Judging Freedom - Alastair Crooke: Is Peace Possible?

Episode Date: April 15, 2024

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

Thank you. Hi everyone, Judge Andrew Napolitano here for Judging Freedom. Today is Monday, April 15th, 2024. Alistair Crook is here with us on Is Peace Even Possible? Not probable, but possible in the middle east but first this how do you really feel about your financial future right now today stable or uncertain despite all the happy talk that the fed and the banks want you to buy into i believe that 2024 is going to be a very unstable year, politically and financially.

That's one of the reasons I decided to buy physical gold and silver, and I suggest you should do the same and do it now. Why? Because throughout times of economic uncertainty, gold and silver have rightly earned a reputation for stability owning precious metals has made me feel more stable and it can do the same for you reach out to my friends at lear capital and get their free wealth protection guides you can reach them at 800-511-4620 lear has earned an excellent reputation by helping thousands of customers just like you

move portions of their retirement savings into Lear gold and silver IRAs. It's easy to do and it's tax and penalty free. Don't be caught off guard. Experts predict the markets may tank again. You'll be happy if you have protection in place. So call Lear at 800-511-4620, 800-511-4620, or go to learjudgenap.com and tell them your friend the judge sent you. Alistair, good day to you, my friend, and welcome here. Does Benjamin Netanyahu need

a war against Iran for his own personal political survival? You framed it in extremely personal terms, and it's fair to say that that's important. But actually, when you look at the situation in Israel at the moment, and it's become, you know, something has changed in the air. Something is very clear that Israelis have the sense of defeat, which they haven't had until now. But now they sense there is defeat. They know that Gaza has been a defeat and that it's unlikely that they're ever going to prevail as they would like in Gaza.

They haven't been able to restore the displaced persons to their homes. They have not been able, if you like, to get the hostages. That's at a dead end on the hostages. So wherever you look, there is a defeat and the economy is tanking and the sides, if you like, of the box are closing in on Israel. And so where is the way out for Israel? They need a diversion. They need something to get out of this. And that's where this great victory comes in and the idea that they can score a great victory. And Netanyahu, for all these years, has always been, you know, target Iran.

Iran is the great Satan that we must deal with. And this is why I think, you know, that we may see this conflict actually escalate further and widen further in this time, even though everyone has been trying very hard to not allow that to happen. But now it is really Israel that has the juncture in the road, the fork in the road. Either it has to accept where it is now and assimilate a defeat, military defeat, a defeat of its deterrence, a political internal defeat, or it has to go all the way, Armageddon, war, Amalek.

And the point is, we all look at this in sort of rational, extremely rational terms and say, well, it's not sensible to do that. But it's become increasingly, you know, an eschatological war, a war about the end of times. And for Israel Israel you even hear them talking about it either it's got to be a great victory or or else we're talking about some sort of complete failure and sort of the the famous example of of the those Israelis who committed suicide on the mountaintop. So I think it's not so much just his personal interest, although it is that, but it is also, secondly, the sense that Israel has got nowhere to go except escalation at this moment,

unless it's prepared to accept defeat. So on Netanyahu's watch, October 7th occurred, either by indifference or intentionally looking the other way, or incompetence. He promised that he would crush Hamas. He hasn't been able to do so.

He promised he would get the hostages back. He hasn't been able to do so. Hamas is not a sophisticated military. There are a lot of them, but they basically live in tunnels and they don't have any defensive weaponry whatsoever. As we speak, I understand that the Israelis have such a sense of defeat that Ben-Gurion Airport itself is deserted. Nobody wants to go there today. Why attack Iran? Let me try and...

Anytime the size of Israel, it has obviously a much greater population and economic base and sophisticated offensive weaponry. Quite true. But the key has always been, and the reason for doing this, has been to try and persuade and draw the United States into attacking Iran's supposed nuclear Westerns program. None of the Western intelligence services believe they have a weapon at all or even begun making a weapon. They are, if you like, a threshold, nuclear threshold state. But there's no evidence that they've moved to weaponization at all. But it has always been a theme. It was not only Netanyahu's theme,

it was his father's theme, that Iran is only about two months away from a nuclear bomb. We cannot allow Iran to have a nuclear bomb. And what I suspect, I mean, this is just my personal sense, what is Israel going to do now? What can it do now? Well, one of the things I was thinking of, let me be very clear to start with. Iran's nuclear program, the parts that

