Judging Freedom - Alastair Crooke: Is Middle East War Inevitable?

Episode Date: August 12, 2024

Alastair Crooke: Is Middle East War Inevitable?See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Thank you for watching. Hi, everyone. Judge Andrew Napolitano here for Judging Freedom. Today is Monday, August 12th, 2024. Alistair Crook will be with us in just a moment on, Is War the Middle East inevitable. But first this. You all know that I am a paid spokesperson for Lear Capital, but I'm also a customer, a very satisfied customer. About a year ago, I bought gold and it's now increased in value 23%. So $100 invested in gold a year ago is now worth $123. You have $100 in the bank. It still shows $100, but $100 invested in gold a year ago is now worth $123. If you have $100 in the bank, it still shows $100, but $100 in the bank is now worth 24% less. Inflation has reduced all of your savings, all of your buying power, and mine, by 24%.

And gold is largely immune from that. If you want to learn how gold will soon hit $3,200 an ounce, And gold is largely immune from that. If you want to learn how gold will soon hit $3,200 an ounce, call Lear Capital, 800-511-4620 or go to learjudgenap.com. Get your free gold report. Same experts who predicted the 23% rise that I've enjoyed have predicted this $3,200 an ounce gold. Learn about how to transfer this to an IRA. Protect your savings. 800-511-4620. Learjudgenap.com. Tell them the judge sent you. Alistair Crook, good morning, my dear friend. Welcome to the program. Always a pleasure,

special pleasure for me to start off the week since it's early in the morning here on Monday with you. I want to discuss the big picture of whether war in the Middle East is inevitable, but first a little bit of breaking news I think relevant to this. Abu Abbas, the head of the Palestinian Authority, is in Moscow. Isn't that interesting? I wish it were. Sorry to put it like that, but Mohammed Abbas is a spent force. I mean, a broken reed.

Not just his age, he just has no credibility at all amongst Palestinians who hate him, just waiting for him to go. But the West sort of props him up as sort of the head of the PLO, the Palestinian Liberation Organization, and of the PA, the Palestinian Authority, and therefore they refer to him. But he's completely broken. He has no sort of sense of control over the people. His only force is that he collects, gets the tax receipts

that Israel collects on his behalf and hands it over to Fatah, and Fatah hand them out, and it's really without the money he would be gone. So I think he's in Moscow. They will try and do something. I've spoken to them about it, and they say, you know, it's extraordinary, but, I mean, there's no way, I mean, people trust the old God of the Palestinians.

But when you talk to younger members of Fatah, they sound more like Hamas. I mean, and, you know, the polls have shown that overall, whether it is in West Bank or in Gaza, there is absolutely no trust in Abu Mazen, and the trust is with Sinwa and with Hamas, who they think have the right to rule the Palestinians as a whole, both sides. The polls are very clear on that. Do you think that the ferocity and barbarity of the Israeli response to October 7th will have the effect of uniting the Palestinians? Yes, it does, but not around Abu Mazen. Right.

No, not around him. You say Abu Mazen, that is another way to refer to... Mahmoud Abbas. Mahmoud Abbas, yeah. Abu Mazen is his sort of name that he's sort of widely, generally known in, but it's Mahmoud Abbas, yeah. Abu Mazen is his sort of name that he's sort of widely, generally known in, but it's Mahmoud Abbas. But it's not attracted any support for him. Overall, Palestinians, less than 8%, less than 8% of Palestinians regard Hamas as responsible

for the plight the Palestinians are in. A vast majority support Hamas and Hamas' leadership, both in West Bank and in Gaza. I mean, 87%, I think it is. I may be wrong on the exact figures, but the polls, the latest polls show overwhelming support for Hamas and for Sinwa. So, I mean, he's going, I mean, the Russians, I don't want to diminish it, the Russians are trying

to sort of get some sort of political process going. The problem for them is that Abu Mazen Mahmoud Abbas has all the sort of tools, the instrumental tools of statehood lie with him. He is the chairman of the PLO, da-di-da-di-da, and they want him to actually change and make the PLO not just the movement of FATA, the movement from largely based in the West Bank, but in Gaza but to make it uh if you like a leadership where it is going to be a joint and so far as I understand from Moscow he's been resisting bitterly is wider war in the Middle East inevitable I inevitable is I know I put that in the article

