Judging Freedom - Dr. Gilbert Doctorow: Russia, Syria, and Georgia.

Episode Date: December 12, 2024

Dr. Gilbert Doctorow: Russia, Syria, and Georgia.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 Thursday, December 12, 2024. Professor Gilbert Doctorow will be here with us in just a moment on Russia, Ukraine, Syria, and Georgia. Ooh, but first this. សូវាប់បានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបានបា Thank you. Thank you, everyone, for helping us achieve this milestone. Professor Doctorow, thank you for your contributions to the show as well, and we hope that they can continue. And welcome here. It's always a pleasure to be able to pick your brain. I have a lot to speak to you about. President-elect Trump on Sunday evening tweeted that Syria fell because its benefactor deserted it, and he identified the benefactor as Vladimir Putin. Is there any truth to that statement?

Not really. Yes, the Russians did not make a great effort to save Syria when it was clear that it was a mission impossible. They have prioritized Ukraine. They will take Ukraine where they want to takeursk, why would they be distracted by something quite remote, which was not salvageable because their own intelligence informed them that the regime of Assad was collapsing from within? Does Russia expect to continue to maintain troops and naval personnel and ships in Syria? used by Western media, by the New York Times in particular, today's edition of how Putin has been so disappointed and has taken such a heavy hit in Syria and therefore is making greater efforts in Ukraine. These are unrelated issues as far as Russian pursuit of its main task.

The Western press here in Belgium, French newspapers, as of yesterday, were saying the same thing, that the Russians took a big hit. They were very happy to have something, what they believed, would take news away from the disaster situation that's evolving day by day in Ukraine for the United States, for NATO, and most of all for Mr Zelensky and his gang running the show in here so uh let's not be uh distracted or misled by the intention of all this material coming into Western media its purpose is

propagandistic and it is uh now to answer your question directly about what the Russians are saying, what they're thinking of doing, the Russians' options are rather, rather considerable what to do. First of all, they're sitting tight. They're waiting to see how this new rebel-led government will be treating the area where they are based, which is the coastal area of the their ships more than eight kilometers out to sea, out of range of artillery. That was a precaution. It was quite wise. What artillery did the Russians fear? I mean, who would dare to attack Russia there?

The U.S.? The IDF? The Turks? The fog of war would have been concealed very nicely. Who was firing those artillery missiles? Just as a contingency. Well, the Israelis have moved in and taken the buffer zone, moved tanks close to Damascus, allegedly, or they were saying, to protect themselves against every contingency.

So why shouldn't, what kind of a contingency were they protecting themselves against when they knew the value of Assad's military? How does a rightist perceive a snarky statement from the president-elect like the one that I just paraphrased for you? Assad lost because his benefactor deserted him, and that benefactor is Vladimir Putin. It's not a quote, but it's a fair paraphrase. No, they don't take anything that Trump says seriously. They don't take anything that merits the candidate of the Christian Democrats in the electoral process of saying, and he's making a very dramatic statements about how the Taurus missiles should be shipped immediately to

to Kyiv. The Russians are focused on their day-to-day pursuit of the war and of how to retaliate now for the latest defiant strike by the United States in Kiev against Tatarog, which I assume we'll talk about. But let me take a step back because you asked me what are the other options. Larry Wilkerson the other day mentioned something that really caught my attention, that, oh yes, the Russians could, if they're chased out, if they feel that they have to abandon their naval base in Tartus on the Syrian coast,

they could now seek to do a deal with the Iranians and to move their naval base in the region to Iran. It's a very amusing proposition and I'm glad that he raised it because he correctly identified the Russians' desire to have naval base, to have their feet, their boots in the warm waters of the Indian Ocean. This goes back several hundred years and it has in the recent, very recent history, been an ambition that was stated by the Russian nationalist politician, Zhirinovsky. He spoke precisely about Russia's wishing to have a naval presence, naval base in the, in the Indian Ocean. But that's a separate point. The other options are,

and Wilkerson didn't mention that, Algeria and Egypt The Russians have many options. The Americans have antagonized, alienated these countries in North Africa. The Egyptians are hopping mad over what's going on in Syria today. So it is conceivable that if for any reason the Russians felt it was necessary to abandon their presence in Syria, they would open up in Algeria. Why not? It serves the same purpose. What is that purpose other than having a base of naval personnel?

