51吃瓜

Even though most Americans might find it hard to believe, the US was not the first country to have an election meddled with by an intrusive foreign power.

In the US, reactions to the Mueller report have been all-American beyond belief. Let’s face it, when it comes to election meddling, it鈥檚 been me, me, me, 24/7 here. Yes, in some fashion, some set of Russians meddled in the last election campaign, whether it was, as Jared Kushner improbably听, 鈥渁 couple of Facebook ads鈥� or, as the Mueller report described it, 鈥渢he Russian government interfer[ing] … in sweeping and systematic fashion.鈥�

But let me mention just a few of the things that we didn鈥檛 learn from the Mueller report. We didn鈥檛 learn that Russian agents appeared at Republican Party headquarters in 2016 with millions of dollars in donations to influence the coming election. (Oops, my mistake!听That was听听in the Italian election of 1948!)

We didn鈥檛 learn that a Russian intelligence agency in combination with Chinese intelligence, aided by a major Chinese oil company, overthrew an elected US president and installed Donald Trump in the White House as their autocrat of choice. (Oops, my mistake again! That was the , dispatched by an American president, and British intelligence, with the help of the , later BP. In 1953, they overthrew Mohammad Mossadegh, the elected prime minister of Iran, and installed the young shah as an autocratic ruler, the very first 鈥� but hardly the last 鈥� time the CIA successfully ousted a foreign government.)

We also didn鈥檛 learn that key advisers to Russian President Vladimir Putin were in close touch with rogue elements of the US military preparing to stage a听coup d’茅tat听in Washington, kill President Barack Obama in a direct assault on the White House and put the head of the Joint Chiefs of Staff in office. (Sorry, again my slip-up and full apologies! That was President Richard Nixon鈥檚 adviser,听,听in contact with Chilean military officers who, on September 11, 1973 鈥� the first 9/11 鈥� staged an armed uprising during which Salvador Allende, the democratically elected socialist president of that country, died and army commander-in-chief Augusto Pinochet took power.)

We didn鈥檛 learn that, at the behest of Putin, Russian secret service agents engaged in a series of plots to poison or, in some other fashion, assassinate Obama during his presidency and, in the end, had at least a modest hand in encouraging those who did kill him after he left office. (Oh, wait, I was confused on that one, too. I was actually thinking about the听, as the 1960s began, to do in Congolese Prime Minister Patrice Lumumba.)

Nor, for that matter, did we learn that the Russian military launched a regime-change-style invasion of this country to unseat an American president and get rid of our weapons of mass destruction and then occupied the country for years after installing Trump in power. (Sorry one more time! What I actually had in mind before I got so muddled up was the decision of the top officials of President George W. Bush鈥檚 administration, in the wake of the 9/11 attacks, to launch a 鈥渞egime-change鈥� invasion of Iraq in 2003, based on听听claims that Iraqi despot Saddam Hussein was developing weapons of mass destruction, and install a government of their choice in Baghdad.)

No, none of that happened here. Still, even though most Americans might find it hard to believe, we weren鈥檛 exactly the first country to have an election meddled with by an intrusive foreign power with an agenda all its own. And really, my examples above just begin an endless list of events the Mueller report didn鈥檛 mention, ones that most Americans no longer know anything about or we wouldn鈥檛 have acted as if the Russian election intervention of 2016 stood essentially alone in history.

漏 Lightspring

I don鈥檛, however, want that to sound like blame. After all, if you lived in the United States in these years and didn鈥檛 already know the secret history of American intervention and regime change across the globe from the end of World War II to the collapse of the Soviet Union, you could be forgiven for thinking that never had anyone done anything quite so dastardly as did the Putin regime in attempting to听听补苍诲听听the results of an American election. In the media, that Russian intervention has (with the听听of exceptions) been covered as if it were an event unique in history. Admittedly, whatever the Russians did do in 2016 to lend a hand to Donald Trump, they didn鈥檛 plan a coup d鈥櫭﹖at; it wasn鈥檛 an assassination attempt; and it wasn鈥檛, in the normal sense, what has come to be known as 鈥渞egime change.鈥�

A World of Chaos Without End

Let鈥檚 start with one thing that should have been (but wasn鈥檛) obvious since the first reports on Russian meddling in the election campaign of 2016 began to appear. Historically speaking, such a plan fits well with a classic Russian tradition. As scholar听听discovered in听听鈥減artisan election interventions鈥� from 1946 to 2000, the Russians 鈥� the Soviet Union until 1991 鈥� engaged in a staggering 36 of them globally.

If, however, you jumped to the conclusion that such an impressive cumulative figure gave the Russians the world鈥檚 record for election meddling, think again. In fact, it left them languishing in a distant second place when it came to interfering in other countries’ elections over more than four decades. The United States took the crown with, by Levin鈥檚 count, a distinctly imperial 81 interventions! (USA! USA!)

Put another way, the two Cold War superpowers together meddled in approximately 鈥渙ne of every nine competitive elections” in that era in at least 60 countries covering every part of the planet but Oceania. Moreover, only seven of them were in the same election in the same country at the same time.