I I I think it's very hard to see how it can be avoided. I think it is pretty well inevitable. And I just take one second to explain why. I think one of the reasons is because of the change that has taken place in Western politics. Western politics has changed. I mean, particularly on the sort of Democratic Party area where in certain senses, the control room that we don't see that is behind it. And that, you know, even the president is a figurehead and, you know, is not particularly important any longer because one figurehead can be removed in a coup d'etat and then another figurehead is elevated by the media

and becomes the new figurehead. But behind it lies a control room, and the control room is operating this in a new form of politics, which I call the whole-of-state politics, which is there has to be an ideological alignment, not just across the party, but amongst, if you like, NGOs, amongst the financial world, all of the state apparatus, the media, all of this has to be all of a state. This was something that was introduced by Obama at the time of the war on terror and has become ubiquitous.

And now it's become very much more, it's really sort of centered on the sense of these slogans, our democracy, our consensus, our values. And it's not about debate, it's not about conformism, it's a sort of totalising process of sort of emotive gestures produced by the control room with Hollywood import, which controls the people. Same in Europe. Same sort of process that is going on. So you have these meaningless things. You know, the campaign is about joy. The Republicans are weird. I mean,

what do any of these things mean? They're just emotive statements. And at the same time, this totalizing politics on the domestic front bleeds across into a totalizing foreign policy. These, you know, the people we're dealing with, Russia, Iran, China, they're all really extremists. They don't follow our democracy. They don't follow our values. They're not part of this. And there's no differentiation. You don't try and understand Iran. You don't try and understand Russia better or China or have a differentiated policy because really they're all sort of terrorist extremist groups and hostile. And that means that if you like, the war is against all of them, not against just Iran, because Russia is supporting Iran, and China is supporting Iran. And therefore, it has to be

against all of them, because they're all, if you like, lumped into this sort of category of extremists, which are against us and against our democracy. Well, when the elites use the phrase the whole of society, are they talking about some sort of subliminal or authoritarian alliance of the various facets of society, military, industrial, banking, pharmaceutical, media, in an alliance against Russia, China, Iran, North Korea? Is that what you're saying?

Yes, the narrative spreads because the narrative, the alignment, the war against misinformation is fought on all levels. It's within the banking community. If you don't share their values, you can be debanked. It goes right across society, in the national security state, in the NGOs. Everyone is talking about our values, and the values are across the whole of society,

if you like, except for those extremists who they call a threat to our state, generally the people on the other side, a different political genre, and they then become the extremists, and the extremists then, in foreign policy, spread across all of those that you regard as not accepting our values and our democracy. Well, to me, maybe to you, and I think to most people watching this program, the most extreme player on the scene is Israel, because of the genocide that it is committing and denying. How does Israel fit into this picture that the elites are attempting to craft? Well, you heard that and you saw that during the recent conventions

when they say, you know, that, listen, if you don't support Israel in what's happening, that means that you're supporting you want Trump to win. I mean, that's what Kamala Harris said specifically. Look, stop all this noise. She was addressing, if you like, the uncommitted groups who had voted during earlier. And she said, listen, listen, will you quiet down? Will you stop the criticism of Israel? Unless that is you want Trump to win.

Unless you want the other side, the extremists, the threat to our society, to our democracy to win. And so, I mean, Israel is precisely what you say and see, a huge, and Israel is trying to provoke this into a war. And I'm saying because all of these things have coalesced together into one type of, you know, that these are all the extremists. They're no longer the terrorist extremists, but now they're a different form of extremists

that don't accept our narratives. As it's coalesced into one enemy, the danger is, as I see, escalation across the board in Ukraine, in Israel, in Syria. Everywhere there is escalation going on. And this is a moment when how can Iran manage, if you like, to do an action that will make Israel regret what they did

in the killing of Haniyeh? How can they provide, if you like, a riposte to that that does not lead to a massive escalation, not just against Iran, but will spread across and bleed across to Russia and even into a certain extent to China. Iran can do this in many ways. The first part of it can be done. It can overcome probably, I believe, quite likely can overcome the air defences of Israel because they have the means, if you like, to do volleys of missiles.

