Judging Freedom - Aaron Maté: Zelenskyy's Victory Plan

Episode Date: October 23, 2024

Aaron Maté: Zelenskyy's Victory PlanSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

This new year, why not let Audible expand your life by listening? Audible CA contains over 890,000 total titles within its current library, including audiobooks, podcasts, and exclusive Audible Originals that'll inspire and motivate you. Tap into your well-being with advice and insight from leading professionals and experts on better health, relationships, career, finance, investing, and more. Maybe you want to kick a bad habit or start a good one. If you're looking to encourage positive change in your life one day and challenge at a time, look no further than Tabitha Brown's I Did a New Thing, 30 Days to Living Free. In the audiobook, Tab shares her own stories and those of others alongside

gentle guidance and encouragement to create these incredible changes for yourself and see what good can come from them. Trust me, listening on Audible can help you reach the goals you set for yourself. Start listening today when you sign up for a free 30-day trial at audible.com slash wonderyca. That's audible.com slash wonderyca. That's audible.com slash wonderyca. Hi, everyone. Judge Andrew Napolitano here for Judging Freedom. Today is Wednesday, October 23rd, 2024. Aaron Maté joins us now. A pleasure, my dear friend. Aaron, you have a great piece on your Substack column about Zelensky's victory plan, or so he calls it, and I want to explore that with you in a moment. But first, I'd like your views on some of the events in and around Israel. I understand from Max that your colleague, Max Ablumathal, that your colleague,

Jeremy Lafredo, is freed. Last time Max spoke with him, he was on his way to the Apple store to replace the iPhone that the IDF stole from him. Do you have any updates on Jeremy? I'm waiting to talk to him and I'm very excited to hear him speak for himself to talk about his ordeal, which I know was not very pleasant. And, you know, Max and our colleagues rallied for Jeremy drew attention to his arrest by Israel.

You know, as Max has talked to you about an Israeli court ruled pretty quickly that there were no grounds to keep him because as an Israeli journalist testified in his hearing, an Israeli outlet republished the post that supposedly got Jeremy in prison, which means that the fact that it was published means that it passed the Israeli military censor, which collapsed the case. So he never should have been held to begin with. He certainly should not have been subjected to the treatment that Israel meted out on him. And I'm very excited to hear, like everybody else, Jeremy speak for himself, which should be very soon. Well, you may see him in person since he's apparently in the city. Yeah, he is. Do you think he was targeted because he works for the gray zone, even though he just said something that others said, as you said, that passed the Israeli censors? You know, given how many times we've been targeted in various deplatforming campaigns, Max himself a few years ago was arrested on a ridiculous charge that was quickly dropped.

We've been targeted with lawfare, with cancellations. One time, Max and I, a few years ago, were supposed to speak at a conference in Portugal. And after we arrived there, the last second we were dropped because the Zelenskys, the first lady of Ukraine, Zelensky's wife, threatened to basically destroy the conference

we were speaking at unless we were dropped. So at this point, whenever a gray zone journalist is targeted, yeah, I think it's fair to suspect that it's because of the gray zone affiliation. But listen, in the context of Israel, they go after journalists in way worse ways than they went after Jeremy.

Jeremy was thankfully allowed to leave the country and he was allowed to leave alive. Israel kills Palestinian journalists. Shireen Abu Akleh in the West Bank, who was an American citizen of years ago, and also so many journalists in Gaza, and has now marked, as we're speaking, six more journalists in Gaza for death, people who work for Al Jazeera, basically accusing them with no evidence, with no basis of being tied to Hamas and Islamic jihad. And that's Israel's

way of saying that we've had impunity to kill dozens of journalists. And we're about to do that again. We want to do that again by going after these people who have been bravely documenting the extermination of their people, including in northern Gaza, which is under an Israeli siege. I'm going to guess that you and Max and Anya have no plans to visit Israel soon. Well, you never know, actually. You know, I haven't been in more than two decades and I'd love to actually go back and see for myself the conditions on the ground. And we have Western privilege, and we have to use it for good. And I'm not going to shy away from visiting Israel. If they won't let me in, they won't let me in.

