Judging Freedom - Col. Lawrence Wilkerson: US Unrepentant for War Crimes

Episode Date: February 22, 2024

Col. Lawrence Wilkerson: US Unrepentant for War CrimesSee 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 Thursday, February 22nd, 2024. Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson joins us now. Colonel, always a pleasure. My friend, thank you very much for your time and for your insight. I have a lot of questions for you about recent developments and recent history, going back to when you were running the State Department as the Chief of Staff for Secretary of State Colin Powell about Israel. But before we get there, is there any serious question in your mind? Should there be any serious question in the minds of any fair observer, but that Ukraine is on life support and is within inches of defeat or has already lost and doesn't recognize it? I would characterize it as you just did in your latter statement.

They've lost. And all that faces them now is losing more and more and more. So it is essential that we get a negotiated ceasefire and begin talks. What will it take for President Zelensky to recognize that? I mean, he switched military commanders. Within a week of the switch, the new commander, General Sersky, whom you may know from your prior life, suffered a humiliating defeat in the city of Diska. They are continuing to bomb, we have tapes of this, Donetsk, which they say is Ukraine and Russia says is part of Russia, and they're killing civilians that they say are Ukrainians. Isn't this the sign of the end coming,

that they would be reckless like this? I think so. And let me get to the first part of your question with regard to Zelensky. He needs to leave. I don't think he has the capability, the character, the bravado, you might say, political bravado to deal with this, to try and turn it as much as he can to a Ukrainian victory, because in a sense it is a small victory. They stood up to Russia and they stood up quite courageously. So let's finish it now and not lose anymore. I don't think he's capable of that. So I think the elections that I think were scheduled for May need to be moved up and we need to have an election or we just need him to step down. Is there any question but that at least in the near future, Ukraine absolutely

positively will not be a part of NATO? I think that has to be a going-in statement, just as recognition of Russian autonomy, sovereignty, if you will, over Crimea has to be a going-in position. You could trade their recognition of Kosovo, which they've never done for that. But those are two going-in positions for the U.S. and NATO, that Ukraine will never be a member of NATO. Maybe a little doubtful that anytime soon it'll be a member of the EU, that it will assume a position of neutrality, and that the negotiations go on from that. Those are two given points, and if we're not ready to do that, we're a sad character. Is the obstacle to a rational and quick end of the war, such as you have just described, the U.S., the E.U., or NATO? All of those.

And the U.S. is in lead. And London is right behind like the poodle they are. Like the poodle that they are. We covered Julian Assange all week because of the two days of oral arguments in the London High Court. There's no question that they're the poodle. Okay, switching gears. Has the U.S. ever acknowledged to itself, to its own officials, among its leading officials, of which you were one, that the two-state solution is dead on arrival. Colin Powell and a number of other people at the State Department and principals in the

administrations other than state talked about it and talked about the roadmap being dead, the Middle East peace process being dead. Indeed, George Bush, if what Colin told me was correct in the debriefing in 2004, when he met with then Prime Minister Ariel Sharon in the Oval Office, Bush had given him carte blanche, essentially prefacing the carte blanche with the statement that the 40 years of failed policy hadn't produced the same thing. So over to you, Arik, over to you. And Sharon, somewhat stunned by that advice, went back and it was over to him. And then, of course, later over to Netanyahu. And they've been doing it. They were doing it clandestinely, if you will, before. We certainly knew what they were doing.