And if you time the volleys correctly so that the American aircraft won't have time to refuel between the volleys, you can, if you like, extend the time of aircraft loitering, having to loiter to the point at which they can't continue. Then you come in with your next volley and you use drones and you use cruise missiles and you use ballistic missiles for which no one has air defences. And in this way, you can overcome them. And you can overcome them also if you have this coordinated with cruise missiles coming from Lebanon and coming from Yemen from a completely different direction.

The ability to be able to, whether it's the Americans with all their aircraft, with their aircrafts that they are deploying to the region and their ships and so on, it's still going to be very difficult. We saw that on April 13th where I think between, because there weren't many Israeli missiles, it's mostly American, well over nearly 3 billion of air defences were expended. You know, they're not infinite. And even on the ships, you can't re, if you like, arm them, re-equip them. At sea. It's not allowed. So it is going to be, it's quite possible for it to be

very problematic for Israel, what is going to happen. Not an attack on civilians, but what is going to happen. But the big question and why I think we've been waiting for this to occur is because Iran has to plan on the stage after, and the stage after that, because the stage after will be a retaliation by Israel. And Israel wants war with Iran, clearly. That's what Netanyahu came to Washington to say. I want a war against Iran, and I want you to support it. And Israel and America has said, it will support you in this war against Iran. So it's in the interest of Netanyahu to be as provocative as he can in stage two. And then there will be another reaction from Iran to that. And this has to be carefully calibrated, and this is what Iran is

doing, why it's taking time, and coordinated with Hezbollah, with the Ansar Allah in Yemen, and with the Iraqis, and so that all of this is meshes together. How do we avoid it going to an all-out war? Well, that's why I'm quite pessimistic that this won't end up in that way, even if there isn't a great desire, although I think there is ultimately a desire for a greater war, not, I mean, by the Kamala Harris's and Walsh's of this world, but I mean, by those deep structures of foreign policy. Right. Which need, if you like, some form of reset for financial reasons, economic reasons. Essentially that, you know, the West has created this inverted pyramid of financial instruments. I mean, not just options, but all of these financial structures that sit in derivatives in trillions.

And they sit on a tiny base of real collateral, of real value. A few bars of gold, perhaps here and there, a little bit of real value. A few bars of gold, perhaps here and there, a little bit of real value. I mean, commercial real estate is not valuable anymore. So where's the collateral underpinning it? They need this to come. This is why you had Lindsey Graham saying very clearly, he said, listen, look, you know, Ukraine for America is a goldmine. It's, you know, it sits on 12 trillion worth of materials, of raw materials. We need those to, if you like, refinance, to re-equip and refinance ourselves. And we don't want Putin and China to get it. That's what he was speaking about, saying, you know,

we need some more actual commodity value at the bottom of our pyramid so we can go on expanding our pyramid, our inverted pyramid that rests on this tiny base of real commodities, oil, gold, rare materials, all of these things, lithium, all of the things. This is why he said, we can't allow Ukraine to go to Putin. We need those to underpin our actually out-wobbling, if you like, inverted pyramid. We've just got too much financialism on the top of a tiny base of real money. How, I wasn't going to go there, but since you've mentioned Ukraine several times, albeit albeit in the context of Senator Graham, how grave, if at all, is this Ukrainian incursion into Kursk, which seems to be going on for a couple of days now?

Well, I think it's very grave for Ukraine. I don't think it's grave for Russia at all. It'll be stabilized and is being stabilized. And you notice Russia is not panicking about it. The panic you see is one that is projected out of the Western media. Russia is not actually panicking at all. In fact, I suspect, and I have heard, that Russia had an inkling. They have very good intelligence in Russia. They got an idea that this was being planned and that they were going to this border area is really mostly forest. And there's a few sort of built up areas, just villages and things. And it's guarded by border police, vanguardia of the border police who are not trained and are not troops, they're not there to fight. And there is a current, I can't say that it's true, but believes that the Russians let this happen.