I mean, what are they going to do with it there? Big shout out to you for making it through the hectic holiday season. This new year, get clean, quality pregnancy nutrient support off your to-do list, including Ritual's best-selling essential prenatal multivitamin, designed with 12 traceable key ingredients to support a healthy pregnancy. With big changes coming up, take the small steps now and start today with 30% off a three-month supply at ritual.com slash podcast. These statements have not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration. This product is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure, or prevent any disease. Look, these ships in the Mediterranean have their home base

in Sevastopol. However, in a situation of crisis, the Turks would have the right to close their right of return through the Dardanelles back into the Black Sea. So for purposes of security and being able to provide for these ships in the Mediterranean, under all conditions, Russians need a base in the Mediterranean. Got it. What is the Russian, I'll be more precise, what is the Kremlin's view of President Erdogan now? I mean, is he still pushing to enter BRICS? Is that likely to be expanded to the full membership of BRICS? Or is his behavior with respect to Syria something displeasing to the Kremlin?

Oh, it's very displeasing to the Kremlin. There's no doubt that they felt a stab in the back. People at the higher levels of Russian government and political circles, they did not see Erdogan as a reliable person. They knew that he goes this way and that way. They certainly knew that he was receiving big offers of cash from the United States, which he needs because his economy is doing very poorly. And so they did not count on him.

And they certainly, I think, that he has eliminated himself from further consideration within Briggs. But that saying that does not mean to say the Russians are emotional, are responding in a way that doesn't serve their own interests. They will not abandon Mr. Erdogan, not because they like him, but because he's a neighbor with whom they have to get along, and because they have very important projects, both for Turkey and for Russia. He has positioned his country as the gas hub for Russian deliveries

to those member states of the European Union that still want and can't receive it. And he is still in there owing them money for the completion of one of the biggest nuclear power projects that Russia has outside of its own country. So these are things that he needs. He needs that energy project to be completed. It is important to his economic plans and the Russians need it. I would say, to put it in a language that Americans will especially appreciate today, the relationship of Moscow with Istanbul is transactional. Nice word. Haven't the Russians, in fact, talked is transactional the nice nice word haven't the russians in fact talk about transactional sold air defense um systems to the turks yes they have they've sold them the s-400 and erdogan to his credit stood by that deal under very heavy pressure from the United States because he was making the

point that his country's defense would not be totally at the mercy of the latest administration in Washington and how it feels about him and his country, that he would have some autonomy. And the Russian S-400 were very important for this purpose, not just because they're outstanding value for the money and very dependable air defenses, but because it was a statement to the United States that he is not in their pocket. President Erdogan is a very interesting character.

I'd be interested in your, you know, two-minute version of how you perceive him on the international scene. I mean, three months ago, he was calling Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu a war criminal, and last weekend was celebrating with him, not physically in the same room, of course, over the demise of President Assad. How does the Kremlin, how do other players in the Middle East, how does Egypt view President Erdogan? None of them likes him. But then I know that in high diplomacy and international relations,

some kind of personal liking or ability to get along is an important positive factor. Mr. Erdogan does not allow that to happen by his duplicity and by his acting against the interests of his of today's partners so there's nothing new in his behavior he's been around for a long time people know not to rely on him too heavily but they also know that his country is very important population wise situationally all right it is what it always was for the last 2,000 years. It's a bridge between Asia and Europe. And we know that from the migrant crisis. He is unavoidable. And so you do business with him, but not out of any particular liking for his personality. Right. A few minutes ago, you reminded us that the United States and Great Britain continue to facilitate strikes inside Russia using attackams and storm shadows, American and British technical know-how and physical involvement, as well as Ukrainian, the Pentagon spokesperson, a woman named Sabrina Singh, whom I don't know,

and who I guess is at the tail end of her career there, made some comments about U.S. intel is thinking that another Ereshnik may soon come. Here are her comments. I'd be happy to hear your thoughts, Professor Doctorow. Chris, cut number one. Putin has said publicly that Russia intends to launch another experimental Ureshnik missile, as you mentioned. It's possible that Russia could do it in the coming days. I don't have an exact date for you. I think it's important to note that should Russia choose to launch this type of missile, it's not going to be a game changer on the battlefield. It's just yet another attempt to inflict harm and casualties in Ukraine.

We've seen this before. They're trying to use every weapon that they have in their arsenal to intimidate Ukraine. But of course, Ukraine, with the United States, other partners around the world, continues to have our support as they, you know, fight every single day on the battlefield. Is the Kremlin plan to use the Ereshnik on a regular basis? Are they concerned that the message intended by the Ereshnik apparently is being ignored or almost even mocked or treated with indifference by the U.S. and the West? Well, that's a complicated question because there are several angles here. First of all, what Washington thinks the Russians will do, there's nothing to think about.

Mr. the Russian Ministry of Defense stated from the 10th to the 13th of this month they have declared a no-flight zone over the area in Astrakhan from which the first Areshnik firing took place and obviously where subsequent launches of Areshnik against targets that the Kremlin identifies will take place. So she's not divulging some intelligence that America has come up with. It's in the public domain. What she is missing and what the Western media is intentionally missing is the question of what the Russians are going to fire against.

