Judging Freedom - AMB - Alastair Crooke: Will there be war in Lebanon?

Episode Date: July 29, 2024

AMB - Alastair Crooke: Will there be war in Lebanon?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, July 29th, 2024. After two terrific weeks in Italy, I am home and happy to be back and happy to have Alistair Crook with us this morning on what is happening in Lebanon. 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 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, welcome here, my friend. Welcome back to the show. There is so much to talk about. I picked two of the most dramatic weeks in modern American history to try and relax in Northern Italy, and there's much to discuss, but let's get right to the hot news this morning. From the evidence that you have observed, who was responsible for the death of those Drew's children that were playing soccer in the Golan Heights over the weekend? First of all, I just need to make something clear, perhaps, to the viewers, which is that where this Ma'at Shal Shand is in occupied Golan,

it is, in fact, Syrian territory, and nearly all those Druze were Syrian citizens. They have Israeli residents, but they are Syrian citizens. And most of them support the resistance, Hezbollah and the other resistance movement. I just mention that because the idea that they could have been targeted by Hezbollah is extremely unlikely. Anyway, something occurred there. We don't know exactly what. It seems there wasn't a direct hit because there's no evidence of a crater. There's nothing directly evidence of that. There is fragments of a missile, and the Israelis say it's a Fajr. One, it is an Iranian missile used by Hezbollah. Now, it's possible. Hezbollah are saying that they did fire a missile that day, but it was aimed at an Israeli outpost,

which was some distance away from the village. And the Israelis did respond with one of their own dome anti-missile defense systems. Now, are we seeing the same thing? Did these two missiles collide? Did one get diverted and end up, did it fragment? And we see the results of the fragmentations in the village. I don't know.

But for the U.S., it's taking a hard line, taking the strange line, saying this was an attack on Israel's northern territories. That's been said by Kamala Harris and by the White House. And I'm just underlining, these were not Israelis and it was not northern Israel. Yes, some time ago, Trump informally acknowledged the annexation of occupied Golan, but no one else really has.

Well, the recognition of the annexation by the American president would not make it lawful. It's still occupied territory, is it not? Exactly, exactly, exactly. And has therefore the right to self-defense too. Is there any history of Hezbollah attacking its own people in order to provoke a sort of false flag? Not in that way i mean in years past have been occasionally the a mistake and as soon

as the mistake has been made hezbollah has always made a point of admitting the mistake and saying it was a mistake in this case they are asserting very vociferously and so is the Lebanese state um also by the way um that it was not a Hezbollah missile that was fired at uh Mashallah Shams here's the uh Lebanese foreign minister uh on this very subject uh interviewed about it last night cut number number four. You know, so we don't know who did it. I know Hezbollah is accused by Israel that they did it. Hezbollah refuses. My feeling is that why would Hezbollah do it to kill Arabs, to kill Syrians? And Hezbollah has been, you know, always targeting military positions of Israel, not civilians.

The number of civilians killed in Israel was less than seven, while in Lebanon, over more than 100 killed by Israel in Lebanon. So I cannot understand why would Hezbollah do it. There's no logic in it. So you have the presumptive Democratic nominee for president, Vice President Harris, and the Republican nominee saying almost the same thing. Iran is behind it. You have the vice presidential nominee for the Republicans,

the Democrats don't have one yet, saying it's time to attack Iran. What do you think Israel is going to do? The Israeli cabinet met for six hours yesterday. Well, first of all, just going back to your first point, Iran, I mean, this was the message that Netanyahu and the government brought to the joint session of Congress. It was all a war message saying that we are being attacked. And every one of these proxies that's surrounding us, whether it is Hezbollah, Hamas, are really Iranian proxies.

And that the West needs to support us in a war against Iran. So I'm not surprised that they're taking the cue from that statement. And maybe this was already sort of in the works. I'm quite sure that Congress and the people, the power brokers in Washington, had a take on what was coming from Netanyahu. If you remember before, in the last session before you were away, I said that this would be what Netanyahu would say. He would come and say that Israel is under attack from Iran and all of these are, if you like, and he used the word Shia 7th of October, if you like, to make it clear that it was all Iran. That's what he said.

So this is not a surprise. It seems that there's been huge pressure on Hamas to agree to the Israeli demands for Gaza and to, if you like, to capitulate before the demands. Now, I think this is unlikely to happen because, in fact, just now, just yesterday, if you like, the negotiators were meeting in Rome yesterday and at that point there are new demands from Netanyahu. They wish to have more Israeli forces remaining in Gaza. They don't accept a full withdrawal of that. They want a list of all those that are living, hostages. They want the names of them before an agreement is made.