Because what Ukraine has done has stripped the Donbass of all its best troops. The Donbass, where they were at the most vulnerable, they've taken the best troops from that. Some of those battalions are down to 20 men left, and they've put them all in this venture for going into Russia, and they're going to lose them all. You know, sooner or later in the next two weeks, they'll all be dead.

And then Donbass is going to be, you know, for a breakthrough by Russia, is it going to be an open place? And the sense of panic is clear by Zelensky now trying to set fire to the Zaporizhzhia nuclear powerpoint, trying to hit it with drones and saying, you know, look at me, quick, you've got to come and help me. It's a crisis. We need NATO to step in. We want the West to send more weapons.

We need troops. And so he's trying to build a real crisis around the drone attack on Zaporizhia. I don't think actually all of the elements of Zaporizhia are closed down. I mean, they're not operating. There is a Favap, but it's not operating. Here's how delusional Zelensky is. This is two days ago on August 10, cut number three. Today, I received several reports from Commander-in-Chief Sersky

regarding the front lines and our actions to push the war onto the aggressor's territory. I am grateful to every unit of the defense forces ensuring that Ukraine is proving that it can indeed restore justice and ensure the necessary pressure on the aggressor. This is just a PR stunt, is it not? Yeah, he said it, you know, this is to convince our partners, I mean, effectively, that we can still, you know, do these exercises. And as it's not going so well, because they're being stopped

and they're being slowly killed off, then what do we do? They fire some drones into the Zaparishio nuclear power plant and start a fire there and then say, help, help, come and save me. And it's a bit pathetic, really. To get back to where you were, where we were earlier when you mentioned Vice President Harris and what she might do, I wonder if Prime Minister Netanyahu heard her say this. We'll play the clip in just a few seconds. Here she is dealing with pro-Palestinian protesters at a rally in Michigan. By the time she's finished with them, they're cheering her. Cut number six. You know what? Hold on a second. Hold on. Hold on. Hold on, everybody. Hold on.

Hold on. We are all in here together. I'm told an extraordinary number of folks who are here together because we love our country. We're here to fight for our democracy, which includes respecting the voices that I think that we are hearing from. And let me just say this on topic of what I think I'm hearing over there. Let me just speak to that for a moment, and then I'm going to get back to the business at hand. So let me say, I have been clear. Now is the time to get a ceasefire deal and get the hostage deal done. All right, I misspoke. It was Phoenix. It wasn't Michigan, but you get the point. Yeah, I got the point.

Does that cause Prime Minister Netanyahu heartburn? Of course not. Of course not. He doesn't pay any attention to Kamala Harris. He listens to the people that matter, that have power in the United States. The deep state are coordinating, have been coordinating this before he even got to Washington to give his address to Congress. And of course, this doesn't matter. And it doesn't bother, it doesn't bother Netanyahu at all, because Hamas are not even going to go to this conference by Biden on the 15th.

Sinoir has already said, you know, that there's no point. I'd like to go back and sit and talk about the original proposal that was put, I think, on the 12th of July or something to Hamas. We need to start discussing that. I mean, it's not, you know, there's not going to be a... Does Netanyahu... He doesn't want a deal. Netanyahu doesn't want a deal, of course. Okay.

Is it fair to say Netanyahu does not want to cease fire and does not want a deal to return the hostages? He wants a wider war against Iran. That's obvious. Yeah, quite clear. He's made that absolutely apparent. There's not a single doubt about that amongst Israelis. He wants a full war and he wants to provoke it. And that's why the great danger is, as I say, not just what Iran does in whenever it does it in this next period,

but might be much more frightening than people expect. I know the sort of myth of Israeli military greatness is pervasive, but it may be much more serious than they expect. And then they will react. And what will they do to provoke it to the next level where America is fully engaged? Use a tactical nuclear weapon? That's been threatened by Israel, something like that. Well, that will certainly take us to a different level. Where will it leave Russia and China? I mean, this is why I say it seems to me almost inevitable because there's no one actually pulling back. Actually, most people, you know, not the, you know, I don't think it suits the Democratic Party to have a war at the moment

because, you know, everyone will say, well, Kamala Harris and Wolf, what's their foreign policy expertise? There isn't any. But nonetheless, I mean, as I say, because there is a wider need, the whole of the Western prosperity, British prosperity, was based on owning the resources of the rest of the world, of India, of its resources, of its materials, its wealth, its spices, everything. And that's made us very wealthy. Now America's coming to the point where it needs to somehow, if you like, rejuvenate that whole process for itself. And it needs some sort of reset. I don't mean a Davos reset, but I mean a financial reset in the U.S.