And we issued a demarche every now and then, or we objected every now and then. But we didn't put any real roadblocks in their way. Then they just started going whole hog. They have been doing what they're doing right now in Gaza, incrementally and slowly in the West Bank. And they had begun in East Jerusalem ever since then. They have been running the Palestinians out or killing them, confiscating their land and beginning the settlements to the tune of now we have settlements that look somewhat like Los Angeles and the hills above it. And we have others that are very rudimentary, but going in that direction and

roads and highways and such all over the place. We have an entirely different situation in the West Bank and developing in East Jerusalem. And indeed, we have totally ignored that. For how long has the IDF or the Israeli security forces, the ones now run by this madman Ben Gevier, been slaughtering innocents prior to October 7 in the West Bank and in Gaza? Women, children, obvious noncombatants, obvious civilians, obvious innocents. Incrementally, slowly, one by one, two by two, three by three, for a long time. Ever since that meeting in the White House in the Oval Office with George W. Bush, and probably even before that, sort of covertly, it's been happening.

But ever since Netanyahu needed Ben-Gavir and Smotrich and others like that to maintain his power to stay in the prime ministership, they've been doing it whole hog. Gaza in October the 7th simply gave them an opportunity to do it in unprecedented proportions. We have 1.5 million in Rafah now and some real developments going on because the IDF cannot conduct a ground defensive like it wants to against Rafah, so it's bombing the bejesus out of them, and of course, killing mostly civilians. It can't do it because it would need to re-deploy forces in Gaza, or it would need to call up a significant new installment of

reservists in order to pull off the kind of ground defense that Netanyahu suggests is coming. So they are needing a breather right now. And what we need to be doing is stepping right into that breather and giving them some ultimata and saying, essentially, you will not get a penny more, a dollar more, a dynamite more, an artillery round more, a bomb more, if you don't get on a road to a negotiated ceasefire. And it's an extended period of time into which humanitarian relief can flow.

And oh, by the way, we had a refund UNRWA, the UN Relief and Works Agency, because they're the only people who have the expertise and the numbers to get in there and do things. And forget this crap that the Israelis propagandized about out of 13,000 workers having some 12 or 13 who might have been compromised. And the list of those workers are passed through the Israelis for security checks before they're hired. This is nonsense. We're putting up with it.

What are the chances of the American government saying that to Italy? Probably none and none under this administration. Italy, excuse me, Israel, none and none under this administration. It certainly doesn't seem like it. I mean, it looks like Biden is having a love affair with Israel and Blinken is occasionally feeling remorse over it. I want to go back to something you said in response a few questions ago. When George W. Bush made it clear to Ariel Sharon in the presence of Colin Powell that the two state solution is dead, was that generally known in the State Department? Stated differently. Has the two state solution just been. Was that generally known in the State Department? Stated differently,

has the two-state solution just been a fig leaf? Has every Secretary of State since Colin Powell and every president since George W. Bush known and recognized in their hearts and in their heads that the two-state solution is dead on arrival and they've mouthed the opposite? There's a certain coterie within the government, within the federal bureaucracy, that that's true for. It was not true for a number of people at state, and I must admit, for some people outside of state, including academics and others who were advising the federal bureaucracy at the time. It wasn't true for Colin Powell. In fact, he had a private meeting with the president and the president apparently at least gave him his head. The vice president tried to chop him down. You know, the metaphor was Powell would climb out on the limb of the peace process and Cheney would saw it off. The most prominent was when he went to Ramallah to meet with Arafat and came back with a reasonable

acceptance by Arafat of what he was proposing the next step would be only to have Dick Cheney nullified. So Powell was very much of the mind that he could revive the peace process, and it was a major effort on his part right up until the last part of his administration. I want to show you one of the oral arguments made to the International Criminal Court. This is in behalf of the Palestinian people. It's very articulate, and it shows a series of maps starting in 1948 and going up to 2023. And I'm going to ask you at the end of this presentation, which is just about a minute and a half long, if these maps are accurate or if they're disputable. Allow me now to show you five maps.