And they want also to have control, a mechanism of control, so that any Gazans heading north to their homes in the north of Gaza, there will be some mechanism to ensure they're disarmed before they cross the Netzerim corridor. foreign forces to prevent any, if you like, Gazans returning with arms. And Israel says it wants control of the Philadelphia corridor and it wants Israeli control of the Rafah crossing. And some of the Israelis who are involved in the negotiations were saying there really isn't, they don't think there's a hope for these extra demands by Netanyahu. In fact, they were saying they doubted if the Arab negotiators would even bother to pass them on to Hamas because it seems so unlikely.

So it doesn't look as if the prime minister is actually wanting to take the negotiations forward. I don't think Netanyahu ever wanted a deal. I think the negotiations are just a pretext to keep him in office, to keep the war going, to keep him from being prosecuted. Because it seems like every time they get closer and closer, the Israelis, and you're an experienced negotiator, You know this. They keep adding to their demands. They keep demanding things that they've already taken off the table. Well, you're exactly right.

Except I would add that, I mean, you know, I know lots of people don't like Netanyahu one bit, and I understand that completely. But, you know, it's not just about his personal position. There is a substantive, a pluralistic view that supports his position, that there must be war, that Hezbollah. I saw even, if you like, the leader of the opposition calling for Hezbollah to completely be crushed yesterday, that they had to be destroyed, calling on Israel to completely flatten Hezbollah. And that is from the opposition left wing side. And on the right, it's the same. So, I mean,

it's wrong, I think, just to attribute it to his personal ambition. There is more to it than that there is a strong demand and what's more there is support for his suggestion you know that this has to be a war against iran ultimately and that ultimately of course means u.s support they cannot do it alone they tried to give them a sort of if you like a teaser example of that by their attack on Yemen, on Hodeidah port in Yemen, which was about 1600 kilometers away from Israel, to show that, you know, Israel is capable of going off and fighting its enemies wherever they are. And now we must be supported, as he told Congress. You've all got to.

This is a war that is your war as much as it's Israel's war. Iran must be defeated as well as all these groups, and you have to join with us in that. So, I mean, there is a support for that. Now, what's happening now, just to update you, is really because there's a sort of pressure from, because this has always been, if you like, the Biden vision, that if only we can get a ceasefire in Gaza, then there will be Qat in Lebanon, in the south of Lebanon, and then with this Qat we can start making arrangements for Gaza in the future. Perhaps we can even get to more of a sort of bringing in a normalisation of Saudi Arabia. And for Biden team, the key has always been to put the maximum pressure on Hamas to try and get a capitulation to the Israeli proposals for Gaza from international sources that Israel will have the right to go in and continue the war after the first phase and the hostages have been released. No country will guarantee that with the possible exception of the Biden administration.

Exactly. I mean, you can see. So they're just waiting for that. And then the question is, how much of an attack will it be? It's clear. They say at every opportunity there will be a severe attack on Hezbollah. And it has been agreed. And it has been delegated by the cabinet that met last night to Netanyahu and Galan the defense minister they have discretion to start the attack as they choose now what Lebanon and His boleros and Iran and others are saying to them you start attacking Beirut you attack, you attack the infrastructure,

and then Hezbollah is going to come and strike into the depth of Israel, and that is going to lead to a war. And by the way, Iran says, you know, we will be, we won't just sit back if that is the case, we will get involved. It really depends on what happens in this next period are they going to really i mean hit only hezbollah's military targets and i think that's unlikely because hezbollah i know are about 90 meters down in their tunnels i mean they're not fools they know this is coming so and you see sort of references in the Israeli press, oh, it seems Hezbollah

has abandoned its positions. Well, of course, they've gone down to the tunnels while they are, you know, the airports. But earlier this, just before the weekend, just to finish off the picture for you, the latest Israeli jet, an F-35 stealth jet of Israel, was nearly hit by a Hezbollah surface-to-air missile. And so it turned tail and left very quickly. It was quite a close shave. So obviously Hezbollah has got some surface-to-air defenses ready. And I think that was quite frightening for Israel, that it was the F-35, not an F-16, F-35, which was supposed to be stealthy, which was nearly hit by one of their surface defense missiles.