But certainly, being a Western or a privileged Western or being Jewish, I'm not worried about any serious persecution from Israel. I think the worst comes to worst, we get deported. Okay. What is your take on the death of Yahya Sinwar? The Israelis, of course, are crowing and boasting about it. Joe Biden boasted about it. The American State Department boasted about it. Max thinks it's a disaster for Israel because he has true, iconic, permanent heroic status now amongst the Palestinian people. I certainly agree that his murder did create these iconic images of his last stand where he's gravely injured and he's still fighting off the invading Israeli forces. And obviously for people committed to the cause of resisting Israel, that will be inspiring.

In terms of the strategic value of this to Israel, it's a blow to Hamas, but Israel has killed countless Hamas leaders before. And where did that get them? It led to October 7th, which Sinwar presided over. And so he'll be replaced. And as long as Israel is occupying Palestinians and refusing to address the fundamental crime, the fundamental original sin of ethnic cleansing and occupation, then there always will be people to resist it. Have the Israelis succeeded in degrading or neutralizing or even crushing Hamas? Well, it's hard for me to say because I don't know what capability is left for Hamas. Certainly, there are Israeli forces still being killed on the ground whenever they go in. But the issue there is that, as Norman

Finkelstein has pointed out, the actual level of fighting in Gaza has not been that extensive. Israel's so-called war in Gaza is mostly just an extermination campaign from afar, where they drop these massive U.S.-provided munitions on residential areas and destroy Gaza, which I think is their real strategic goal. I don't think their strategic goal really was the defeat of Hamas. They'd be happy to defeat Hamas if they could. What they really wanted to do, I think, and which they have succeeded in, is destroy Gaza and make it unlivable and expel as many people as possible. Here's the Secretary of State earlier today with his view on the current state and likely future of Gaza. Cut number 16.

Israel has achieved most of its strategic objectives when it comes to Gaza, all with the idea of making sure that October 7th could never happen again. In the space of a year, it's managed to dismantle Hamas's military capacity. It's destroyed a bunch of its arsenal. It's eliminated its senior leadership, including most recently Yahya Sinwar. This has covered the cost, great cost, to Palestinian civilians in Gaza. Now is the time to turn those successes into an enduring strategic success. And there are really two things left to do. Get the hostages home and bring the war to an end

with an understanding of what will follow. Does he know what he's talking about? Well, in terms of saying Israel has achieved strategic successes, I do think he's correct. But those successes are not what he describes. The success was in making Gaza unlivable. And it's incredible for a diplomat to be speaking in laudatory terms about an extermination campaign that has routinely targeted hospitals, civilian infrastructure, mosques, schools. I mean, there isn't one university left standing in Gaza.

And this diplomat, this purported diplomat, is praising all that as a, quote, success. And think about the message, the tactic he's endorsing. He says that Israel has carried all this out to ensure that October 7th could never happen again. That's the logic of terrorism that says, you know, you can basically kill as many civilians as you want, destroy an entire area if you want to basically ensure that people cannot strike you again. That's the logic of terrorism. That was the logic of October 7th in which Hamas was trying to inflict a blow on Israel to ensure that Israel could no longer carry out its occupation. The difference is Hamas actually has the right to launch a military occupation against its occupier because they're the ones being occupied. And especially after so many years of diplomatic alternatives being exhausted where Israel and the U.S. used the so-called peace process to accelerate the colonization of Palestinian territories, especially after Palestinians tried nonviolent resistance with the Great March of Return in 2018, which was violently crushed by Israel.

Then for people living under occupation, the message from Israel and the U.S. was that there's no choice you have but military resistance. So Blinken is actually endorsing the logic of October 7th, which doesn't apply to Israel because Israel is an occupying power. And if Israel wanted to ensure that October 7th, which doesn't apply to Israel because Israel is an occupying power. And if Israel wanted to ensure that October 7th didn't happen again, what it could do is end the occupation

of the people who are military, who are militarily resisting it or resisting it in an armed way because Hamas isn't a military. But so the logic is completely inverse, but that's US policy. It's to support the occupier and crush all diplomatic alternatives.