matter, are totally buried in tunnels deep inside mountains. They're not acceptable. Ehud Barak, who is a prime minister, has written that and said that quite clearly. It's too late to destroy the program by military means. It's over. They've done it. They're a threshold state. But what do you imagine? Supposing they decided to bomb Nantaz, which is not part of the program as such, but it's out in the open and it's sort of associated with the nuclear program it's got nothing to do it won't set iran back at all but what happens if they tried to do that and then they told the world look we've set back iran's nuclear program there would be applause in the united states and Europe and in many areas,

and they would say, oh, well, that was great. And then possibly congressmen would start to say, well, you know, it's right. We need to do something about this nuclear program. We need to destroy it. And then you can try and see him trying to draw. I'm not going to say he's going to succeed in this, but I could see some tactic like that appealing to him after what he's experienced last night in terms of the missile attacks. badly, or how poorly did the Iranian missiles attack IDF assets? help. But who is that person? How do you find them? Where do you even start? Talkspace. Talkspace makes it easy to get the support you need. With Talkspace, you can go online, answer a few questions about your preferences, and be matched with a therapist. And because you'll meet your therapist online, you don't have to take time off work or arrange childcare. You'll meet on your schedule, wherever you feel most at ease. If you're depressed, stressed, struggling with a relationship, or if you want some counseling for you and your partner,

or just need a little extra one-on-one support, Talkspace is here for you. Plus, Talkspace works with most major insurers, and most insured members have a $0 copay. No insurance? No problem. Now get $80 off of your first month with promo code SPACE80 when you go to Talkspace.com.

Match with a licensed therapist today at Talkspace.com. Well, first of all, you have to understand what Iranian objectives are, because otherwise people will get it wrong. But the Iranian objectives really have been, first of all, to control the intensity. This has been the resistance objectives, to control the intensity of this war and to control the escalatory ladder, the steps up the ladder of escalation, and to manage that in such a way that it doesn't go to all-out war, because neither Iran nor anyone in the region wants a major war where, you know, Beirut is leveled to the ground or Tehran, civilian Tehran, is destroyed. So the aim of this was simply to do one thing, to reestablish deterrence. For this last period, Israel has been assassinating Iranians in Syria and in Lebanon,

and then finally in their diplomatic premises in Damascus. And Iran wanted to send this message of deterrence. And of course, it's been misinterpreted widely in the West, because first of all, the drones that they fired, and they made it clear that they weren't looking to do a major destruction in Israel, but to send a clear message of a new equation. What's the equation? The equation is if you go on attacking Iran, in Iran, or Iranians outside of it, from henceforth, you will be attacked direct from Iran into Israel. That is the new equation.

We will attack you inside Israel from Iran. That's what the purpose was. That's what they did. Now, all those drones, they take three and a half hours to arrive at their target. They're very slow moving. The cruise missiles go faster and the ballistic missiles faster still. So they mix these things up. The point is that the drones were put up to be shot down because those drones, just as we've seen in Ukraine and elsewhere, the drones are used to map out the air defenses of Israel. And so the Iranians will have got a lot of information about the air defenses and the capabilities by putting up these old, slow drones that take three hours to get there.

So, you know, everybody knew they were coming. It was very clear when they started taking off that it would take that long. Now, they mixed that with two things, cruise missiles, some of them ground-hugging and some of them ballistic missiles. And a number of the ballistic missiles broke through all the air defenses they destroyed two air bases or not destroyed them but they landed

in two air bases into intelligence building uh in tel aviv the air force intelligence building from where the um if you like the attack and damas was coordinated, and also an electronic center on the Golan. And there were no casualties, and the damage was not, you know, world-shaking, but it sent a clear message, and it said, we have the capabilities. Now, in the newspapers, in the media, it says, oh, well, 99% of them were shot down. I mean, that's nonsense. 99% of the drones were shot down because they were put up to be shot down. So that, first of all, it gives cover for the other missile systems.

And also because it allows the Iranians to map, if you like, the ground of Israeli air defenses. Israeli air defenses were not able to stop the ballistic missiles. They know that. They will go on with the propaganda, and the West is pushing this propaganda very strongly in order to try and deter Netanyahu from making a strike against Iran in retaliation. Here's Admiral Kirby yesterday on how many missiles did the U.S. take down, cut number six. Isn't the United States already involved to some extent, though, given that, as you say, it did counter a number of those drones that were directed towards Israel?

