Judging Freedom - Alastair Crooke: The Two Israels.

Episode Date: May 20, 2024

Alastair Crooke: The Two Israels.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, May 20th, 2024. Alistair Crook joins us now. Alistair, a pleasure, my dear friend. There is some significant breaking news which I'd like to address before we dig deeply into your thoughts on Israel and its unique relationship to the United States. The Iranian government is reporting that the President of Iran and the Foreign Minister of Iran have been killed in a helicopter crash. This was mentioned over the weekend when they argued,

when they revealed that they couldn't find the helicopter, either they couldn't find it or they wanted to prepare the public for this announcement that he was dead, but it wasn't revealed until just a little while ago, which would be early morning here in the East Coast of the United States that, in fact, the president and the foreign minister are dead. Second breaking news is that the high court in Great Britain ruled just a few minutes ago that Julian Assange will not be extradited today and is entitled to one more appeal. He and his lawyers feared that he'd be extradited to the U.S. this week. The issue on

appeal is whether or not he can get a fair trial here in the United States. And the third breaking news is a decision by the chief prosecutor of the International Criminal Court to ask the court to issue indictments and arrest warrants for Prime Minister, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Defense Minister Gallant, and the three designated persons in Hamas. So let's start with the first of these. Is there geopolitical significance to the death of the president of Iran, or is he likely to be replaced by a person of like mind and like ideology? There could be great significance, but it's not clear yet. It's not clear because there are still some very much unexplained elements to what happened.

Now, the weather on the mountain was atrocious. And I mean, having been brought up as a boy on mountains like this, I know, you know, when you get a whiteout, it's really difficult on a mountain to find things, find where you are. You hardly know whether you're going uphill or downhill. I mean, look at it. It was just a real, real mess. Not ideal weather for flying helicopters at all. But don't forget, there were three helicopters in this convoy. And he occupied one of them, the president and the foreign minister. But there were two others.

So there was a convoy. But there were two others. So there was a convoy. And there were no communications. And people have said, well, it's very strange. There were sort of rumors that there was a telephone call from the crew. But that's turned out to be untrue. And so we had no communication. There was the head of the presidential security on Raisi's helicopter, and I'm sure he has communications.

It would be most strange for him not to have communications. And also the other helicopters, what happened, even if communications were difficult because of the mountain topography, at some stage I'm sure there was sort of more direct communications because the three helicopters were flying together. And the other two helicopters arrived safe and sound, I think, in Tabriz. So there are some, I'm not trying to say that there's something untoward. It may just have been an accident in the weather,

but we still don't really know. What did the other helicopters find or notice? Did they just go on and not notice that the president was missing? Alistair, is there any intimation of foul play or just unanswered questions at this moment? You can't tell. I mean, first of all, if you saw the photographs, I mean, that helicopter is completely burnt out, destroyed. I saw one photograph with perhaps a body that was unburnt on the side, but, you know, this might have just been thrown out at the time of impact,

or whatever. But, I mean, it was just, there's a bit of a tailpiece, and the rest of it is just, you know, like a black smear on the ground. I mean, it was a little, shall we say, a little bit unusual to see a helicopter in quite that way. Usually, if it crashes in a wood or in an area, you'll see bits of helicopter. We've seen enough of those from Ukraine and things.

You see part of it is burnt out and uh the those inside are dead but this is complete so they've got to do the forensic and that's what I think we're waiting for forensic it was coming from Azerbaijan which is not exactly friendly territory um for Iran and for Iranians. But it is these are questions. I mean, it's very unusual. You don't just let a president go out of contact for hours. I mean, it was early yesterday evening I first heard that, you know, the president is just missing. And then

finally the search parties were looking and looking and looking, going to the wrong directions. And then finally, the search parties were looking and looking and looking, going to the wrong directions. And then they've announced it. I don't think it's going to make a big change if it turns out, as we all imagine it may well be, that it was just problems with bad weather on a mountain. But nonetheless, there will be some change, I think, from this. First of all, I think that in terms of foreign policy, the foreign policy is set by the Supreme Leader and the Supreme National Security Council, and that will continue.

