Judging Freedom - Alastair Crooke : Israel and Reality

Episode Date: June 10, 2024

Alastair Crooke : Israel and RealitySee 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, June 10th, 2024. Our dear friend Alistair Crook will be with us in just a moment on what is going on politically throughout Europe and what is going on politically in Israel. 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 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, call Lear Capital. 800-511-4620 or go to learjudgennap.com get your free gold report same experts who predicted the 23 percent rise that i've enjoyed have predicted this 3200 an ounce gold learn about how to transfer this to an ira protect your savings 800-511-4620 learjudgesnap.com. Tell them the judge sent you. Alistair, good day to you, my friend, and welcome here. Since last we spoke, a lot seems to be going on politically in Europe. The EU elections seem to show a marked movement to the right. The National Assembly has been dissolved in France, and they're having a snap election. The British are having a snap election for Parliament,

and that seems to be moving markedly to the left. Do you have a handle on all of this? Well, it's early days, but yes. What happened is, I mean, France was the first to break, first to crack, if you like. I've spoken for some time about the fact that we are in a sort of silent revolution and a silent, if you like, cultural war. And this has been gathering for some time. And, of course, in Europe, amongst the elites, there's huge disappointment that the long arc of history, which suggested it was bending towards what they call liberalism,

has actually met these poll results. And the counter-revolution, because we keep hearing the words across all of the mainstream media, the shift to the hard right. It's not a shift to the hard right. Liberalism, so-called, turned illiberal. And it has just been posing as liberalism, hijacking its language.

Liberalism really turned in the 60s and 70s. This was a time when people spoke about the limits of growth and the Rockefeller, the Rome, if you like, Treaty. All of this was suggesting that only the oligarchs and the technical elites could better manage this resource limitation and that technocracy was the future. It was paradigm change, control, lockdown, climate emergency. And of course, out of this came really that, you know, this sort of neoliberal paradigm actually meant that instead of the economy, humans being, if you like, integral into a community, actually it became the economic markets, the markets that only technicians could understand,

became dominant and the humans had to fit themselves around, if you like, those markets. And this goes against the whole history of economics, where economics was always supposed to be, if you like, embraced within a community, not severed and separated, where politics is quite separate to economics. In fact, politics almost disappeared. You have Blair saying, well, there is no more politics anymore because all we need to do is have the right technicians at the cabinet table.

And so we don't need to have politics anymore. It's just a technical matter to be sorted out but the consequence of that is that social bonds have been diminished, community has dissolved, all these solid things in life have just turned out to be a whim of identity more than anything else. And this new liberalism that poses, if you like, as liberalism while being very liberal, has no metaphysical element. So faith, family, love of your home soil, all those things have been, if you like, reduced, attenuated during that values such as self-sacrificing love for your family or for your state or your country loyalty all these values

have been diminished so really in in europe europeans are feeling if you like, unfulfilled, feel they don't count, that they don't somehow belong anymore, that there's no real existential meaning or purpose to their being. And that's what we saw in these elections. I put it in a very broad picture, but that's what's going on, playing out. Of course, it's going to take some time.

This election won't be all. This election won't set. If you like, the other forces in society in Europe have been pushing towards this sort of illiberal paradigm since the 60s and 70s, as I say, with the Trilateral Commission, with the Rockefeller Foundation, Ford Foundation. And now this is the pushback is started. But it'll take a few years. We'll see what happens in France.

But it probably won't be till after three years when the presidential election takes place, unless he decides to go for a presidential election together with a national parliamentary election. Well, what do you think will happen in Britain? I mean, let's say Sir Keir Starmer becomes the prime minister. Are they going to stop being involved in Ukraine? Are they going to free Julian Assange? My guess is no and no, that there won't be material or substantial changes.

But I'm asking you because you have a better handle on this than I do. Oh, it's a complete mess in Britain. I mean, there's complete disaffection, first of all, with the government. The government almost certainly will fall. It may fall so dramatically, so drastically, that it's almost finished as a government, a conservative government, maybe after centuries, eliminated in this election. But the only alternative, and of course this is deliberate, is Tweedledee. Tweedledum will probably take off and go to America, i.e. sooner, will probably disappear on the 5th of July.

But Tweedledee is the representative of precisely that globalist, illiberal front, if you like, or Brussels and in the United States. And so there'll be a lot of dissatisfaction and a lot of social stress still to come in England in this next period, I suspect. And how about Germany? Before we started the show,

you thought that there might soon be elections in Germany. It would not go well for Chancellor Scholz's party. That's right. I mean, these were, by the way, of course, elections for the European Parliament. These weren't elections for Scholz or indeed for Macron, but to the Parliament. But they are, of course, indicative,

even though they've been contained very much by Brussels as best it can but yes there's a lot of pressure on now because Scholz's party only got 14 percent support in the MEP elections in Europe which is a drastic no confidence vote and so there's now pressure I don't know whether he will succumb to it, but there is pressure. All of his coalition partners did badly, equally badly in it. The Greens and the Free Liberal Party did badly as well. So he's under pressure to call a snap election there too. I don't know whether it will happen. In terms of the parliament itself, parliament probably will remain not much changed because the centre-right has been sort of created.