And for that, I regrettably have to bring a piece of news that she didn't mention. What is that? That is that the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs today told Russian citizens not to travel in Western Europe or the United States because there might be some serious problems that they will find. But this is as much as saying that Russia is considering right now using the Areshnik against a NATO target. That is almost certain what the intent of that message was. So her saying that this Areshnik missile has no relevance to the battlefield is dead wrong. It has every relevance to NATO and its ability to continue this war.

Here is Maria Zakharova, the Russian foreign ministry spokesperson. Yesterday, Professor Doctorow saying exactly what you just mentioned. Cut number 14. Seeing the confrontation in the Russian-American relations because of the official Washington, they are on the verge of breaking. The trips, private and business trips to U.S. are fraught with serious risks. There is a literal hunt by the American law enforcement and intelligence service for our citizens and there is a fraud scheme of luring out Russian citizens to abroad so how is it happening they send invitations with some beneficial commercial or tourist offers.

After that, the people that were targeted are detained, and then they're extradited to the American jurisdiction according to the extradition agreements. And there is a full list of countries that cooperate with the U.S. regarding the extradition. It will be on our website. That is why we urge during the celebrations and in the future to refrain from any trips to the U.S. or any allied satellite states, first of all Canada, and countries of the EU with some exceptions. It isn't an emergency, of course.

I mean, if this is serious, this is pretty heavy-duty stuff, Professor Doctorow. This was a very big one for a very shallow threat. So I believe that this was an indirect message to Washington about the possibility of a strike on NATO asset. This has been going on for 20 years, that Russian citizens in third countries, Thailand and Martin, I was aware, had been extradited to the United States to stand trial for various alleged crimes.

That's not new. Now, why she's speaking precisely about NATO countries, that is Western Europe and the United States and Canada, I don't know. But I think that there is a lot of re-examination now in the Kremlin as to how they want to use the Irashnik next and whether I had assumed, and I've said this in the last week, that they decided have Mr. Zelensky dead frightened about the next strikes that might come, namely the decapitation strikes that when they say they're going to target decision-making centers, well, he is a decision-making center.

So that was what I assumed was the case. But now I have to rethink that and I think they are considering whether they want to hit Poland or not. That would be the most logical thing. It would require the least advanced warning because the Polish base that America has is a military base and the presence of civilians is at some distance from it and is negligible. Therefore, I would not rule out today the possibility of Russian strike, next response strike, retaliatory strike for what happened in Taganrog. Now what happened in Taganrog? I've seen different explanations of what was targeted. The most common one you find in our mainstream is that it was a military air base.

The more interesting explanation is that next adjacent to that military base is a factory producing planes, the Russian equivalent of the American spy planes, the early warning planes. And that if so, that would have been a very threatening damage if it succeeded. It would be in line with the earlier, this goes back six months or more, when there were attacks on the Russian early warning radars. The planes that we're talking about are the airborne equivalent of these early warning radars.

And they were shot down. There were six attackers, the Russians say. Two of them were shot down with debris falling over the area and causing some damage and some injury to cars and other non-strategic, non-important equipment. But they say that the building was attacked and nothing, the building meaning the factory i'm talking about right uh was was not damaged nonetheless if that had succeeded uh it would have been a serious loss for russia and so i think they're taking this attack with um with the uttermost concern two were shot down and four were diverted by Russia's very advanced electronic warfare equipment.

Nonetheless, it was a serious threat. And I think the Russians are recalibrating how to put the fear of God into Washington. We only have a minute or two left, Professor Doctorow. What's happening in Tbilisi, Georgia, from the Kremlin perspective? The Kremlin perspective is that it's completely falsified Russian participation or influence over what the Georgia Dream governing party is doing. The whole issue is about Washington's attempt to use Georgia as it has used Ukraine, to open a new front against Russia and distract Moscow's attention from the battlefield in the Donbass.

But they, Russians, have nothing whatever to do with the conflict between the president, Zorab Peshvili, and the Russian Dream, sorry, the Georgian Dream Party that controls the parliament. The lady involved, the president of the country, is a dual national, she has a French passport, and the Russians say that she was heavily involved with French intelligence, that she is an asset of French and CIA intelligence. So this is a strictly domestic fight within Georgia over whether the country is going to be used as a proxy by the United States to attack Russia. Wow. Wouldn't be surprised.

Professor Doctor, I thank you very much. Again, thank you for helping us to achieve our goal of a half million subscribers. You've been a core part of the show, and I hope it will continue, and we look forward to seeing you next week. Thanks. I look forward to it as well. Thank you. Coming up later today at 11.15 this morning, Max Blumenthal at two o'clock this afternoon, a new former British

diplomat who will be here and at three o'clock this afternoon, Matt Ho. Judge Napolitano for judging freedom. Thank you.