I don't think, I wouldn't expect there to be much change in that. Change is one thing, is that there was supposed to be election soon to the, what's called the Council of Experts. This is the body that helps select the next supreme leader of Iran, and that is important. And it was thought that the next leader was going to be Raisi, was going to be the head of the Council of Experts, selecting the new Supreme Leader. But I mean, just to be clear, because in the West, often people think of Iran as a sort of, you know, one man state or something like that. It's not. It has a proper systems. Some people think they're not adequate enough, but the Council of Experts and the

Supreme National Security Council, on which everyone sits and makes policy, both foreign policy and to a degree internal policy, all of that will continue. What I expect is we'll see the funerals will attract huge crowds, just as they did during Qasem Soleimani's funeral. I mean, millions, millions turned out in Tehran, and it will be also in his hometown. And I think we will see not a great change in it, nothing extraordinary, but a rather sort of tougher-minded Iran will emerge from it. They view them as martyrs in a conflict, not as just accidental deaths. So I think it will become a sort of, I don't mean a shift to the right or the left. I'm talking about a sort of sense of Iran being under attack.

Don't forget, Shi have experienced this sort of thing for a thousand years, the sort of loss of leaders and everything. I mean, who else but the Shi? You know, there was times when they weren't allowed to go to their own mosque, except at the pain of having a finger cut off. And they went to the mosque and had the finger cut off, and they went the next week and had another finger, and then a hand, and then a leg.

That is the Shi. So they are nothing if not very robust in their attitude, they will just keep going solidly, but with care in a very calibrated way. They're used to, if you like, these misfortunes in history. Their history is littered with misfortunes. And they've always pulled themselves out of this and come through it stronger than ever.

I think that's what I would expect from the sense of it. Okay. To Assange, just a little bit of background for all of our listeners. When Assange, through WikiLeaks, revealed the war crimes of the Bush administration. This happened during the Obama administration. The Obama administration, the vice president of which, of course, was Joe Biden, decided not to indict him, that he was protected under the Pentagon Papers decision, a Supreme Court opinion, which says that the publisher of material is not criminally or

civilly liable if the material is of interest to the public, no matter what the material is, in this case, secret Pentagon secrets, and no matter how he got it. The Trump administration reversed course and indicted Assange. Trump himself once said he was going to pardon Assange, never did it. Assange has now been locked in solitary confinement for five years in Great Britain while the extradition process proceeds. It appeared as though he was at the end of his rope this morning when the court unexpectedly announced he's entitled to another appeal. So he and his lawyers and the Americans who were in the courtroom thought he was going to be released to the custody of the Americans today, but he's not. And that appeal

could take months or even a year. Your thoughts on that, Alistair? Just in two words, very good news. I mean, good news, and a great relief to his father. I've spoken at one of his conferences in Australia in support of Assange. And so everyone will be very happy. I mean, it's not over yet, but this was a very good step. Yes. Now to the International Criminal Court.

The prosecutor had sent investigators to Gaza. The investigators, of course, were interrupted by the IDF. The IDF reported to their superiors who was there and what they were looking for. The Israeli government itself leaked the fact that Prime Minister Netanyahu and Foreign Minister Gallant might be indicted. There was a little bit of an uproar. Twelve United States senators, all Republicans, signed a very, very thuggish, almost mafia-like letter

threatening the prosecutor, you better not do this, or we, meaning the U.S. government, will come after you. The prosecutor doesn't indict in this court. The court does. So the prosecutor announced this morning, European time, that he would seek indictments against Prime Minister Netanyahu, Defense Minister Gallant, and three, I believe three, you might correct me on this, leading members of Hamas. Your thoughts on the significance of this internationally? Well, I think we were expecting something like this in terms of Netanyahu and others who were involved in what's happened in Gaza.

And I suppose it is just a sort of sleazy bit of really balancing. I call it balancing because, of course, those who are under occupation have a legal right to resist occupation. But the occupiers don't have a legal right to resist occupation. But the occupiers don't have a legal right to kill people for whom they have responsibility as occupiers. But nonetheless, I mean, I suppose this was predictable. But what is surprising, one of them is Sinwa, Yahya Sinwa, who we all know is the leader already of Hamas,

the wing Qassam Brigades in Gaza. And the other one is Mohammed Deef, who was the head of the military wing. Both of these are military people. But the third one is surprising because it's Ismail Haniyeh. I think I've said before I know him. He's not a military person, he's a political person. And what he's been doing in this period is he's been the link person between Doha and Cairo and Sinwa, trying to negotiate a ceasefire and the release of hostages. And, you know, why are you going to indict, you know,

the go-between, the negotiator on behalf of... He's the person who's been sort of superintending in this period. It was someone else before. And I remember he was assassinated in Beirut. He was the negotiator then. Now, Haniyeh is now going to be an arrest warrant, so he won't be able to go to Doha. I think Doha is a signature. I'm not sure of the Rome Accord. But he won't be able to travel or do that job. Maybe that suits certain people, to have it like that. It's happened to me. I was negotiating the ceasefire once in Gaza. And the negotiator, the chief negotiator on that part called Shahadi

had a one-time bomb dropped on him the day the ceasefire was due to go into practice. Good Lord, you weren't with him when the bomb was dropped, were you? I wasn't there, no. But I woke up at four in the morning to find everything in a complete chaos as a consequence. As Rang said, have you heard the news? Salah Shahada is now dead and 13 of his family. And I'd warned the Israelis that everything was ready to go for a ceasefire, that I had the approval of the political committee of Hamas in Damascus.