Europe, as I've said before, have really destroyed most of the bridges to alternative politics, terming them all, describing those as hard right or fascist or something, which they're not at all. They are actually liberal in the old meaning of liberal, but not in this new liberalism, which is profoundly, if you like, illiberal against conversations, against discussions, and against, if you like, the freedom of the individual to express themselves in their own way. So, you know, I think this will be a slow process because the European Parliament will resist it and Brussels will resist it. And so, if you like, this cultural revolution and the social war will continue in Europe.

Do the Germans have the ability to call a snap election, a very, very quick, unscheduled election, as the British did and as the President of France did with respect to the French National Assembly, the lower, larger House of Parliament? I don't know the answer to that because it's a coalition government. And I don't know how it would work, whether it's still possible for that to happen at such short notice in Germany. But that's the pressure is for a snap election in Germany, yes. Well, all this is happening.

It's almost a monumental week, really. If we go down to Israel, former defense minister and leader of the opposition and former chief of the IDF, Benny Gantz, has resigned from the war cabinet. I don't think this necessarily produces a snap election in Israel, but it can't be good news for Prime Minister Netanyahu. How do you see it? I'm not sure. I think it's quite complex how it's going to work out. I mean, that is one sort of

perspective on it. Just so people understand, the government, if you like, the parliamentary majority is unaffected. His party, Gantz and his party, the National Union, are not part of the 64 block that, if you like, controls the 120 seat parliament. He is not a member of the full cabinet, which is formally the government, which is in law the authority in Israel. He belongs to an informal group, which is the war cabinet, which is made up of just three people.

And he's resigned from that, and Isengard has resigned from that. There's more than three or four people. And those two have resigned from that. And of course Netanyahu can appoint someone else to that war cabinet if he decides to continue with the war cabinet instead of using the cabinet as a whole, all the cabinet meeting together, to decide security issues. It's also possible that he might have to point some of the right of his own party into that, of his own

government into that war cabinet. They're certainly pressing Ben-Gavir and Smotrich are both saying that it's time now for them to be part of the war cabinet, not just the main cabinet. We might as well give up all negotiations if Smotrich and Ben-Gabir are part of the war cabinet, no? I think it's, I mean, you know, I've said all along I didn't think that, you know, those negotiations were very hopeful. And I've explained why, because having been a negotiator between Hamas and Israel, I have some experience of this and I didn't think it was likely to come to fruition. And certainly after the raid that did release four, if you like, prisoners held by Hamas on Saturday, but the cost of it was really extremely heavy, 274 Palestinians dead, another 400 or so injured. I mean, the figures may be right or a little bit wrong,

but there was, you know, dead bodies all over the street, people's limbs lying on the ground, children dead. I mean, it was pretty much a massacre that took place as part of the rescue. Of course, Israel is delighted and understandably so that their hostages are released. But for Palestinians, it's been a disaster because it went wrong in part of the thing. They were found and they were hidden in this truck,

posing as one of the aid trucks. The soldiers came out and they just fired at anyone. Helicopter came in and started firing down the streets because by that time, the special forces had got into the apartment and was with one of the hostages. And their exit to the pier and the helicopter that was sitting just beside the pier was blocked. So another car had to come, more soldiers, helicopter came, gunship helicopter came to rescue it. So it succeeded by a hair's breadth but at a huge risk. I mean, you know, what is it, 60 dead per hostage released? I don't know what ratio is considered um you know a

worthwhile um ratio to undertake but that's what it costs to buy is israel any closer to defeating hamas no no that had nothing to do with it in fact mean, what is going to happen now is it's going to make hostage release much harder, hostage rescue almost impossible. Hamas have already said, well, okay, you know, they were keeping those hostages, those four hostages, particularly the girl, in houses, private Palestinian houses, and they allowed them to go out and get some sun and walk around, I mean, which was quite liberal. And they've said, no, finish all the hostages down deep in the tunnels. First of all, there will be no conversation, there will be no overhead recognitions, because the Americans and the Israelis are just sort of covering the hole with facial recognition technology

