Judging Freedom - Gilbert Doctorow : What is Russia’s Strategy Toward the US?

Episode Date: August 12, 2026

Gilbert Doctorow : What is Russia’s Strategy Toward the US?See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Undeclared wars are commonplace. Pragically, our government engages in preemptive war, otherwise known as aggression with no complaints from the American people. Sadly, we have become accustomed to living with the illegitimate use of force by government. To develop a truly free society, the issue of initiating force must be understood and rejected. What if sometimes to love your country you had to alter or abolish the government? Jefferson was right? What if that government is best which governs least? What if it is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong? What if it is better to perish fighting for freedom than to live

as a slave? What if freedom's greatest hour of danger is now? Hi everyone, Judge Andrew Napolitano here for judging freedom. Today is Wednesday, August 12, 2006, Gilbert. Dr. O. joins us now. Gilbert, a pleasure as always. Do you have a handle on President Putin's current strategy for achieving the military objectives of the special military operation? I have thought and rethought what I was saying a couple of weeks ago when there were rumors that General Sorviken was coming back and that Russia was about to act decisively to put an end to the war in the coming weeks. And in review, I come to the conclusion that I was mistaken. Many of us were mistaken. I believe that he is sticking with

his original strategy of a war of attrition that goes on as long as necessary to obtain the upper hand over Ukraine and possibly the force of it took capitulation. And what I'd like to point out here that is decisive for me is the reconsideration of what the destruction of the port of Odessa was all about and the semi blockade of all of the Ukrainian Blackseed ports. I had assumed initially that that was a sign that Russia was about to strengthen. Ukraine by cutting off supply all of its Western military supplies. As we know, despite all the gloating and self-congratulation of Ukraine about his successes in the drone warfare against Russia,

almost everything that they're using is coming in from the West. And if that is cut, then Ukraine's ability to continue the war would be reduced to a matter of days. So the strikes on these ports looked like it was part of a strategy to finally strangle Ukraine. However, in retrospect, considering that nothing, whatever has been done in the past two weeks, to follow up on this strategic change, meaning no attacks on decision-making centers in Kiev, no attack immediately, what we have discussed in the past, the Ministry of Defense, the Center of Military Intelligence, and the like. None of that's been touched.

More importantly, the major lines of supply from the West are land coming from Poland into the region of the Wolf. They haven't been touched to our knowledge. We hear about Russian attacks on this railway station, here or there, and that is not cutting off the supply of Western military assistance to Ukraine. So I go back and reconsider the first thought. What was this destruction of the port of a desol about? It was not about cutting off military supplies from the West. That is something that we have read into it. The reality was it was just another expression of tit for tat.

The Ukrainians attack the shadow fleet. The Ukrainians attack Russia's ability to export oil and gas. And the Russia responds by crushing their Ukraine's ability to export the one commodity that earns most of its hard currency grain. Cutting a decim to pieces meant stopping the grain trade and was a direct response, economic response to Ukraine's economic war on Russia. So that is not a change of military strategy. What do you think he's trying to accomplish?

I guess it's that same slow, frustrating, methodical movement that we've been watching for four and a half years. Exactly. Of course, it was extremely slow because the Ukrainians had 12 years to 10 years, to build fortifications with American and other West European technical support that would, by intent, make a Russian advance from the far eastern part which had rebelled and was holding its ground in Donbass, to make an advance into the center of Donbos impossible. It took the Russians a great deal of effort to overcome these concrete bunkers

and all kinds of defensive structures that were put in place with American and other West European guidance. Now, still, the moves are very cautious and very slow, but for different reasons entirely. The slowness of the Russian advance is a consequence of the way in the last 18 months drone warfare on the battlefield has changed the possibilities of the attacking force to move swiftly. He cannot concentrate troops because they will be highly vulnerable to Kamakazi drones and great loss of life. So for that reason, it's moved slowly, but it is taking, as everyone knows, it is taking the two remaining main defensive towns of Kramatorsen Slaviansk. Already Russian troops are in parts of these cities and are certainly constantly and subjecting them to artillery barrage. So they will fall in a matter of weeks.

And then the Russians theoretically can advance to the damper. But I go back to my original point, which is contentious, I know, that is that Russia under the present course will experience empiric victory because it will not have achieved any of the goals that President Putin set out in February 22. Does the Kremlin still call this a special military operation, or does it call it a war, or does the terminology mean nothing in terms? of the behavior of the troops. The terminology has changed a little bit.

You don't hear the word special military operation quite so often. You don't hear the word open warfare, almost at all, not at all, coming from the Kremlin. It is coming from the chattering classes. It is on television. They speak of it as a war, most particularly, as you and I and others in this program understand. they speak of it of a Russia-NATO conflict, a Russia-EU conflict, which of course is a different war from what began February 222. So that change, it's a little bit fuzzy.

They are the Russians state television and so far. They're very careful not to speak of it of a war as such, but you understand that they're calling a special military operation only because they're obliged to. Is the United States still pretending to be a neutral mediator between Russia and Ukraine, even though Russia has acknowledged that the U.S. is a co-belligerent with Ukraine against Russia? Well, the facts are exactly what you've stated. the United States is pretending to be neutral arbiter, a friend to both sides, when the reality, of course, is somewhat different.