It was then in Damascus. And also I had the agreement of Fatah. And all the texts were all agreed about the tactical way, how it would go into operation, what would happen if Israel incursed into Gaza during this period. And then it was all signed off and ready to go, and I was obliged to tell the Israelis that this was coming in. And then at 4 o'clock the following morning, I got the news that Salah Shahada and his family were all dead.

Wow. We're going to take a break for a commercial announcement. When we come back, Alistair and I will discuss a fascinating new piece that he published over the weekend. Are there two Israels? 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. But first this. 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, 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, thank you for jumping onto these hot, breaking news stories for which neither you nor I had time to prepare. But of course I did, as I always do, devoured with fascination and joy your recent piece. Are there two Israels, culturally and politically, subsisting within the borders of the state of Israel as we speak. Yes. And I was really quoting, first of all, a very senior former Israeli diplomat, Alon Pincus, who is also very close to the White House. He lives in the U.S.

I have interviewed, when I was at Fox News, I interviewed Mr. Pincus and have a lot of respect for him, as do many people all across the board. Proceed, please. He's a bright cookie, no doubt. Anyway, he was describing how he saw the irreconcilable, that the civil war, there was effectively a civil war. Not yet, he says, sort of to the Gettysburg level, but it was a real civil war, a divide that was becoming irreconcilable. And he described it as being on one side, if you like, a Western sort of European perspective on Israel.

In other words, what I've spoken before on this program, I think about the Ashkenazi sort of view, which is a view which could be broadly described, the Ashkenazi, but is broadly described as a sort of European-style liberal view, particularly linked with the Kibbutzis and that element, and based in a geographical area of Israel, Tel Aviv and Haifa and those business centers who are completely severed from the reality of what's going on in the West Bank and in the occupied territories. I mean, it's like South Africa when I was there,

living in Pretoria for a short while, 7 o'clock, and all of the black population was rounded up, put into buses, and hidden away in their townships only to arrive the next morning. And you didn't really have any sense of what was happening. And that's true for many of these children. They've never been through a checkpoint. They don't know how long it takes a Palestinian just to move between two towns. No idea about that. But they are very strong, pro-American, pro-feel as if they're the 51st

state of America. They feel they're liberal and they feel that they should be sort of part of the United States. And then you have what I've described as the Mizrahim type and the right allies of the Mizrahim, which are seeing this increasingly as a, if you like, in biblical terms, that they are under attack and that they need to go back to the sources of the biblical because they are about founding Israel on the land of Israel as it is put in the Bible and in the way it is indicated in the Bible and that they are

going to establish, if you like, the third temple, the symbol of Judaism and Judaic law. I mean, none of these things are the remotest bit liberal or European in that concept. These go straight back to a very different culture. And that is the one that Netanyahu and the right support. And it largely has the support of a majority of Israelis, perhaps just a plurality. And so Pinkhus is quite right.

There are two different Israels coexisting and at war with one another. You cannot describe Israel as a liberal Western democracy, can you? No, not at all. I mean, the whole idea of Zionism is not democratic. It's precisely special rights for one population group and over and above those that share the same land base, who have inferior rights, both political, legal, and administrative, and in terms of security and who have no basis in law as such. You know, the borders are multivariable. So no, it's not a democracy at all in that sense.

It's a sort of rather South African model, if you like, as it was while apartheid was still existing. And so there is now this great push, and so you hear all the time from American politicians now, why doesn't Netanyahu... we just want a day after solution for the problem. Just tell us what happens after when Hamas has been eradicated from Gaza. What's so difficult about that?" Netanyahu and his government refused to do that because actually they don't think there is a day after that's imminent. Netanyahu said, you know, we're going to face a long-term insurgency in Gaza. And I have to say that I think he is right. And so the situation for Israel is becoming really, I mean, intolerable and difficult. And this is overlaid with another element, which is just as important. And they more or less inform that there is a plurality in Israel that are really existentially afeard of what's happening.