And that's why also they've left the hostages to die. Netanyahu's killed more hostages than he's saved, and they've ignored them. They could have freed all the hostages without even entering Gaza. Hamas offered that way back in October. They'd free all the hostages if Israel didn't invade Gaza, and Israel ignored that because its goal was never to free the hostages. It was to destroy Gaza. Its goal was also never to negotiate for a ceasefire. Netanyahu kept changing the goalposts. You and I and Max and Ritter and McGregor believe that Bill Burns and Amos Hochstein were probably in on that stunt. Do you think Blinken was? Was he being used or was he a part of the crew that was using everybody else? Well, both. He's so inept that certainly there wasn't an extent to which he was used, but it was willingly. There's reporting recently that

says that Blinken was told by Netanyahu early on within days of October 7th that Israel wouldn't let a single aspirin into Gaza, that Israel was going to impose a full blockade, a starvation siege. And Blinken heard that, said nothing about it publicly. And in fact, what he said publicly was to lie about it and cover up for Israel. So that's Blinken, completely in lockstep at every turn with Netanyahu and happy to be used in a way that embarrasses him just to further Israel's goal of destroying Gaza. Switching to Ukraine, I don't know if you know this, it was announced just as we were coming on air, but Andrei Kostin, the prosecutor general of Ukraine, which is the equivalent of their attorney general, just resigned in a draft dodging scandal in which he apparently orchestrated the designation of the friends and

relatives and colleagues as physically disabled so that they wouldn't be drafted. I hadn't heard that news, but it's totally in line with the way this war has gone for Ukraine, where people without connections, without social status, have been shipped off to die as cannon fodder in a proxy war that U.S. neocons know Ukraine can't win, but want to continue because it serves their goal of using Ukraine to weaken Russia. And it's average Ukrainians who pay the price and people with connections avoid it. That's always

how it's gone. And it's to the point now where there's so few, there's a, they're running out of people left to sacrifice. So what is the US offering? They're offering a demand as expressed by people like Lindsey Graham and Alexander Vindman, that Ukraine lower its draft age to 18. Ukraine's already lowered it to 25. But for American neocons who are just hellbent on using Ukraine to bleed Russia, they're demanding now that Ukraine lower the draft age to 18 so that Ukraine sacrifice even more young people for the sake of this proxy war. It is such a disaster, but it's perfectly consistent with the U.S. policy of using Ukrainians as cannon fodder to bleed Russia. At the beginning of your Substack piece, Zelensky's victory plan, you ask rhetorically if Zelensky wants a long war. What do you think? I don't know what goes on in his head, but what I do in that article is I quote Zelensky from late March, 2022. And for those who watch your show closely, everyone knows this is a very pivotal time because this was when Ukrainian and Russian negotiators were making critical advances in a drafting a treaty to end the war that began

just one month prior. So this is late March, 2022. Russia invades a month before. This is before Boris Johnson intervened. Correct. And this is what Zelensky said. I'll quote it for you. There are those in the West who don't mind a long war because it would mean exhausting Russia, even if this means the demise of Ukraine and comes at the cost of Ukrainian lives this is definitely in the interest of some countries and that's not you know Scott Ritter saying that or uh another critic of the proxy war that's zolensky saying that in late March 2022 so he recognized exactly as you heard on this show and at the gray zone from the start that the U.S

goal has been to bleed Russia, even if this comes at the demise of Ukraine, which are Zelensky's words, the demise of Ukraine. So Zelensky recognized that his so-called allies were using his country to bleed Russia, even at the expense of the, quote, demise of Ukraine. And what did he do? Rather than tell them to go to hell, he bowed to them when Boris Johnson, as you brought up, came over and told Zelensky not to make a peace deal that was by then advancing between Ukraine and Russia. So he listened to the very same people who he acknowledged were presiding over the demise of Ukraine. And it's gotten him to where he is today. What is the status of the incursion into

Russia going, given Russia's military advantage. And so now we're seeing the result of that. It's been, you know, a few months now, but Russia, as they've done everywhere else, has just relied on its sheer strength in numbers and artillery and has, you know, grinded the Ukrainians down, ground them down, and now is, you know, about to basically route the last Ukrainians from Kursk. And Zelensky is issuing some desperate plea, along with other acts of desperation. He's recently talked about Ukraine reacquiring nuclear weapons. He's thrown out the allegation that North Korean troops are on the ground

fighting for Russia with no evidence whatsoever, which is just a desperate ploy to get foreign intervention on his side. So by bringing up mythical North Korean intervention, he's trying to spur NATO intervention because that's the only chance he has of turning the tide. I'm looking, Chris, for the Secretary Austin clip. Oh, here I found it. Tell me what you think of this domino theory. I'll let you characterize it. Cut number 10, Chris. The United States does not seek war with Russia.