Yes, that was a purely defensive mission. It was completely consistent with our obligations and our commitments to the defense of Israel. And again, Kristen, it wasn't just us. Other nations participated as well. How many drones, how many missiles did the U.S. shoot out of the sky? I don't know what the final tally is. I think the Department of Defense will probably be looking at that. But I think it's safe to say several dozens of drones and missiles that the United States helped out. The mainstream media here in the U.S., I would imagine it's the same same in Western Europe today, is making it sound like not a scratch was inflicted on Israel and

that this was a failure on the part of Iran. You have, of course, articulated for us the true purpose of why all those drones were set out. Let me ask you this. I know you're not intimate on the military aspects, but maybe you know this. The U.S. and the U.K. that helped shoot these down, were U.S. and U.K. assets that were shooting down the missiles and drones in Israel, or did they come from naval ships stationed nearby? Do you know? uh yes mostly naval ships um some from aircraft um but mostly from naval ships that they were uh they they were used there um and um israel used various of its missile defenses and they used a lot of it, which was, again, a thing that the Iranians were very interested to discover, you know, how many they would use.

I mean, the Israelis have calculated that the cost, the missile cost for them, Israel, was about 1.3 billion in terms of the missiles that they used. They can't go on doing that every day. I mean, these things for Western missiles are hugely expensive, whereas the drones they were shooting down probably cost, you know, I think at most $1,000, $2,000 each. I mean, it's chicken feed. The Iranians may have spent three three million um dollars but um iran uh israel rather

with the western services spent probably well over a billion on this process but they've got a good sense iran has now got a good sense it as i say it wasn't intended to be a destructive um it was it was intended to send a very so they just targeted two of these air bases uh a surveillance base and an intelligence headquarters to say we can do it it's possible you know we're not doing it this time but if you want to escalate bear in mind the lessons from this. Of course, the propaganda is all over the place saying, oh, well, you know, it's been a complete defeat for Iran. On the contrary, it's established this new equation, which is a very important equation that henceforth if Israel attacks any Iranian assets anywhere, it will be Iran that will respond from Iran into Israel. And that is a new equation,

and it is a loss of deterrence, if you like, on the part of Israel. Yesterday, the G7 leaders met by teleconference, and yesterday afternoon and again this morning, their spokespersons unanimously said to Prime Minister Netanyahu, don't retaliate again, enough of this. Do you think he'll abide that or do you think he has a vested interest in escalating this notwithstanding what the Iranians succeeded in doing and learned about Israeli defenses over the weekend? Well, as I say, I don't see any other way out for Israel. They've been defeated on all accounts in Gaza, in Lebanon, where they have a no-go zone, where they've removed all of the inhabitants, which are effectively part of Lebanon now. At this stage, the economy is tanking they've lost uh legitimacy around the world and they're trying

to you know and the west is trying to boost them up and sort of say well now you don't have to do anything because you've been so successful you don't have to do anything so don't escalate because everyone is frightened that we're on the precipice of escalation, which we might be. Because what else is the government going to do after the defeats on all the fronts and the loss of, if you like, both Israeli legitimacy around the world and the loss of its deterrence? This is what matters most to them. There's no longer any deterrence. How do we get that back?

Well, the only alternative, I can think, would be then that they would have to divert attention from Gaza by opening a front with Lebanon. But the army is not that keen on it. And the prize has always been to pull America in to a war on Iran and rely on America to destroy Iran and Iran's nuclear capabilities which they cannot do either the United States as I say they're buried in mountains the United States can't do that and the United States at this stage is not keen on a war in the Middle East. It's got an election on. But, and here I don't want to step into domestic politics in the US, but from what I've heard from talking to people, at the moment it doesn't suit.

But maybe later in the campaign, perhaps becoming a war president might have some advantages. But not now, not yet, maybe perhaps later. Who can tell? It depends how the campaign goes. It's an unknown, really. You recently gave a brilliant and gifted address in St. Petersburg, Russia, and I just want to ask one or two questions about it before we conclude. Is the United States of America today a republic or an empire? It's an empire, without doubt. A nihilistic empire.