And they see the 7th of October as really the start of a new Holocaust. A Holocaust that is both literal Holocaust, that Hamas would like to kill them all. I don't think that's true, but that's what they believe. And that's what's important. They believe it. And what I call soft holocaust. Soft holocaust being the sense of what's happening in the United States with the students protesting against the killing in Gaza. And they see that as an attempt to disarm Israel's legitimacy, their ability to command support from the West and from other states, and is leaving them isolated and ostracized. And of course, the students are not doing it for that purpose. They're doing it because they have a human empathy for all those women, children, and men that have been killed in Gaza. But this, I mean, we have to understand,

and I keep saying it, I mean, whether legal obligation to kill all of those that are trying to kill Israelis. And they call it and they define it in terms of the book of Isaiah and the commandment from Yahweh to Saul to kill the Amalek, and to kill their women and their animals and all. And the rabbis, I've seen them on the video, telling the young soldiers and say, look, this isn't optional. This is part of the Talmud. This is part of the law. You have to do these things.

So we have these two, I mean, very different groups in Israel on a collision course with each other. And the problem, why they're in such a difficulty is, you know, the solution that Europe and America is proposing. Look, it's so simple. We'll just get normalization. Saudi Arabia is the key. We'll do that. Then we can have a hostage release. Then we'll have a ceasefire in Gaza and everything can go back to normal.

This was just an extreme mowing of the lawn, as they call it, the Israelis, i.e. killing a few militants in Gaza. And then we can go back to, you know, occupation as it was, back to normality. And it's being sold on a false pretext. There's no way there's going to be normalization, in my opinion. I have to just explain it very briefly. But in Saudi Arabia they have this thing called Wali al-Amr, and Wali al-Amr means the king is ruler, and the king is absolute. It's an absolute monarchy, and no one can question it in the family so long as he lives.

And the thing is that the Amr, the Wali that is today, is the old king, who's in very poor health at the moment and in hospital with state has been established on the lines of the 67 proposals as per the UN Security Council. And so even though he may be a crown prince, he has a certain ability to maneuver and he can do some changes in it. But he can't go strictly against the wali, the ruler. And the ruler may be incapacitated at the moment, but everyone in the family knows what he said. That's what he said. It was endorsed by the entire Sunni Arab world at the time, the 2002. So it's very hard for him to break that.

And it's particularly hard when the king, who's been in a sort of vegetable state for some time, is now being moved. There's usually a clinic in the palace that tends to his health. And he's now being moved into into hospital with high temperature and pneumonia. So the second reason really is this, you know, that this, you know, actually giving, if you like, normalizing with Israel. As the Americans would often put it, oh, but this would be advantage. This would be for your advantage, Mohammed bin Salman. It wouldn't, because it might actually

prevent him going through the process of the family coming together. It has to come together in a committee and agree who will be the next king. It doesn't automatically mean that the crown prince becomes it now. There was a change in the rules, and now it has to go through a sort of family consensus about who will become the king. Then the new person then does become the Wali al-Ammar. Well, it's fascinating that we're in this part of the conversation. I didn't know we were going to migrate there, but Jake Sullivan over the weekend said from the Middle East, he's days away from establishing a new relationship between Israel and Saudi Arabia. That would seem to defy what you just explained to us.

Well, no, because I mean, you know, he's, Mohammed bin Salman can say, well, you know, maybe in the future we can move something like that. I don't believe he said that because what he said, and we have that on record before us, I want, if you like, an irrevocable commitment from Israel to a Palestinian state. Irrevocable. Right. And I want it in writing. And there's no way that the present government is going to give any acceptance of a state at all. And the second reason, which you'll appreciate, I think, particularly, is because the part of normalization, which includes providing Saudi Arabia with nuclear capability, nuclear energy capability, and also a defense treaty,

has to go through the Senate and be approved by the Senate by two-thirds. That means 67 votes. And there's no way there will be 67 votes in the understanding of the Saudis, not just me, or even the other commentators, even like Friedman in the New York Times understands that there's no way that they can get 67 votes in the Senate without normalization with Israel. And so you can't just do the nuclear part and, if you like, the treaty, because treaties, not just a nod and a wink,

oh, we'll look after you, don't worry, Mohamed, if you get into trouble. If you have a defense treaty, it has to be endorsed by two-thirds majority in the Senate. So, I mean, they're selling, you know, a false perspective. And I think, you know, the Israeli public get it. They understand. That's why there's, you know, although Gallant and others may speak the Washington line and say, yes, we need a solution. What's the solution?

