Judging Freedom - Alastair Crooke: Israel and Ukraine Soon to Explode?

Episode Date: September 16, 2024

Alastair Crooke: Israel and Ukraine Soon to Explode?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, September 16th, 2024. Alistair Crook is here and will be with us in just a moment on our Israel and Ukraine about to explode and with some breaking, late breaking news on Israel. But first this. A divisive presidential election is upon us and the winner is gold. Let me tell you what I mean. Since 2016, our national debt has grown a staggering 70 percent and gold has increased by 60 percent. Do you own gold? I do. I bought my gold in February 2023 and it has risen 33 percent. You've heard me talk about Lear Capital, the company I trust, let me tell you why. Recently, Kevin DeMeritt, who is the founder and CEO of Lear, assisted the FBI in discovering a nationwide gold theft ring. And because of Kevin's good work, the FBI caught these people before they could steal anymore.

That's why I have been saying the people at Lear are good people. They believe in America. They believe in their product. And they're honest to the core. So take action right now, my friends. Call 800-511-4620 or go to learjudgenap.com. Protect your savings and retirement before it's too late. 800-511-4620, learjudgenap.com.

Remember, hope is not a strategy, but gold is. Alistair Crook, welcome here, my dear friend. A lot to discuss, but first to breaking news from Israel, which I think you have for us. Yes, it's to say that there is a security cabinet meeting, a cabinet meeting taking place, really, I think, still as we're speaking. press anyways that he plans or he's thinking of sacking the defence minister Galant and replacing him either with Gideon Saar who there's discussions been taking place with Gideon Saar to come in as defence minister or possibly even the foreign minister Katz but that is ongoing at the moment. And there are ramifications from it because Gideon Sarhassan said to journalists, but reflecting his talks with the prime minister, that he'll only join the cabinet provided there is an attack on Lebanon, a military attack.

And he said, and he explained that in saying, anyone that attacks Israel must lose territory. That is the price to pay. And Katz also is in favour of an attack. Netanyahu has for some time been saying he wants to move against Hezbollah and to restore, if you like, return the displaced residents of the north to their homes, but that Galant has been opposing it. And it's trying to block the military from taking the necessary action. What would be, if any, the domestic political ramifications and the actual military ramifications to firing the defense minister in the middle of all these wars he's fighting? I think, first of all, there are ramifications of removing Gallant. There would be political, I mean, popular, that is sort of ground disquiet about it, because he's seen as an advocate for the release of hostages. But now I think widely

understood across, I mean, the Israeli establishment as well as the American establishment, that a Gaza deal is just not going to happen. I think it's widely understood now that a deal on Hezbollah, a Lebanon deal by Amos Hochstein, is not going to happen. Both of this is now being sort of understood and assimilated. And so I think that from that, although there will be some disquiet about the hostages, and even today there's news that more hostages were killed um in in Gaza um that it is becoming much more broadly accepted amongst the army who have been opposed because they're overstretched and they worry about being overstretched and they're worried about going to war in Hezbollah whether whether they will be able to manage this. But it's becoming accepted that really, what are the alternatives? Israel doesn't have many alternatives. Either a deal in Gaza that will bring quiet and maybe

bring quiet to the southern Lebanon, or else they have to take uh action against Hezbollah and if you like destroy the the threat and then return um if you like people uh to the north so this is really the the the situation there's another thing that I think I should mention because it's important. There are a number of deadlines around that face Netanyahu. But one of those deadlines that is a general one is the weather. The Israeli Air Force cannot do close support operations in Lebanon in bad weather. So we have about two or three weeks until the weather turns and winter begins. And then Israel will not go to war against Lebanon in December, or even November. It's just but certainly it's not possible. So if action doesn't take place in this next two or three weeks, which we have to wait and see what is decided at this cabinet meeting, but if action does not take

place, then they will have to wait till next year in order to take some sort of action that might help to return the displaced residents to their homes, which is quite a long period. I want to go back to something you said a few minutes ago about Amos Hochstein. He, of course, is the Israeli-born former IDF member, Israeli-American citizen, State Department official who was the chief Biden administration, it's quite a handle, chief Biden administration negotiator with respect to Lebanon. The other chief negotiator is the director of the Central Intelligence Agency himself, and those are the negotiations over Gaza. This goes to the character faults

of Benjamin Netanyahu. Hasn't he abused both negotiations? Don't you think both negotiators know by now he never intended to consummate a deal in either respect for a ceasefire in Gaza or for a ceasefire or non-aggression with Lebanon? I think in some ways, Amos Hochstein has actually played it in the sense that he's acted on behalf of Israel in these negotiations. Not in behalf of the United States. Not on behalf of the United States. Not on behalf of the United States. Incidentally, he's removed himself from State Department at the outset, and most of the State Department experts in the region were removed.