And even as Putin makes profoundly reckless and dangerous threats about nuclear war, we will continue to behave with the responsibility that the world rightly demands of a nuclear armed state. So the United States will uphold our sworn NATO obligations. The United States will defend every inch of NATO territory, and the United States will get Ukraine what it needs to fight for its survival and security. So we must continue to face, squarely face, the specter of an aggressive Russia, backed by other autocrats from North Korea and Iran. If Ukraine falls under Putin's boot, all of Europe will fall under Putin's shadow.

If Ukraine falls under Putin's boot, all of Europe will fall under Putin's shadow. Does anybody take this seriously? Anybody who looks at reality should not be taking this seriously. And that includes, by the way, U.S. officials who've admitted the opposite of what Austin just said. There was an article in the New York Times back in July where they admitted actually what U.S. officials think about the so-called threat that Putin poses to Europe beyond Ukraine. And I'll quote it. It says this, Throughout the war, U.S. officials have assessed that President Putin is loathe to expand the war beyond Ukraine's borders.

Loathe to expand the war beyond Ukraine's borders. That's what U.S. officials said about Putin. So despite what Austin says in public, that if we don't stop Russia and Ukraine, they're going to go beyond the borders, U.S. officials admitted to The New York Times actually what they really think. And of course, because this war, despite so much prox war propaganda, it was not about Russia's trying to restore the Soviet Union. It was about Russia trying to intervene to protect ethnic Russians in the East who are under threat from a coup regime that came into power 10 years ago with the help of the U.S. and that refused to implement the agreed upon peace framework for ending that conflict, which is the Minsk Accords.

So this was Russia's attempt to impose the Minsk Accords essentially by force. And it almost worked weeks into the war when they negotiated a peace treaty that would have left Ukraine intact, with the exception of Crimea, which Russia took back in 2014 and is not going to return. And rather than accept that deal, which his own negotiators had worked out with Russians and which his own negotiator called a very real compromise, Zelensky decided to listen to Boris Johnson and to Antony Blinken and Joe Biden and be used for the real goal, which is to use Ukraine to weaken Russia. And so now Austin can talk about

how we have to stop Putin. But look, it's over. Russia has taken more territory, which they're not giving back at this point after the sabotage of the Istanbul peace deal. And Austin says there about we'll defend every inch of NATO territory. Yeah, of course. But that means nothing because this isn't about Russia trying to fight with NATO. This is about Russia trying to impose a peace deal that should have happened 10 years ago, had everybody respected the rights of millions of people in the east of Ukraine who didn't want to live under a government that was trying to ban their language and their culture. Do you think that the eggheads in the State Department recognize the gravity of their mistake and the tragedy of it all? No, I don't. No, because they face no consequences. It's Ukrainians doing the dying, which they're happy with. I mean, remember when Lindsey Graham bragged that as long as we provide

the military support, Ukraine will fight to the last person. So it's not Americans who are bearing the cost. I mean, it's not Americans who are bearing the cost. I mean, it's American citizens who are footing the bill. But for people in power, they don't care. Their whole job is to basically take American tax money and use it for their own purposes, their own interests. So it's when there's no domestic cost because U.S. citizens aren't coming home in body bags. It's just Ukrainians, which we don't care about. They're perfectly content. And their goal of weakening Russia in their eyes is a worthy enough goal to sacrifice an entire country. And since that country is expendable to them, I don't think they have any regrets at all.