because the juice has been sucked out of the lemon of the U.S. You're clear that Netanyahu couldn't care less what Vice President Harris says, but he certainly cares about what his own finance minister, Belizil Smotrich, says. Here is first a full screen in which it's in Hebrew, but the headline is translated, Minister Smotrich saying, ceasefire is effectively a surrender deal.

This is August 9th. And here is Admiral Baghdad Bob Kirby responding in behalf of the U.S. government. The views being taken against this agreement, the views expressed by Mr. Smotrich specifically, would in fact sacrifice the lives of Israeli hostages, his own countrymen. What do you think? I think it's time Kirby tried to learn what's going on and what the sentiment is. Modric reflects the views of a majority of Israelis who think that a deal, not half of them don't agree, maybe a little more, maybe a little less, but a majority of them believe that the only way for Israel to survive is to remove the Palestinians from between the

river and the sea. And he's been clear about it for years. He's also supported in this by Ben-Gavir, by Levin, all cabinet members, and by Netanyahu. Don't forget, Netanyahu's father, his father worked with Jabotinsky, the, if you like, the radical author of the, if you like, Zionist project years ago. I mean, it's been a long process in which they said, and Jabotinsky at the time was said, and his father, Netanyahu's father was saying, we can only stop a new Holocaust by creating a hegemony of our own. And so, I mean, it's not a new idea. What is new is that we've got this sort of Judeo-Messianic apparatus.

And what is so dangerous for Netanyahu is that there are this, not only is there the ideology, this Judeo-Messianic ideology, behind that are a hundred or so rabbis who work with what they call hoplites. Hoplites were the forces of Sparta at the time. These are the vigilantes from the settlers, the 700,000, 800,000 settlers. And they call them the state of Judea at war with the state of Israel. And that they can come down.

And this is what Ben-Gavir and Smotrich command. If the state of Israel does something with which it disagrees, then its vigilantes will come down. They're all armed and they are a militia so that would be treason that would be treason on the part of smotrich and ben gevier if they commanded some uh vigilante group to attack the government of which they are a part they would say this is the government saving israel you're right now it all depends on how you look at it how you look at it, how you look at these things. But this is what they would say, that we are the true saviors of Israel and that those people,

and Nadenyahu said that about the defense people, he said they're leftists, you can't trust them though. He said that of both of Halevi, the Chief of Defence Staff, or Galant, who's the Defence Minister. He said they're really basically leftists. They'll sacrifice. We're talking about something that is very, very basic about Israel that is taking place. This argument that has been going on from Jabotinsky's time about cultural Zionism, if you like, and pure Zionism, which is based on revelation and faith. And they say democracy is a sort of privatization of Judaism. You know, you're answerable to yourself and you're answerable to your own values. That is not the true Judaism, which comes only from faith and from revelation and is not affected by democracy and cultural Zionism. So it's a deep argument that is taking place within Israel. And I hate to say it, but I think the dear Admiral needs to sort of pull out some of those textbooks and read a bit further.

Alistair, the situation is such a mess, but the breadth of your knowledge is so vast. It is such a pleasure to have you explain the intricacies of how things like fidelity to traditional Judaism interplay into the modern world and modern geopolitics. Thank you very much, my dear friend. These Monday mornings are so, so stimulating. I spent the weekend on the beach. I'm right back in the mode now. Thanks to you, Alistair. Well, sorry that the beach fades away so quickly. It's just a dim memory with a little bit of sun on my skin.

But thank you so much, my dear friend. All my best to your family. We'll see you again next week. Thank you so much. Thanks. Bye for now. Yes, bye-bye. Coming up later today at 10 o'clock this morning, Ray McGovern.

At 11 o'clock this morning, Larry Johnson. At 4 o'clock this afternoon for his first interview with us since his encounter with the FBI, Scott Ritter. Judge Napolitano for Judging Freedom. Thank you.