And he's a one-man band operating out of the White House with a secretary, and that is about all. And he hasn't really, there's no real correspondence at all with the French who are acting there. But the French are really, again, trying to gain leverage with Israel more than they're trying to find a solution. But he's not succeeded at all. Hochstein has not got any sort of solution to the question.

Indeed, I don't think there is a solution in the terms in which he's looking for one. It's inconceivable that Hezbollah would remove themselves from the south. They've been there 500 years. They're not going to suddenly disappear to the north of the Litani. So, no, he has not produced. And that, I think, is now understood.

Even if the United States doesn't like it, I think they have to understand that that is the reality, that there's not going to be a deal in Lebanon. I'm very confident in saying that. And I think, equally, it's understood, whatever they may be saying in sort of optimistic terms, that there is no deal coming from, if you like, in Gaza that would change the situation dramatically. So what is the way out? I mean, you know, the attrition continues.

We had only over this weekend, last night, the Yemenis were firing a missile, which they said was a hypersonic missile. I don't know whether it was hypersonic or whether it was new technology. There's no certainty of what it was. But now it evaded Andom, it evaded the Israeli defense systems and landed at an unmentioned or an undescribed location close to Ben Gurion Airport, and the airport was shut for a period. Initially the Israeli press came out and said, oh, well, it had landed an empty field and there was no problem. Now the Israeli press are saying it hit the target as intended and evaded all of the Israeli defense systems.

Much as you remember, you remember I was on the program and we were talking about Hezbollah's attack on Giot base. This was their response to the killing of Fuad Shukr in Beirut, the assassination. And initially it was said there was, first of all, censorship imposed and said there was no effect, nothing was happened, there was no destruction. Now, European intelligence service have been reporting to their contacts quite widely, and it's been confirmed by others, that in fact, in Giot,

in that A200 base in the Mossad base just near Herzliya in Tel Aviv, that there were 22 killed and 74 injured with the attack drones that were fired by Hezbollah. And more details are supposed to be coming out shortly. So, I mean, there is a real sense, and there's been much talk in Israel at the moment, saying saying you know the we can't allow this to stand Yemen is a declared war on us we it's attacked attacked us in a vital area and we had no defense to it all the defenses did not work and so they have two major sort of escalations taking place at the same time. Does the chief negotiator for Gaza, CIA Director Burns, does his boss, President Biden,

do his colleagues, Secretary Blinken and Security Advisor Sullivan, know that Netanyahu is not serious about negotiation. The negotiations have been a facade or a farce because Netanyahu intends to remove or exterminate every Palestinian from Gaza. No, they don't. It's been very interesting. We've had a report back from a very credible Israeli. He was the head of intelligence assessments, Amos Yad know, in Washington, and he's speaking generally, he doesn't name names in it, but it's very detailed, and that was put out on Channel 12. And he said, in Washington, there's complete bemusement. What is Netanyahu doing? Why are we having all of these wars? Why are we having these wars taking place, these sort of pointless wars, attritional wars against Hamas and against Lebanon? And we don't understand what is the point. And we don't understand why Netanyahu just doesn't give a political horizon to the Palestinians, i.e. the two-state

solution. And they see him as pursuing it, and they suggest everything must wait on the elections, nothing must be done to harm the candidates, prospects in this election that's coming up in the United States. But after that, Netanyahu will be told, stop the wars, stop the wars. I don't think they have any understanding of something that I just, you know, just want to say very briefly, that from the prospects or from the perspective of the right, of, if you like, of the group that is seeking a new Nakba, that is a new expulsion of the Palestinians, from their perspective, they're winning. I know that sounds like double dutch to many people listening. But they think they are going to be able to take back the northern end of Gaza, exclude the Palestinians, move them south, starve out the ones that are north, annex the north of Gaza, the northern portion of Gaza, annex it and then put settlers into it. And for them, this is huge victory because for the first time in 50 years, Israel will