You knew that one was coming. Yes, that was in it. I got it. No, it is. I mean, the atmosphere here is, it's quite striking because it was a big conference. And, you know, it was, I mean, what is so interesting is that this conference was paid for, managed and organized by the trade unions. I mean, all these people coming, the government participates there are members of parliament and various people taking part but it's the member it's the trade

union and this is the sort of bottom-up politics that no one uh outside um sort of sees or believes exists but it was i mean i can tell you it was i mean really i was amazed by the energy and the sense of you know politics all the time people sniping at one side or sniping at the other side but that's good so it was very lively and it was very energized looking at what's the future of the world and there are not many places where these discussions are taking place. What is the attitude, as you were against Russia and the anger of American government officials towards their counterparts in Russia? Well, you know, this meeting was very different because it's all sorts. I mean, you know, it's from the trade union roots, but it was full of

academics, scientists, professors of philosophy, and then people from the parliament and from the government. And I have to say the uniform feeling, and it was expressed so powerfully, was really of not just disappointment, really despising particularly Europe. They said, I mean, this would be typical. You know, we believed in the West for 20, 25 years, and now we despise them. And we regard what they're doing to us now is like the siege of Leningrad during the war. We're in a new siege of Leningrad where they're besieging us, they're trying to do everything to hurt us, to damage us. But at the end, I have to say the thing that was very striking was the sense they are proud of their values. They're proud of what

Russia stands for. They're proud that they've managed to sort of, through all of this, get their values back. And that those values are good and true values. And they believe that ultimately these will bring, if you like, some sort of accommodation with the West. But first of all, the West has got to go through its own revolution if you like and come out the other side before that is probably possible they must look down on so-called western values i mean here in the united states as you know the president of the united states of america uh outwardly roman catholic proclaimed uh easter sund Sunday a day to commemorate sexual transition of men becoming women and women becoming men. This must be repellent to the Russian mind. Absolutely. The idea that a man can become a woman or a woman become man, they don't understand

why we in the West don't see that this draws a line under Christianity as a whole, whether it's Orthodox or Latin Christianity or Catholicism. I mean, this is a striking at the very core of all of Christianity. And they just do not understand how this could happen. And they laugh at it. And they laugh at how stupid we seem to be, to be allowing ourselves to be put through these contortions. And I used the words, but they understood exactly.

I said, we have our Bolsheviks. Now this is today in Europe is, if you like, early February 1917 in St. Petersburg. The same betweenness. There's a sense of normality on one side and there's a sense of the turmoil and the revolution that is sort of forming at the same time but beneath the surface. They understood that perfectly. Last question. If Israel attacks Iran and if the United States backs up Israel, would Russia get involved? Would Vladimir Putin let Iran be destroyed? No. I can say to you, I mean, I don't think I'm, this is probably fairly evident, but Russia has been in continual and close contact with Iran every day during this period. Certainly the time I've been here, but before and after, they are working closely with Iran on the shared objective

of keeping control, if you like, of escalation and of the intensity of the conflict so that it doesn't move towards, if you like, all-out war. And that is also being supported by the Chinese very clearly. How it will play out, we have to wait. As I say, we stand at the fork in the road. It's really now very much up to Israel to see if they will be able to, if there's any leadership there, given the squabbles within the cabinet and the ill feeling

between all of the politicians within Israel, is there going to be some sane person and are we going to move? There are really two routes out of this. Either there is a sort of sense of defeat and that Israel has to reconsider what it is to be Israel in this territory, or we're going to go to escalation. But there's really not much in between those two. Either there will be, if you like, between the river and the sea, everyone will have the same rights and the same position and be treated equally, or else we're going to something much bigger. But that's where we're coming to this fork in the road, I think, and we have to wait and see how it's going to play out.

Whenever you say, this is to end on a ridiculous note, even though we've been so serious, whenever you say fork in the road, I'm reminded of a famous American philosopher who was also a baseball player by the name of Yogi Berra, who used to say, when you come to a fork in the road, take it. All right. Only in America. Thank you, Alistair. Enjoy your time in St. Petersburg. Thank you for coming to us this morning. Thank you for your analysis. Thank you for this terrific, terrific speech. If we get a video of it, we'll happily post it at Judge Knapp so that all of those who happily watch you on Monday morning can watch you give this talk as well. All the best, my friend. Thank you very much. Thank you, of course. It's Monday morning here in the U.S.

Coming up at 10 o'clock this morning, Ray McGovern. At 11 o'clock this morning, Larry Johnson. And at 4.30 this afternoon, how much damage did the Iranians do to the Israeli military infrastructure? Scott Ritter. Judge Napolitano for Judging Freedom. Thank you.