The first one is historic Palestine. This is the territory over which the Palestinian people خمسة مرات. أولاً هو فلسطين المستقيم. هذا هو المنطقة التي يجب أن يتم استطاع الناس القلسيين حقوقهم للتأكيد. بل ترمز المجموعة الجنسية ترمز فلسطيني. تنسى أهلنا كما يظهر في المرحلة الثانية. مع النقبة التي تتبعها. of our people as shown in the second map. With the Nakba that ensued, over two-thirds of our people were systematically and forcibly expelled by Israel. And three-fourths of Palestine became Israel, as shown in the third map. This was the start of the Nakba, the disposition, the displacement and replacement of our people, the denial of rights and discrimination that continues to this very day. إسرائيل ثم اتخذت المباكرة من فلسطين ومنذ يوم الأول من تلك المباكرة

بدأت بالتقليد والتقليد من المدينة بأهمية تجعل تباً مستقبلية تركنا مع نموذج المتواجدات المتواجدة تمنع إستقرار حكومتنا كما يظهر في الماك 4. أراد إسرائيل جيوغرافيا فلسطين ولكن ليس ديموغرافيا. لذا استمرت تحركنا من أجل أسرارهم من أجل مدينتهم. هناك الماك الخامس. كانت تصويراً من أسرار إسرائيل للجنة الأساميلي في السبتمبر الأخير. It was displayed by Israel's Prime Minister to the General Assembly last September. He called this the new Middle East.

There is no Palestine at all on this map. Only Israel, comprised of all the land from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea. This shows you what the prolonged continuous Israeli occupation of Palestine is intended to accomplish. The complete disappearance of Palestine and the destruction of the Palestinian people. Can this be historically challenged? Not really. He's right. It'll be historically challenged because we have propagandists in this country who contort history to their own wishes all the time, as do other countries too. Let me give you something else he didn't talk about. When the 1967 wars occurred and Israel achieved a blitzkrieg-like victory over Arab armies, significant Arab armies. The United States changed its policy.

Its policy up until that time had been to tolerate Israel as a bastion in the Cold War, an unsinkable aircraft carrier at the eastern end of the Mediterranean. We used to call it military. Changed its policy to be, ooh, they can keep the Arabs at bay forever if necessary. Thus, we're going to change our policy. Let me just give you an indicator of that. Up until, from 48, the initiation of the state of Israel, up until 67 wars, we gave them approximately $1 billion. From 67 to the present, we have given them $50 billion, which interpreted in constant dollars

over that time period is $300 billion, or roughly about $7,000 per Israeli citizen, considering the changes in population over time, $7,000 for every Israeli citizen. So one has to conclude from that, that strategically, we think Israel is doing our purposes in the Middle East. The question to ask today, I think the huge question is, do we think what they're doing in Gaza is achieving our national security purposes? If we do, we are insane. Chris, do we have the, now successor to your former boss, certified twice under oath in order to bypass Congress, not because Congress wouldn't do it, but Congress was adjourned at the time, that sending in two tranches $100 million and then again $100 million in assets to Israel was a matter of American national security, an emergency matter

of American national security. You're familiar with this statute. I don't know if your boss ever used it, but it's the way by which the State Department, the Treasury Department can just send funds immediately to a foreign country without waiting for Congress's approval. American national security emergency. Is there any legitimate moral, legal, or political basis to support that statement that Tony Blinken signed? None whatsoever, unless you buy that strategic purpose I just rudely articulated, keeping the Arabs at bay, which includes the Persians now too. So if this is our strategy and we think Gaza is contributing to that, I think we're insane. Keeping the Arabs at bay from Israel, how does that contribute to American national security?

I get what AIPAC does. I get the domestic politics. I get the donor class. I don't get that this is a matter of American national security. Is it a matter of American national security for the donor class to be displeased? It's a matter of American security if you buy the proposition, which let me preface my statement now with I don't, if you buy the proposition that Iran is somehow an existential threat to the United States, whether you buy the idea that they could mess with the oil flow through the Strait of Hormuz, or now mess with an even more important commercial flow through the Red Sea, or in some other way, mainly existential, which is what I just don't get, impact the national security interests of the United States.

