Inside Ratcliffe’s Moscow mission: What CIA chief told Russia

CIA Director John Ratcliffe’s unusual trip to Moscow this week has triggered intense speculation about what messages Washington’s top spy carried into talks with his Russian counterparts.

Neither Washington nor Moscow has provided a detailed official account of the discussions. President Donald Trump has described the visit as “semi-routine”, while Russian officials have similarly sought to play down its significance.

But reports by The New York Times, CBS News and other US media, combined with details subsequently confirmed by Reuters, provide a picture of discussions that touched on three of the world’s most dangerous geopolitical flashpoints: the war in Ukraine, the possibility of Russian action against NATO and Moscow’s relationship with Iran.

Ratcliffe did not meet Russian President Vladimir Putin. The Kremlin has confirmed that he held talks with Russian intelligence officials and that Putin was subsequently briefed on the outcome.

So what do we know about the messages Ratcliffe carried to Moscow?

One of the clearest reported messages concerned Russia’s military and economic position in the Ukraine war.

The New York Times, citing current and former officials, reported that Ratcliffe gave Aleksandr Bortnikov, head of Russia’s FSB security service, a bleak assessment of Moscow’s position and urged Russia to reach a deal before its military and economic situation deteriorated further.

According to the Times, Ratcliffe did not accompany that assessment with threats about what Washington would do if Putin chose to continue the war.

Instead, his message appears to have been that Russia’s own interests increasingly favour serious negotiations.

The CIA has long questioned whether Putin’s advisers give him an accurate assessment of the trajectory and cost of the war, the Times reported.

Ratcliffe’s private assessment also echoed comments he has made publicly about Russia’s battlefield performance. He has highlighted Moscow’s heavy troop losses and its relatively limited territorial gains despite the enormous resources committed to the war.

The visit comes as US efforts to broker an end to the conflict remain stalled, with Moscow and Kyiv still far apart over fundamental issues.

This part of the meeting requires more caution.

CBS News reported, citing multiple people familiar with the matter, that Ratcliffe warned Russia against attacking NATO member states.

Reuters subsequently reported that two sources familiar with the talks confirmed Ratcliffe raised the possibility of a Russian operation against a NATO country. However, Reuters said it was unclear whether this was the principal purpose of his visit.

The concerns come amid US intelligence assessments that Putin could be increasingly willing to authorise provocative actions designed to test NATO’s unity.

Such actions would not necessarily take the form of a conventional Russian military attack. US and European intelligence agencies have been monitoring sabotage, cyberattacks and other so-called grey-zone operations that remain below the threshold of outright war.

Western intelligence officials have also reportedly been examining the possibility of false-flag operations intended to obscure Moscow’s involvement.

Trump, however, has strongly played down the prospect of Russia attacking the alliance.

“He’s not going to attack a NATO territory,” Trump told reporters on Thursday.

Asked whether Ratcliffe had been sent to Moscow to deliver a particular message, Trump also disputed that characterisation, saying the CIA chief’s contacts with his Russian counterpart were not unusual.

The Kremlin has likewise rejected suggestions that Russia is preparing to attack NATO.

Iran was also among the subjects discussed.

Reuters, citing sources familiar with the meeting, reported that Ratcliffe and the Russians discussed Moscow’s support for Iran, which has become a source of friction with Washington.

CBS News went further, reporting that Ratcliffe raised Iran and warned of additional sanctions if the Strait of Hormuz remained closed to shipping.

That specific warning has not been publicly confirmed by Washington or Moscow.

The issue comes as the Trump administration increases economic pressure on Tehran and threatens countries maintaining financial and commercial ties with Iran with secondary sanctions.

Russia has a close strategic relationship with Tehran spanning military, diplomatic and economic cooperation.

Trump nevertheless suggested on Thursday that he was, for now, satisfied with Moscow’s behaviour over the Strait of Hormuz.

“So far, I think Russia’s behaved quite well, having to do with the Strait of Hormuz,” he said.

This may be the more intriguing question.

Trump already has other channels for communicating with Moscow. His envoy Steve Witkoff and son-in-law Jared Kushner have been involved in contacts with senior Russian officials as Washington searches for a way to end the Ukraine war.

But intelligence agencies maintain their own lines of communication.

The CIA has long had channels with Russia’s FSB and its foreign intelligence service, the SVR. Such contacts can continue even during periods when conventional diplomatic relations are severely strained.

There may also have been a particular advantage in having Ratcliffe deliver Washington’s assessment.

The New York Times reported that some US officials hoped Putin, a former intelligence officer himself, might regard a message delivered by the CIA director as more urgent and credible than one transmitted through normal diplomatic channels.

Before travelling to Moscow, Ratcliffe also spoke to his Ukrainian counterparts and assured them that he would be exploring Russian positions rather than making concessions on Ukraine’s behalf, according to the Times.

CBS News reported separately that Ukraine was informed that a US delegation would be travelling to Moscow and was asked to suspend strikes for the duration of the visit.

Very little.

Sergei Naryshkin, head of Russia’s SVR foreign intelligence service, confirmed that he met Ratcliffe, describing it as a “working-level meeting”.

He said the two men discussed sensitive issues that fell within the responsibilities of their respective intelligence agencies, but did not elaborate.

Naryshkin also said there was nothing unusual about such contacts.

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov confirmed separately that Ratcliffe had spoken with Russian intelligence officials but did not meet Putin. The Russian president was briefed on the outcome, Peskov said.

Both sides, therefore, acknowledge that the meetings occurred while revealing little officially about their substance.

There is considerable precedent for Washington using its intelligence chief to communicate directly with Moscow during periods of extreme tension.

In November 2021, then-CIA director William Burns travelled to Moscow as Russia massed troops near Ukraine. He held talks with senior Russian officials and spoke to Putin to warn against an invasion.

Three months later, Russia launched its full-scale attack of Ukraine.

A year later, Burns met Sergei Naryshkin in Ankara amid US concerns about possible Russian use of a nuclear weapon as Ukrainian forces advanced.

The meeting was not intended as a negotiation over Ukraine. Burns’ role was to communicate the consequences Russia would face if it used nuclear weapons.

US and Russian intelligence channels have also served less confrontational purposes, including negotiations over prisoner exchanges.

Ratcliffe and Bortnikov have themselves maintained contacts, and Trump has pointed to that relationship while arguing that this week’s meeting should not be regarded as extraordinary.