Looking for these hostages, so they will be all of the of the list I don't think it's going to make the Hamas any more amenable to to either to to Hammer to Israel's proposals at all the proposals have never changed from Hamas, from the other, which were the hostage release has to be contingent on a cessation of the war, not just a ceasefire, but cessation of the war and a complete withdrawal of forces

by Israel from Gaza. And I don't think that this is immediately in sight. And so solutions are far off. And now, I mean, again, eyes are turning to Lebanon as a consequence to that. I think if you ask me what you did ask me what Ganses, if you like, resignation does. Already, if you like, during this period, Netanyahu's poll standing was going up and Ganses was going down, 39 to 30 as being who would make the best premier. So Ganses was falling, if you like, during this period. So in a sense, it strengthens Netanyahu's hand. I mean, he did what it will seem to most Israelis, not to the rest of the world perhaps, but to most Israelis,

it will seem, there we are, military force produced a result. The army went in, they used heavy weapons, and they succeeded in rescuing it. So in a sense, it's a sort of endorsement for military action in Gaza, as seen by many Israelis. Of course, I don't see it that way, and many other ones would think that actually it may turn out to be counterproductive from the view of Israel. The media is reporting, one last question on the hostage rescue, that American intelligence was instrumental in helping the Israelis. I guess that means the CIA. What would the CIA have had to do with the rescue of these hostages? I think this is actually not a CIA operation. There is a unit in the United States. I had some

dealings with it when I was doing hostage negotiations, which is a sort of quick action, if you like, unit. Special forces, of course, but it is orientated towards doing hostage rescues in difficult circumstances. Is it military or civilian? Military. Military, as I understand it. Of course, it will have links and probably has seconded people from both the FBI and the CIA working with it and part of it. But the crux of it is special forces, either from in Britain it would be the SAS or Delta Force in the United States, I would imagine. How does the United States benefit, if at all, in all of this?

Well, they've got credits in Israel. They've got credits in Israel. But actually, when I and I can tell you this with assurance around the rest of the world, there's no credit at all because they look at the sort of disaster and the images. I mean, the hospital's just full of children and civilians as part of the rescue system. And again, the anger is growing hugely about this. And they just see this as a sort of callous operation. That what is the ratio of civilians to saving one hostage? What is acceptable? They just see this as really another example of the United States and Europe also giving legitimacy to any military actions taken by Israel, however reckless they are.

Is the resistance to Israel ready to come out of the closet? I think they may be. They don't intend to come out of the closet necessarily all at once altogether. But I think everyone is now waiting for what's going to happen to Lebanon. I think there's bound to be, because of the failure of the hostage negotiations, a strong pressure, and particularly with Gantz and Isingkot leaving the war cabinet, there'll be pressure to do what they talk about, which I regard, and I think your colleagues who will be speaking later will regard also, as a highly risky, I mean almost suicidal idea of limited war in Lebanon.

The United States says it doesn't agree with his proposal, but may find itself pushed into this idea of limited war to push Hezbollah further back, if you like, from the border beyond the Litani, and then they will be able to bring home the Israelis who've been displaced from the northern area. But I just have to say to you, you know, in this period where people have been looking, you know, at what was going on in Russia and the Ukraine and things like this, there has been a marked increase in military action, both by Hezbollah and by the Israelis back across the line. Many operations by Hezbollah directly and many operations by Israel deep inside. Hezbollah has taken down nearly all the technology. I mean, you know, Israel is now,

someone called it, Zionism is tech. In a certain sense, it's true. Zionism has become tech. I mean, look at Gaza, everything. The Palestinians say, you know, they see us in our bedroom, they see us in our bathroom. We cannot move without facial recognition and drones going over hair everything we do is washed well not in the northern area because uh hezbollah has just destroyed all of that technology along the entire border so there israel is finding much harder to see what's going on much harder to you like, facilitate and support a military operation into Lebanon, much harder. How is it that you write that the this program, is that the West is convinced that the solution is a two-state solution, that the two-state solution can come and once,

if that is accepted by the government, then this would enable, if you like, normalization with Saudi Arabia and that this is the way ahead. And what I have been trying to say is, you know, this just ignores the reality. It ignores the reality of the most recent polls that have just come out, which say that since the 7th of October, that first, that date of when Hamas invaded into Israel, 79% of Jewish respondents said they will not accept a Palestinian state. 74% of Jewish respondents said absolutely not, even if there was normalization with Saudi. We would still not accept a Palestinian state.

And really, my question was that I sort of posed in this was, why does Europe and America keep on ignoring this reality? This is the reality. I just quoted the figures, the latest ones from the Jerusalem Institute. Why do they keep on going? And I have to say either they just don't want to see it or they don't accept the corollary. The only way to get a Palestinian state on lines of 67 is by military force, because the lines of 67, in the lines of 67, there are near 800,000 settlers who are very fierce,

who are absolute zealots for what they are doing, and they will put that in order to frustrate a Palestinian state ever coming into existence. So the question I keep asking is the people who say, oh, it's solution is simple. Simply just we all have to accept two states living side by side in peace with Israel and Palestine. And I'm saying, are you ready then?