But we seem to think that, and we seem to have this sort of pact with the devil, with Netanyahu and any Israeli prime minister, that they will be the front lines in this struggle. And that if it ever does erupt, we will come in and have their back, or we might even lead the struggle against the mullahs of Tehran. And don't rule out either the other side of the Persian Gulf and Mohammed bin Salman or whoever might replace him or whoever preceded him, because they are always looked at as a, a friend who could become an enemy at the drop of a hat.

And so that's kind of the explanation of the strategy ever since 48 and it's grown increasingly insane as it's evolved. And Israel has taken full advantage of that to now implement its Zionist purpose, which is to make Israel from the river to the sea and to eradicate every Palestinian in sight. Colonel, can a high-ranking official of the State Department have dual citizenship? Yes. Can the American State Department send an American to negotiate with the Israelis who was born in Israel and fought for the IDF and then came to the U.S. and became an American citizen.

Well, that's a little bit convoluted. I'm not sure. I go back to Douglas Fythe, who was the Undersecretary of Defense for Donald Rumsfeld in the George W. Bush administration. And Doug objected to my saying this and wouldn't appear before a congressional committee alongside me because he said I was a liar in saying this. But I don't think I'm a liar. I think I may just not be quite as articulate a lawyer as he. As the number three man in the Pentagon under Secretary of Defense for Policy, he was surrounded by Mossad in his office for the entire duration of the first part of the Iraq war. They were advising him. They were giving him policy

statements. They were giving him propaganda statements. They were building his information warfare procedures. They were doing all sorts of things for him and incidentally not going through any security apparatus at the river entrance of the Pentagon or any entrance of the Pentagon. So I accused Fyfe of being a dual citizen and he immediately said he wasn't even denied that he had ever practiced law in Israel. I have people who told me, oh, not a very good denial, Doug. You did practice law in Israel. Your law firm is in Israel, as well as Washington. On and on and on. We abused this dual citizenship thing like it was just water to drink. I was speaking of Amos Hochman, who was, of course, Joe Biden's lead negotiator over there and fought for the IDF. But take a look at this photograph of Congressman Brian Nast. Oh, I'm sorry. I thought we had it. I thought we had it, Chris. This is a congressman from Florida who appeared on the floor of the house in an IDF uniform. Now, I don't know if he ever fought for the IDF. I don't know if he was born in Israel. But could you imagine a member of Congress

appearing on the floor of either of the two houses in the military uniform of a foreign country other than Israel and not being chastised for it. Nope, I could not. There he is on his way to the floor of the Congress. He has no legs below his knees from either Iraq or Afghanistan, but that's the uniform he wore in the House Office building and on the floor of the House of Representatives. I'll tell you one thing that stunned me, because I know how close this relationship is. They should

be the 51st state, but I had a student at the George Washington University who served in the IDF. American citizen who went to Israel, served in the IDF for two years. He actually participated in Operation Castlehead, which was the precursor for about 13 to 23 days, something like that, of this eradication policy that's going on now in a greater magnitude. David could not get a U.S. security clearance, and he wanted to work for the U.S. government. So he tried to get me to help him, and I tried to help him get a security clearance. I was stunned that we would not issue him a security clearance. Now, maybe he got one subsequently by getting someone more influential to intervene for him, but at least we were doing that sort of thing. You serve in a foreign military, you cannot

then get a U.S. security clearance. That's a very good policy, I think. I certainly didn't think we had it with Israel. Last subject matter about which I want to ask you. Colonel Wilkerson, does Israel have atomic weapons? Yes. Are you the only present or former official of the United States government who will acknowledge the truthfulness of that? Well, I'm the only one that will equivocate. I don't know that for a fact. Well, as I understand it, as I understand federal law, we are not allowed to supply the American

government. Congress has enacted this as legislation. The president signed it into law, military assistance to any country that has nuclear weapons not authorized by the UN and all the various authorities that have to authorize it, which is why you'll never hear Tony Blinken or Lloyd Austin or even your former boss, George W. Bush, acknowledge that Israel has nuclear weapons. It's probably true. I think it's just an absurd policy i i think it is a uh certainly we don't have any treaties now we've abrogated all the nuclear weapons treaties but if if you were a non-proliferation treaty member and you had nuclear weapons and you didn't declare them how can you stay in that treaty regime how How can you be a member of that regime? Right.