You mentioned a few moments ago the calls on the Israeli left for the demolition of Hezbollah, calls which we've heard for a while from the right. So the Israeli public, or at least the political elites in Israel seem to be united on this. But how realistic is that? The IDF is exhausted, they can't beat a ragtag Hamas, do they really think that they can take on and defeat Hezbollah? You know, this is a key question that you're asking. I mean, they are exhausted, they are, have a sense of being defeated they are not enthusiastic for this war but it has moved to a different layer it's gone beyond it's gone beyond if you like the rational and the sort of our sort of structures of thinking and it's moving to much more an eschatological level to the Talmud and to the

sense you know that this is the the destiny of Israel this must be done even if it's a suicidal project you know we have you know Divine right on our side and I know for the West, it's very hard to accept these ideas, but it really is a messianic vision, not a rational one, this calculation about a war with Hezbollah, because you're absolutely right. My sense is that there will be big surprises coming from Hezbollah, and that, in fact, Israel may be defeated. It's betting everything on this, and it's betting it on its sort of divine mission rather than on a very careful calculation of the forces available. Maybe they think that if, you know, they start in Lebanon that somehow

this will suddenly prompt the United States to come in and attack Iran, but I don't think that is what people are going to do just before an election in the States. I think it would not, you know, I mean to have a little bit of tension and okay and for Israel to be attacking Israel Israel to be attacking Hezbollah, yes, that might play well in the election, but all-out war against Iran, I don't think would play very well. So I don't know how they think this is going to end in a favorable way, but it seems that's the bet they're going to make. Were you surprised at the speech that Prime Minister Netanyahu gave to Congress? There was no meaningful path to peace. There wasn't even the discussion of peace. It was the same old high-end bellicosity. It's almost as if, correct me if I think I'm wrong,

his audience was not the American public and not the American Congress, but the Israeli public back home. Well, it didn't go down very well with the Israeli public back home because, you know, there was that huge omission. Yes, he mentioned that there was one of the hostages in the audience there at one point, but he didn't even use the word a deal or a negotiated outcome. He didn't mention it. And so that hasn't gone down very well with the families and the hostage families and the other half of Israel, which is not so messianic, which is more, you know, liberal European. So it didn't go down that well. But I do think that his speech was what I expected him to say. I do think that there is a determination to try still and find a way to pull the United States into its conflicts, into Israel's conflicts, in a real sense,

that United States will solve this for them. So there was no solution to Gaza because there isn't a solution to Gaza, frankly. There's nothing that will solve that. There's no solution to the other problems in Israel. There's not going to be a two-state solution because there are 800,000 settlers living on what would be the state of Palestine, and they're not going to be removed except by force.

And what state is willing to use military force to remove 800,000 settlers from the West Bank? I don't think Europe intends that, and I don't think the United States would do that either. For sure, the United States wouldn't do that. So there's no real solution except to go to Armageddon and to try and bring in other states than the United States into what he laid out in Congress, a war of civilizations,

a war against Iran, against everyone. Does he think the American public has the stomach for such a war, particularly in the midst of an election? I don't think he has that view, but I think he feels that he got the backing of the power structures. I think he got a green light. I think I sent you a message on Friday that they were quoting a green light coming from, if you like, the deep state, the power brokers in Washington

for an attack on Hezbollah, not on Iran, but on Hezbollah. And then Katz said that explicitly in the last day or so. He said, you know, United States and European states stand behind us in our attack on Hezbollah. The Europeans say things differently, of course, and everyone sort of, you know, oh, no, restraint, restraint, restraint. But I believe it's I think, you know, he did get some sort of assurances. Your reference to Katz is the Israeli foreign minister. Sorry, yes, the foreign minister said that. And before that, a senior official, a senior security official on Channel 14 on Friday said the green light had been given and that we could expect Netanyahu to come back and go to the Ministry of Defense and start preparing the war. Now, the orders for the war have already been given. The plans for the war have been approved in Hezbollah.

The question is, what are they going to attack? Just military targets, but there won't be many of those lying on the surface. Or are they going to, and therefore it be a sort of demonstrative attack, or are they going to go further, in which case then the equation that exists between Hezbollah and Israel will be broken and Hezbollah will feel free to attack into the depth of Israel. And then we will probably be going towards a wider regional war. Here's what confronted Netanyahu when he got home, this lady Aviva Siegel, she was a hostage for 51 days. Her husband is still a hostage. Her English is excellent, as you'll hear in a moment.