What's the solution for the day after in Gaza? There isn't one because what is it? The Arab states are going to go in there and act as Israel's policemen, looking after 1.3 million Gazans and shooting Hamas and killing. There's no way. UAE, Saudi Arabia are not going to do that. Who's going to go in as a peacekeeping force? And because we're not going to see in the next two weeks Hamas eliminated. I remember the old story of once British Special Forces landing during the Libyan Civil War, when it was just starting after Gaddafi died, and they landed in their helicopter and they came out and they realized they were on unfamiliar terrain and they

kept saying, can someone tell us who are the enemy? We don't, we're not quite sure who's friend and who's enemy. You know, you can't just walk into Gaza and say, oh, he's Hamas over there. That must be Hamas. They don't look any different. They don't have horns on there. Right. One last question before we go. And I appreciate all the analysis, particularly in the areas that we didn't expect

we're going to get into this morning. Also over the weekend, a member of Prime Minister's War Cabinet, Benny Gantz, himself a former chief of staff, senior general of the IDF and another administration, has announced that if Prime Minister Netanyahu doesn't negotiate for and achieve a ceasefire byuntled rival saying, I've had enough of you, Bibi? Yeah, he's grandstanding to Washington, basically, because his party, the National United Party, doesn't have that number of support to depose him.

He's not in the government. He's in the war cabinet, but he's not a part of the Likud Alliance coalition that forms parliamentary majority. And that parliamentary majority remains at 64 out of 120. So it has a majority there. There's no sign at the moment of that breaking. I suspect that soon the Knesset, the parliament, is due to resume, and there will be an early no-confidence vote given on the government, and the government will pass the no-confidence vote with the support that it has. So Gantz, and he gave it, he said, I mean, the giveaway was that he said, you've got to give me this assurance by the something of June,

the 8th of June, I think it was. I can't remember the exact date, but the 8th of June or something. Three weeks hence. So, I mean, you know, it's just posturing, I think. But reflects, you know, a very, you know, the United States, Washington, is really pushing to try and get a regime change without having thought through what that is going to mean in practical. What's going to change when you do your regime change? Probably nothing except the personality of the head of the regime. I want you to listen to what he said.

It's only about 15 seconds long, but here's Benny Gantz laying down his ultimatum. If we are to continue to fight shoulder to shoulder, the cabinet must approve by the 8th of June an action plan that will lead to the realization of our strategic goals. Straight out of Washington's playbook. Really, Israel is in deep, deep trouble. It has not a strategy for Gaza. In these last few days, people have been preoccupied. I mean, there's been such incredible other news like the Beijing-Russia manifesto coming out. But I haven't noticed there's been a real uptick in the sort of resistance, both in the north and in Gaza. Gaza, there is fighting the entire extent of Gaza from the north down to the south. Israel is

suffering heavy casualties. There will be casualties on the other side too, but there's been heavy casualties on the Israeli side. They're not succeeding. And in the north, there's been a change, a step change. Hezbollah is using new weapons we haven't seen before, drones that have missiles attached to them. We know that Hezbollah has all sorts of more sophisticated weapons than this, but it's a big step up. They've been using drones that are capable of firing, if you like, missiles from the drone over a target, and they've been causing and attacking many outposts,

and particularly the sort of surveillance outposts have been destroyed. There's been a real qualitative shift up in the resistance. And there is no strategy from Israel. There's no way out of them. The more it goes on, the more they feel themselves trapped, the more the fear goes, and that's why they're not going to agree to some sort of cooked-up sort of promise from about, you know, Saudi Arabia and maybe the Arab states this,

maybe Arab states will pay for that. It's not, you know, they are feeling the sort of hot breath of the Holocaust as they fear it. These are real fears on their part. I'm not diminishing them. But, you know, it makes politics very, very different from the way we normally look at it. Alistair Crook, thank you very much. Thanks for all the deep analysis and thanks for rolling with the punches, so to speak, on the breaking news.

Much appreciated. Look forward to seeing you again soon, my dear friend. Thank you. Thank you very much. Of course. We have a very powerful lineup for you coming the rest of the day. Some our usual Monday and some our heavy hitters. We've moved to Monday at 10 o'clock Eastern, Ray McGovern. At 11 o'clock Eastern, Larry Johnson. At 2 o'clock Eastern, Professor Jeffrey Sachs. At 3 o'clock Eastern, Colonel Douglas McGregor. At 4.30 Eastern, Scott Ritter. Wow.

Ready for all that. Judge Napolitano. And thank you for watching. Judge Napolitano, and thank you for watching. Judge Napolitano for judging freedom. Thank you.