ANALYST REPORT: ASSESSMENT FOR NATIONAL SECURITY COUNCIL
- john raymond
- Jun 18
- 4 min read
Updated: Jun 19
Subject: Strategic Disruption of Western Alliance via Asymmetric Coordination Between Trump, Putin, and Netanyahu
Executive Summary
Recent escalations in the Middle East, particularly the Israel–Iran conflict and subsequent U.S. posture toward Iranian targets, have triggered a secondary asymmetric maneuver — one long anticipated by independent intelligence analysts but still largely unacknowledged at the institutional level. While the formal assumption remains that President Trump’s administration is operating within the bounds of U.S. national interest, the working reality diverges sharply.
This document outlines the logic that should be guiding strategic threat perception: President Trump is not acting as a sovereign agent of U.S. national policy, but rather as a compromised actor whose behavior aligns consistently and observably with the geopolitical goals of the Russian Federation.
Furthermore, this brief identifies the fraying Axis of Autocratic Coordination — once informally aligned between Trump, Putin, Khamenei, and Netanyahu — and its transformation under pressure from Ukraine’s Operation Spiderweb into an opportunistic escalation designed to fracture NATO and destabilize allied Western resolve.
1. Context: The Axis Was Real — And It Has Broken
The prior 18-month period saw multiple cross-regime vectors of tactical collaboration — publicly downplayed, privately confirmed through HUMINT and OSINT convergence — between four authoritarian actors:
Vladimir Putin, facing deteriorating domestic legitimacy and military exhaustion
Donald Trump, operating under Russian protection and seeking authoritarian leverage through foreign distraction
Benjamin Netanyahu, under indictment and reliant on internal emergency powers
Ayatollah Khamenei, economically cornered and functionally serving as a Western antagonism vector for Russia
The equilibrium within this axis began collapsing in the wake of Ukraine’s successful Operation Spiderweb (May 2025), which inflicted heavy strategic losses on Russian bomber infrastructure and shattered the myth of Russian air dominance. In response to this perceived weakness, Netanyahu accelerated a long-planned strike against Iran, disrupting the axis’s informal coordination and forcing a crisis pivot among the remaining players.
2. Putin’s Adjustment: Tactical Abandonment of Khamenei, Strategic Exploitation of Chaos
Putin was partially unprepared for an Israeli-first strike, but his calculus adapted quickly. Rather than restrain the theater, the Kremlin moved to internally reframe the chaos as a strategic opportunity: by secretly pushing for U.S. escalation in Iran, Russia achieves three goals simultaneously:
Divert Western attention and material support away from Ukraine
Accelerate fragmentation within NATO (particularly from France and Germany)
Reinforce internal Russian narratives of global disorder driven by the West
Khamenei’s tactical utility ended the moment Israel struck first. Putin’s pivot was swift: he wants Trump to manufacture a U.S. pretext for deepening conflict and spin the crisis into a broader East–West distraction.
3. Trump’s Role: Not Bluffing, But Aligning
Trump is not bluffing with Iran. That framing misleads both policymakers and military planners.
Trump’s military posture cannot be understood through traditional deterrence or strategic restraint modeling. His recent Iran rhetoric and readiness posture should be read through a client-state lens — his actions function to serve Putin’s information and distraction needs, not America’s strategic calculus.
The false assumption that Trump is reorienting to “protect American assets in the Middle East” obscures the larger intent: to trigger Iranian retaliation, use it as cover for wartime emergency powers, and fracture allied cohesion.
Trump is not driven by defense priorities; he is reactivating the chaos vector that has long defined his asymmetric utility to the Kremlin.
4. Implications for U.S. National Command and Intelligence Apparatus
If current trajectories hold, the following developments are assessed as high probability within the next 30–90 days:
U.S. ground or air assets engage directly with Iranian forces or proxies under fabricated or exaggerated pretext
European NATO members openly break from U.S. Middle East operations, citing illegitimacy of American command
Russia launches a secondary offensive against Ukraine, timing it to coincide with maximum Western distraction
Domestic unrest escalates, as wartime posture is used to justify repressive federal measures
Further intelligence compartmentalization occurs, impeding internal visibility across agencies
All of these trends are either in progress or partially deployed as of this report.
5. Actionable Intelligence and Institutional Responsibility
To the CIA, NSA, DIA, and U.S. Combatant Commands: you must realign your models. Trump is not improvising. He is functioning as a strategic vector of Russian asymmetric policy, and every delay in naming that truth empowers the continuation of that policy.
If there are analysts in the room who still think in symmetric terms — who still believe that Trump is responding to Iranian behavior rather than anticipating and provoking it — they are not just mistaken. They are enabling failure.
You must:
Recalibrate briefing models to reflect non-sovereign executive behavior
Track Trump’s wartime posture and speech patterns for psychological operation triggers
Map Putin–Trump information coordination in real time through social, broadcast, and dark channels
Treat current escalation in the Middle East as a Russia-enabled, U.S.-executed campaign of alliance disruption
The longer the intelligence community operates under the assumption that it is watching sovereign U.S. behavior rather than compromised entanglement, the closer we move toward irreversible geopolitical fracturing.
Conclusion
This is not a question of ideology. It is not even, strictly speaking, a question of treason. It is a question of function.
Trump’s function, as it currently operates, is to carry out asymmetric destabilization on behalf of a hostile state.
If your agencies cannot name this, then you are already downstream of it.
And if you know, but choose not to act — then you are no longer intelligence professionals.
You are witnesses to the betrayal of the republic.
Comments