She gave an interview on July 24th to ABC News. Here's what she had to say. Way Netanyahu being here in your eyes. I just want to say that the leaders of the world have been chosen by us, by people, to lead this world in a better way. And killing should not be allowed. There should not be wars. The leaders should handle life and things that happen between countries in a different way. I'm against killing.

Is that a view that has substantial currency amongst the Israeli public? Well, it's really rather paradoxical that you should say that. Just after what we witnessed in the United States, when we've seen a sort of coup d'etat mounted against a sitting president, whether for good reason or bad, but nonetheless being thrown out of office without any involvement of the public. And then a sort of coronation announced of the chosen successor that is coming from the leaders, if you like, the cabinet, the Politburo

within the government that has chosen Kamala Harris and is going to propel her up. Maybe it will be different at the end of the day, but she's on test now to go through it. No primaries, no proper process, simply, if you like, the leaders in behind. So sadly, I mean, actually, she touches a sore point because, you know, we're almost reaching the stage in democracies in Europe as much as in America, whereby actually the people, the views of the ordinary people are seen to be awkward and unnecessary and it's better to let the sort of the big money interests and also the people who are professionals in politics

manage the whole electoral process but don't consult the people. What happens if Kamala Harris wins and she calls up netanyahu and says you have 24 hours for uh to agree to a ceasefire otherwise we're going to stop sending you military equipment it'll never happen because and this was the point i would have been trying to explain before is that um you know what is the deep state as opposed to the sort of political permanent state? And the deep state is really what I call sort of structures, if you like, load-bearing structures that exist in America and have existed for some time and they will not allow anyone to touch them one of them is the military edge for israel that will cannot be touched and everything and above that

is a superstructure of policies towards the region to egypt to saudi arabia that is all based on israel's qualitative structure then there are other parts of that, the financial aspect of it, of the dollar dominance and of the financial prospect. All of these cannot be touched as the Bush doctrine. I mean, it still passes on. It's still the current doctrine, the Bush doctrine out of the Wolfowitz doctrine, that we will not allow any peer competitor, any competitor to American hegemony to emerge. And we will stop that happening by preemptive action. So these are the, if you like, load-bearing structures of all of this policy. And you don't touch that. If you touch that, you know, and this is why

it's so sensitive what happened at Milwaukee and others, because, you know, suddenly they were all sitting there, the deep state people like Pompeo and Murdoch and all those people watching, if you like, Trump after the attempted assassination and raising his fist and saying, fight you like, Trump after the attempted assassination and raising his fist and saying, fight, fight, and then appointing a populist, a seeming populist, J.D. Vance, as his prospective running mate, I mean, they'll be going crazy with us, going quite crazy, because from the

perspective of that, those, if you like, load-bearing structures, the key foreign policy structures on which the will of the people or even the will of the president. It's reflective of entrenched interest, military, industrial, intelligence community complex. Exactly. I'm saying precisely that, that foreign policy is, we're not allowed, I mean, parts of foreign policy you can play with, but those bedrocks like Israel and its, if you like, qualitative edge must be respected. They're not going to let Kamala Harris say something. That's why, I mean, if she goes on sort of expressing sympathy for people in Gaza, you know, it could be that in due course, some other candidate will suddenly emerge as the power brokers above decide, you know,

she's not respecting. The last thing they will allow is partisanship into the bipartisan arrangement on Israel within the United States Congress. There is a bipartisan position on the quantitative edge for Israel. And if she introduces a strong element of partisanship, other than just a peripheral one for electoral purposes, that will not be acceptable.

And we might even see a new candidate suddenly produced out of a hat by the power brokers in Hollywood and in Silicon Valley, the big money, the big checkbook holders. Fascinating stuff, Alistair. Absolutely fascinating. Oh, how I missed these Monday mornings with you. Of course, you did spend a Monday together with your lovely wife in Florence and it was a delightful day it was great to see you there sorry it was so hot it was brutally hot

but worth it, thank you very much for your time we look forward to seeing you next Monday same time, all the best my dear friend thank you, thank you so much it is good to be back and thank you for the kind comments of so many of you about my suntan and about my being back. But we are back in the saddle and we'll deliver for you all of your favorites this week at 11 at 10 o'clock this morning, Eastern, Ray McGovern at 11 o'clock this morning, Eastern, Larry Johnson at two o'clock

this afternoon, Eastern, Ambassador Charles Freeman and all of your regulars coming throughout the week. Thank you for watching. See you soon. Judge Napolitano for judging freedom. I'm out.