Do you accept the need? Or do you think there is the will and the political nerve to actually enforce it, to remove 800,000 Israelis from where they live? Because Israel won't help. They certainly won't. The army won't support it. Who's going to do this? How's that going to happen? And so I'm saying that the problem is really, you know, much more, you know, it's much really more problematic than just a simple, you know, two-state solution. Because when status become categories become frozen, when status categories, i.e. Jews on one side and Palestinians, and this becomes first. People only meet as enemies.

Those that dominate experience fear. It's normal. It's reasonable because they feel either they've got to keep on dominating or else they're going to lose it all. It's natural, and it's natural for the dispossessed in these cases to feel fear and hatred towards their oppressors. And these things burn deeply. These psychic forces burn deeply into people when you're told you don't count

or you're told that the world wants your destruction in both of them there's no esteem there's no sense of value there's no sense of being uh human and so the question i was posing and saying how then do we arrange things how is israel going to be arranged and we go to like south africa there was South Africa. There was an agreement in South Africa. There was an agreement that arrangement, if you like, the economic forces, the white economic elite came to an agreement that political power would go to the ANC and its forces, if you like, and that the elites, Anglo-American and the other big oligarchies there, would keep the economic power. They still have it today, which is one of the

reasons we've seen the ANC faring so badly in its elections at this time. But that isn't easily available in the Israeli context. There isn't a deal like that that you can say, well, we'll take the political commanding heights, you have the economic commanding heights. It worked in South Africa, but how would you work that in Israel? So I'm saying that the resistance understands, you know, there isn't that sort of solution. You can't sort of simply move that. And that there is going to be a trial of strength.

And this is maybe going to be a long or prolonged period. But what I'm saying is they are more realistic. They understand the reality better than the West and Europe and America, who thinks that somehow, despite the fact that there are 800,000 settlers living in the West Bank, despite the fact that three quarters of Israelis say no to a Palestinian state under any circumstances, even if the Saudis lay down and say, we'll love you forever. I mean, it's still not going to happen. So my plea is for a bit of reality to enter into this discussion, instead of just going on in the sort of make believe that somehow by saying repeatedly two-state solution, that will solve everything.

Well, with the president struggling for credibility, President Biden, because of the perception of his cognitive loss, with the president struggling for re-election, it's unlikely that the American government either understands what you just said or will accept what you just said. They're going to say two-state solution, two-state solution, at least until election day. Of course, of course. That's exactly right. And that's why it's going to be a long war. And that's why we have to, you know, the main thing really is to stop this sort of spilling over into a huge war, which it could easily do. And so the answer is, you know, I mean, the resistance, this is why they're so careful about calibrating the intensity of the war and also trying to take control of the escalatory ladder. And one of the striking things why Israel is in such a terrible situation is because Israel doesn't control the escalatory dominance. It's the resistance that are controlling escalatory

dominance in this war. That's why they're having such a failure in it and why it is a failure and why really Israel is in deep trouble and has no clear way out. Is the Netanyahu versus Gantz rivalry Tweedledee against Tweedledum? Is it personality? Is it just power?

Or is there some principled difference between them? There are real differences between them, but they're not the ones as understood. In Washington, when he was invited there, he was supposed to be saying, oh yes, let's have a two-state solution and everything will be fine. In fact, he said, listen, I'm here to tell you that if I became prime minister at any time soon, and I'd be happy to become prime minister, but if that happened, nothing would change essentially with the program of the government.

His only position really is that Netanyahu is not doing enough to destroy Hamas in Gaza. And he wants, I think if there is a real difference, is I think he does believe too. I mean, because some Israelis don't like reality. And he thinks that somehow there's a magical way in which after they've destroyed and killed all of the Hamas members in Gaza, and how are you going to tell who is or who isn't?

But then some Arab savior will come in and will police Gaza for them and sort of pave the way for a Vichy Palestinian authority to take over that. But this is, you know, this isn't right. But his main concern, Gantz's main principle is the long war. And so people get it wrong. They think, oh, he's just going to do a deal quickly and then there'll be a ceasefire. He says the war in Gaza will probably go on for years. What's the difference between that and what Netanyahu says? He said that last night. There's no difference. The war will go on for years if Netanyahu stays

in because he doesn't want to be prosecuted once he leaves the prime minister's office. And then Gantz has blood on his hands from long before October 7th, going back to the days when he ran the military. Alistair, there's so much more to ask you, but time is short. Thank you very, very much for this extraordinary analysis, as usual. Thank you for your time, and we'll look forward to seeing you again next week. And thank you very much. Of course, of course. All the best, my friend. Coming up later today at 10 o'clock in the morning Eastern, Ray McGovern at 11 o'clock in the morning Eastern, Larry Johnson at two o'clock in the afternoon

Eastern, Colonel Douglas McGregor, and at three o'clock in the afternoon, Eastern, Anya Parampil, Judge Napolitano for judging freedom. Thank you.