caution. Mike Rogers, a former Republican House Intelligence Committee chairman, noted, “Undermining Five Eyes would be a gift to Putin and Xi. We cannot afford to lose our closest partners.”
---
Conclusion: A Test for the Post-Trump Era
As Trump’s political fortunes rise, allies are drafting contingency plans. Options include establishing direct intelligence channels with U.S. agencies bypassing the White House, or shifting focus to partnerships with the EU and Indo-Pacific allies.
The stakes transcend any single administration. “Intelligence alliances are built over decades, but they can fracture overnight,” said Wright. “If the U.S. is seen as an unreliable custodian of secrets, the global order pays the price.”
For now, the Five Eyes network remains intact, but its members are watching Trump’s every move—prepared to act if the unthinkable becomes reality.
Post a Comment