And elections are but one part of a story of meddling on a scale that has been historically remarkable. In her book,听, Lindsey O鈥橰ourke notes that between 1947 and 1989, a span of nine Cold War-era American administrations, the least number of 鈥淯.S.-backed regime-change attempts鈥� per president was three (Gerald Ford鈥檚 administration), the most 30 (Dwight D. Eisenhower鈥檚). Harry Truman鈥檚 administration came in second with 21, Lyndon Johnson鈥檚 third with 19, Ronald Reagan鈥檚 fourth with 16, John F. Kennedy鈥檚 fifth with 15 and Richard Nixon鈥檚 sixth with 10.

And keep in mind that, while such numbers remain unprecedented, despite a number of short-term successes from Iran to听, this was not generally a notable record of success in remaking the world in the image Washington desired. Many of those regime-change attempts, especially against countries in the Soviet bloc, failed dismally. Others created chaos or regimes that not only did their citizens little good, but didn鈥檛 end up doing much for Washington either. Still, that didn鈥檛 stop one administration after another from trying, which is why the numbers remain mind-boggling.

And then the Soviet Union imploded and there was but a 鈥渟ole鈥� superpower听left on planet Earth. Its leaders had no doubt that its ultimate moment had come and it was to be no less than 鈥�.鈥� The planet was obviously Washington鈥檚 for the taking. No more need for subterfuge, subtle election meddling, secret support for dissidents or even covert regime change, not when the only opposition to an American planet was a few weak 鈥渞ogue states鈥� (think: the 鈥�,鈥� also known as Iran, Iraq and North Korea), a desperately weakened and impoverished but still nuclear-armed Russia, and a modestly rising future power in Asia.

And then, of course, came 9/11, that staggering act of听听鈥� in part from one of the great 鈥渟uccesses鈥� of CIA covert action in the Cold War, the decisive defeat of the Red Army in Afghanistan thanks to the funding and arming of a set of extremist Islamist militants, a war in which a young Saudi named Osama bin Laden gained a certain modest reputation. On that day in 2001, the last superpower, the one exceptional nation, became the planet鈥檚 greatest victim and all hell was let loose (just as听听hoped it would be).

In response, in a world without other superpowers, the country with, as one president proudly听, 鈥渢he finest fighting force that the world has ever known鈥� no longer needed to meddle secretly (or at least in a fashion that allowed for 鈥減lausible deniability鈥�). With the invasion of Afghanistan that October, open regime change became the order of the day. Iraq would come in 2003, Libya in 2011. The US Air Force and the CIA鈥檚 drones would bomb and missile at least听听across the greater Middle East and North Africa repeatedly in the years to come, helping reduce great cities to听, uprooting and displacing听听of听, creating听听galore and setting in motion forces that, from Pakistan to Syria, Yemen to Niger, would in turn unsettle a significant part of the planet.

And, of course, it would all prove to be a militarized failure of the first order. And yet, with a potential new conflict听听in Iran and the US听听in听听almost 18 years later, America’s wars show little sign of winding down. Only recently, for instance, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff听听a group of senators that the American military would 鈥渘eed to maintain a counterterrorism presence as long as an insurgency continues in Afghanistan,鈥� which should be considered the very definition of a听. Think of it as a world of chaos without end and now consider again that Russian meddling in an American election.

Exceptional Meddling

By the way, whatever the Russians did in 2016 (or may do in the future to American or听) is deplorable and should be denounced, no matter how slapdash it might have been. After all, as Dov Levin discovered, it doesn鈥檛 necessarily take much to affect the result of an election in another country. Here鈥檚 his conclusion for election meddling in the Cold War era:

鈥淚 find that an electoral intervention in favor of one of the sides contesting [an] election has a statistically significant effect, increasing its vote share by about 3%. Such an effect can have major 鈥榬eal life鈥� implications. For example, such a swing in the vote share from the winner to the loser in the 14 U.S. presidential elections occurring since 1960 would have been sufficient to change the identity of the winner in seven of these elections.鈥�

As we all know, a 3% shift in the 2016 election in several states would have made a staggering difference. After all, as the听Washington Post听, in Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin, Donald Trump beat Hillary Clinton by 鈥�0.2, 0.7, and 0.8 percentage points, respectively — and by 10,704, 46,765, and 22,177 votes. Those three wins gave him 46 electoral votes; if Clinton had done one point better in each state, she’d have won the electoral vote, too.鈥�

So, the issue isn鈥檛 faintly whether Russian electoral meddling was despicable or not. The issue is that it鈥檚 been covered here, like so much else has in this century, as yet another case of American exceptionalism (but never narcissism). As on 9/11 鈥� forget that first 9/11 in Chile 鈥� we eternally stand alone in our experiences because, by definition, we are the special ones, the ones who matter.

In the case of election meddling, however, this country just joined a moiling crowd of the interfered with 鈥� and largely by us. It was a classic case of getting a taste of one鈥檚 own medicine and not liking it one bit. It should have taught us a lesson about our own global behavior since World War II. Instead, it鈥檚 simply continued us on a path of exceptional meddling that will prove someday to have been one of the great follies in history.

*[This article was originally published by .]听

The views expressed in this article are the author鈥檚 own and do not necessarily reflect 51吃瓜鈥檚 editorial policy.