be adding territory and not relinquishing it. Now, I know it means nothing to people in the United States, but in terms of the thinking and understanding of this, what I call the radical Jabostinsky people who are looking for a state from the river to the sea with no Palestinians in it. This is a huge victory to be, again, as I said to you, Gideon Saar just said, you know, every state must lose territory. But this is Israel thinking. And at the same time, there's been little understanding of how far they are advancing the project in West Bank.

Not so much in you see people disappearing and leaving and going off to the West Bank yet. But a huge squeeze is being imposed. They are going to bankrupt the Palestinian Authority. They are putting a squeeze on all Palestinians who can't normally work in Israel and are getting very little income at all. And more importantly, Smotrich, who is, if you like, administers the West Bank in a different way as both finance minister and is also he has a deputy, his deputy defense minister. And we will start to see either an explosion there or people starting to leave with the settlers putting them under pressure in the north.

So from the perspective of Netanyahu and part of his cabinet, this is a winning hand. And what's more, they feel, you know, this is our last chance at it. We're really going to be able to, you know, create the land of Israel with our tactics. But we have to deal with Hezbollah. And that's on the agenda, too. And as I say, there are certain deadlines coming up. One of them is the weather will deteriorate soon in autumn. The other is by December, Netanyahu will go before the courts again. His process will return to the courts.

If you recall, it's a corruption process, a legal process that has been suspended. But that will come before the courts. If he's able to get rid of Gallant, point it, then probably the government's life will be extended and will continue. So, you know, these are the unstated, and it's not seemingly understood in the reports coming back from Amos Yadlin, who's, as I say, a former head of intelligence of Israel, and he says, this is how they see it. He doesn't comment on it. He just says, this is how they see it.

They're bemused. They're bewildered. What's Netanyahu playing at. They do not understand the sort of eschatological, if you like, the radical element of those who want to pursue a Jabotinsky outcome in Israel and to restore the land of Israel. They just see it as a pointless attrition. Why is he fighting these wars? I mean, why doesn't he just give the Palestinians some sort of horizon for peace? Well, no one in Israel is prepared to give the Palestinians a stake. And in fact, Smotrich, unseen by most of us, but in stealth in the last 20 months,

has been extinguishing it legally. It's no longer occupied territory under the legal form. It has become, if you like, part of the administration, his administration, which he administers through the police and the security forces. I see the dog doesn't like what I'm saying. I'm sorry. I just asked him to go into another room. I have so much more to ask you about this. Some of it will have to wait. Is Ukraine near collapse? I think there are two halves to that. I think Vladimir Rostov, President Putin, made it very clear that he said in a very confident and clear statement that the Ukrainian armed forces are almost at the point of being combat incapable.

They can no longer sustain combat as an entity, as a military force, that they're near incapable of maintaining combat, the Ukrainian armed forces as a whole. And he says, which was the whole purpose. And I think that implies that he believes that with the fall of this crucial hub, Portresque, which is just seemingly being surrounded from the south, and probably there will be a strike soon, that there will be the collapse of the capability to maintain army. And although it won't happen immediately, and no doubt there will be efforts to sustain it through to the American election, although that is true, at the same time, time ultimately the political structures in kiev the political

apparatus will start unraveling because they are based they are levered simply on the capability to provide combat against russia they have no political legitimacy indeed they have no constitutional legitimacy as things stand. So I expect that in due course, and I should imagine President Putin would see it in the same way, that that will unravel. And at that point that it unravels, there will be the prospect of a new team coming into Kiev, and that it will be possible. I don't think Moscow will need an intermediary even for that. I mean, it will be just a straightforward discussion between Moscow and whoever is coming into power. Here's President Zelensky on Friday in an interview with Fareed Zakaria at CNN.