Here's what they think they need to get this across to November 6, cut number 11. So I'm pleased to announce today the commitment of a $400 million presidential drawdown package to provide your forces with additional munitions, armored vehicles, and any tank weapons. While the focus on Ukraine's immediate needs goes on, we're also committed to sustaining your support as pledged in the bilateral security agreement that you and President Biden signed in July. preposterous from the constitutional perspective that the president can make these decisions that Congress should be making about how much they get, when they get it, and whether it's cash or whether it's armaments. Will this do them any good, realistically speaking, at this stage of the game? Or is it just a waste of American borrowed taxpayer dollars? This whole war has

been a waste. Tens of billions of dollars shoved into weaponry to fuel a proxy war. The U.S. officials always knew that Ukraine couldn't win, but winning wasn't the goal. The goal was just to bleed Russia. So in that respect, this will serve that purpose for a little while longer. But look, according to Ukrainian officials, Austin is talking there about meeting Ukraine's needs. Well, the U.S. is not meeting Ukraine's needs because what Ukraine needs, according to them, is permission to launch U.S. weapons deep into Russia. But the U.S. is not authorizing that because they've been warned by the Pentagon that this could spark a direct Russian retaliation against NATO. And so therefore, that's a line that

the U.S. doesn't want to cross because they've been fined to fuel this war as long as Ukrainians are bearing the costs and as long as it's just Ukrainians and Russians dying, but not anybody outside those borders. Even though they've been willing to risk it, they don't want to do something that will knowingly trigger a direct Russian response. So that's where we're at today. And this is why Zelensky is sounding increasingly desperate and talking about Ukraine reacquiring nuclear weapons because he's also asking for immediate membership to NATO, which they're also not granting him. Because, again, the goal has always been to dangle NATO in front of Ukraine to bait Russia, which was successful. And now it's Ukraine left to bear the cost. I just want to go back to Israel for a minute, if I may, Aaron, in the two leaked documents that came out last Friday,

which is since you and I spoke last, which apparently show American intel spying on Israel, sharing some of it with the Five Eyes and not sharing other parts of it. There's a casual reference in one of them to the Israeli nuclear program. I thought that was forbidden from being mentioned by American officials verbally or in writing. It's certainly forbidden publicly because if we were to admit publicly that Israel's nuclear weapons, then we'd have to cut off military assistance to Israel because Israel is in violation of the Nuclear Proliferation Treaty. And according to our laws, we can't be arming someone who's in violation of that. But of course, laws don't matter the same way that we know that Israel is blocking humanitarian aid to Gaza, which should trigger an immediate cutoff of U.S. support. But of course, it doesn't because

Israel is our ally that can do whatever it wants. So yeah, that was a very interesting admission. I mean, on the positive side, the document said that Israel is not planning on using nuclear weapons, which I guess we should all be relieved by. But of course, we still have to contend with the fact the Biden administration is assisting Israel in plotting how to attack Iran, not trying to defuse this whole disaster and reach a ceasefire in Gaza, which is at the heart of this crisis. Instead, coordinating with Israel on how it should attack Iran and willing to fuel the fire even more on top of all the disasters

that we've seen over the last year. Aaron Mate, thank you, my dear friend. Very informative and much appreciated. All my best to you. Thank you, Judge. Appreciate it. We'll see you again next week. Sounds good. Thank you, my dear friend. Very informative and much appreciated. All my best to you. Thank you, Judge. Appreciate it. We'll see you again next week. That's good.

Thank you. Coming up tomorrow, a long and full day at 8 in the morning, Colonel Tony Schaefer. At 9 in the morning, Professor Gilbert Doctorow. At 12 noon, Old Times Eastern, Colonel Larry Wilkerson. At 1 in the afternoon, Colonel Doug McGregor. And at three in the afternoon, Professor John Mearsheimer. I remind you, if you're going to be in the New York City area on Sunday, you can come to a place called the Tudor City Steakhouse.

Even though it's a steakhouse, it's a nice eggy brunch at 10 o'clock on Sunday morning. And at 11 o'clock, some of your favorite and familiar guests, including yours truly, will be discussing the assault on free speech and the assault on humanity in Ukraine and in Gaza. Chris, if you can put that up just again briefly. The steakhouse is located on the east side of Manhattan, 45 Tudor City Place is East 42nd Street. You know some of these folks, Randy Credico, Jimmy Dore, Dennis Fritz, Danny Haifang, Colonel Wilkerson, who'll be with us tomorrow, Jeff Norman, and all of this is orchestrated by Scott Ritter. So if you want to have some intellectual stimulation and a nice brunch on Sunday morning

and interaction with all of us, we'll see you there. We'll see you at eight o'clock tomorrow morning with Colonel Schaefer. Judge Napolitano for Judging Freedom. you