Because you start out by lying. What happens if Israel uses nuclear weapons on Tehran? Do Moscow and Beijing and Washington get involved? I think everyone would get involved. I don't know how they would get involved. I think that would be the subject of a really good simulation or war game, tabletop or otherwise. I never participated in a game like that. I did participate in the game that simulated the Israelis against the

Egyptian Third Army in the 73 War, the Yom Kippur War, had uploaded atomic weapons and were going to drop them on that army. Subsequent to that, I have learned that this game might not have been so hypothetical, but that's the only circumstance I've ever gamed it to see what would happen. And in that case, of course, the Soviet Union weighed in heavily. I did want to ask you about one more thing. I know I said the nuclear would be last. We know what's going on in Rafah. You mentioned it. There's a million and a half Palestinians there. Many of them were forced to go there because the Israelis said, go south,

go south, go south. Now, of course, Netanyahu wants to invade and slaughter them, and it doesn't appear that anybody's going to do anything to stop this slaughter. Joe Biden can say whatever he wants about Bibi's personality on the phone to Bibi, but until he turns the spigot off, nothing's going to happen. And a lot of people think that Netanyahu is himself in a lot of trouble with the Israeli people, with the law enforcement authorities, and as soon as the war is over, he's gone. And so he has an incentive to extend the war. I'm going to run a clip of his likely successor, the liberal Democrat, Benny Gantz. And what you will hear him say sounds like it could have been written כמו אם זה היה כתוב נתניהו הוא-הו. העולם צריך לדעת, וחמאסים של חמאס צריכים לדעת,

אם ב-רמדאן לא יעדו חיילות בקהל, השחר יצא ככל מיד, כדי להתרחק בקהל רפח. אנחנו יעדו ככה, במהלך קו-דינטי, We will do so in a coordinated manner, facilitating the evacuation of civilians in dialogue with American and Egyptian partners to minimize the civilian casualties as much as possible. To minimize the civilian casualties as much as possible. Never been done and no one can take that seriously. I agree. You know, I've been the editor of Ha Ha Rats, said something the other day that was quite,

I think, descriptive. He said, quote, I'm going to tell you that the identity is now more ethno-nationalist, and that's an important word, and militaristic. He then described the Israeli policy as, quote, more occupation, settlements, and displacement. This strategy will only lead to more catastrophic, more catastrophe. Israelis cannot expect stability. Here's the key. Here's the key. Israelis cannot expect stability, which Benny Gant was just indicating, if they continue to ignore the Palestinians and reject their aspirations, their story, and even their presence. And that's the end of his statement, I would add, and even their very existence.

That's what he's talking about. And that's why he sounds like Netanyahu. Colonel, it's a pleasure, my dear friend. No matter what we talk about, as unpleasant as this stuff is, your historical perspective and your present-day analysis, I got to read what one of the viewers has written in. Colonel Wilkerson sounds like a four-star general with heart and courage. Not many four-stars have that. Your boss accepted. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.

I used to tell Powell, you know, you're a brilliant tactician. He said, what do you mean? I'd say, you know, you're from New York. You know, the guy waiting around the corner with the shiv to stick in your side and steal your wallet is there and you can stop him. But you don't know shit about strategy. That's why I hired you, he said. Well, I wish I could have been a fly on the wall in those conversations, but

you relate them with refreshing candor. Thank you, Colonel. All the best. I hope we can see you again next week. Take care. Of course. A great interview, if you don't mind me saying so. Not from the interviewer, but from the guest. Take care. Thanks for watching!