In light of what you have just said to us, he almost sounds delusional, but I'll let you opine on it as you see fit. Cut number one. He affraids only one thing. No leaders, no countries, no nothing. He affraids only one thing. No leaders, no countries, nothing. He is afraid of his society, Russian people. And if Russian people are in danger, if they don't have a comfortable life, if they live without energy like our people, they will understand the price of the war and they will be not happy with it and they will begin to influence on him, on Putin. That's why I said, make Ukraine strong and you will see that he will sit and negotiate. It almost sounds as if he knows that President Biden and Prime Minister Starmer have authorized,

if it's the case, it hasn't been announced and it hasn't happened yet, the use of long range missiles that can reach deep into Russia like Moscow or St. Petersburg. I think this is the last desperate play he's got if his army is soon going to be incapable of sustaining combat. The only thing he can hope for is that the West will take the bait and agree to fire longer range. Storm Shadow, by the way, is not longer range. The attack arms is about 300 kilometers, but Storm Shadow is only about 150, so it won't be a big change with Storm Shadow.

But it's not the point. The point that Putin is objecting to is the prospect that as a matter of policy, the West is ready to see weapons fired throughout the extent of, if you like, 1914 Russia, that it is accepting that. And for him, as he made very clear in his statement, that is a declaration of war and there will be consequences. And i think his very clear and precise statement will have unnerved many britain and america i'm not sure about britain but certainly the us is is looking very carefully at at what he said because he was very clear and said this is a red line quite a lot of the other red

lines were red lines that were invented by the West and said, ah, you see, he doesn't stick with these red lines. They weren't ever enunciated by Russia. They were enunciated by the West saying, imputing a red line when sometimes they didn't exist. What we've been discussing is dreadfully serious however for laughs here here is former british prime minister boris johnson uh over the weekend supporting ukraine yet again as it uh attempts to join nato cut number six i strongly support strongly support Ukrainian accession to the EU, if that's what they want. And I should have said in the context of Ukrainian backfilling in Europe,

they must join NATO as fast as possible. I would say they have a massive contribution to make to NATO, and Ukrainian accession to NATO is actually a utensil for bringing this conflict to an end. We should just get on with it. That's my opinion. by talking President Zelensky out of the agreement that had been negotiated between his government and Russia in Istanbul in 2022. Of what conceivable benefit to NATO could Ukraine be in the state that it's in now? Not a benefit, but an absolute drain on NATO,

just as it's been all this time. It's emptied NATO of most of its weapons, of its shells, of its missiles and air defences, all have been destroyed. So it's an absolute drain on NATO. And it's not surprising that there are voices in Washington that are questioning, you know, the cost benefit of NATO. I mean, is NATO really? I mean, Trump said it. Maybe we can just do without NATO and the Europeans can deal with Russia as they choose. I mean, maybe that's where we're going and that's the direction of traveling. And I think, I mean, what we're seeing with Boris Johnson making statements like this

is really, again, what I say is, you know, this is the attempt to keep the sort of ideological alignment across Europe and across everyone must pay abeyance to support for Ukraine or be described as an extremist or a purveyor of disinformation and therefore should be, you know, worry about their job and their future, because if you're regarded as a supplier of disinformation, then sanctions will be brought against you and perhaps your employer will no longer wish to employ you or your bank provide financial services to you. This is, I mean, this is really the land we're in where we're being obliged to pretend something that is just evidently not true, that Ukraine can win, that Ukraine is a benefit

to NATO, that we need to support Ukraine, that Ukraine is naturally part of Europe. It's not naturally part of Europe. Even the West, apart from a few parts of it, are Slav, just like Russians are Slav, and they speak a dialect of Russian. It's not something... The claim that they somehow descend from the Vikings and that they speak a special sort of ancient language has been debunked long ago. They're all of the same stock. It is a sort of civil war. It is not actually a war of the races.

Alistair Crook, thank you, my dear friend. Thank you for your analysis on both of these hotspots. We truly appreciate it. We look forward to seeing you again next week. All the best. Thank you very much. Thanks. Of course. Coming up later today at 10 o'clock this morning, Eastern Ray McGovern at 11 o'clock this morning, Eastern Larry Johnson at four o'clock this afternoon, Eastern, Scott Ritter. Judge Napolitano for judging freedom. Thank you.