And the interest of Moscow in holding up this fiction is that their single most important is to prevent the United States from rejoining Europe. as a single force against themselves. They would, I think, in the present circumstances, when the likelihood of a Russian strike against, say, Rhein Batao or another military producer supplying Ukraine in NATO land, I think that Russia is very interested to ensure that Article 5 would never be invoked successfully

so that they would not face all of NATO in a direct war. And by keeping alive this fiction of U.S. neutrality, they ensure that this worst scenario does not occur. Here's President Putin. Let me see when this was. This was yesterday talking about the threat from NATO. Chris, number 19.

NATO is gradually seeping into the area and new military political blocks are being formed right before our eyes. New weapon systems are currently being deployed and are also planned for deployment here, which pose serious threats to our country as well. Tensions are also been significantly ramped up in the neighboring Arctic zone, which we have already mentioned, specifically regarding the ongoing use of the northern sea route, although Russia has always, and I truly mean always, consistently advocated for, and now confirms its full and complete readiness.

for broad international cooperation and utilizing the many strategic advantages of the Northern Sea Roe for the mutual benefit of everyone at Polly. And those states that are genuinely interested in working with us are now showing a significant level of interest primarily from our close friends such as China, India and other nations. They are currently engaged in active discussions with us regarding these issues and we will certainly welcome and encourage joint cooperation both with our friends and with all country's that. Observations. One, I missed book. That was earlier today.

Two, what's the significance of him appearing in a military uniform? Well, he is, after all, the supreme commander, so I think he likes to remind his compatriots of the authority that he's using. All right. He sucks on what he said, Gilbert. All right. He said something additional to what you are showing. I believe I've heard a bit earlier part of the series saying important speech. And in that opening remarks were about European EU piracy and threats to the Russian shadow fleet, threats of seizure of Russian ships. In that part, that segment, I believe that Putin was giving empty threats.

because he has let so many red lines be crossed that I don't think anybody in Berlin or Paris or London is worried about his threats. I think that he's obliged to actually seize some ships. Then people will take notice. The last part that you have featured here, the section in which he's describing the growing contentiousness of the Arctic challenges to Russia's dominance. in the Arctic, I turn the question around that those threats, of course, are led by the United States, and there the United States are doing all the talking and not none of the deeds. There are no deeds by American side to catch up with, in any reasonable period of time, to the vast Russian superiority in icebreakers, which are essential to maintaining your position in these northern waters, where Russia has, I think,

something like 20. The United States, to my knowledge, has no operational risk breakers. So these are empty words, which are not backed up by deeds. Is Russia close to achieving its military objectives? It doesn't appear so. The Kiev regime is still there. NATO is still there. If the war were to end today, NATO would be in there tomorrow. Military objectives as defined by President Putin in February 22 are the very reason why I'm saying that this looks like a Pyrrhic victory if it continues on the present course of a war of attrition. Because he will not have achieved, as you say, the neutrality status for Ukraine, the removal of NATO structures as well as personnel. Well, that is not foreseeable.

The Ukraine can continue to exist indefinitely as a landlocked country that has held up by NATO countries for the sake of weakening Russia indefinitely through these missile strikes that are certainly being coordinated and largely supplied by Western Europe. However much the Ukrainians may protest that all of these one. wonderful drones, far-reaching drones, by their own invention and production. Chris, if you want to put up the full screen, this is from the Kiev Post. Today, Russia could launch 200 ballistic missiles, not today, I'm sorry, it's Sunday, at Ukraine in a single attack. Is this just trying to animate the Ukrainian defenses, or is this a realistic prediction? It could happen, but to what consequence? The recent strikes, which are in the 50 or 60 missiles at a time, they have been devastating as far as we know.

But Russia has just been smashing the China. It has been doing wonderful photo ops to show on Russian state television to the Russian audience how Russia is harming Ukraine, damaging Ukraine, responding to these vicious. drone attacks that everyone is aware of when he goes to the gas station in Russia today. That is for domestic consumption. It is not changing the course of the war. And you have 200 missiles there. The big discussion point in various media, with Indian media, is the 100 of more missiles that are said to be,

have been supplied by North Korea. And these missiles allow said to be deadly and also cannot be stopped by any known air defense presently. But Russia is not yet targeting the decision centers, which President Putin said would be the natural response to security threats coming from Ukraine. It hasn't done it. The Western media is reporting the discovery of a Russian drone or a drone that apparently belonged to a Russian intelligence unit in Germany. Is this caused it? Is this credible and what is it doing there? Well, I don't believe it's credible. There are all kinds of possible explanations what I was doing there who actually put it there and for what purpose. But if you draw back from the details of this case and put it in the context of the scale of this war and the hundreds of drones that are being fired by each side.

The Russians said they down 500 Ukrainian drones last night. The vast number of drones that are being used in this warfare to have one drone here or there found in place like Germany is utterly meaningless. The Germans will talk up a stormer about it, but it's utterly meaningless. Here's the former Secretary of Defense and former director of the CIA under Democratic administrations, Leon Panetta, talking about this. Chris, cut number 20. The Russians have been playing around with incursions for the last couple years. Just this last week, an explosive-laden drone was found in Germany. belong to a Russian intelligence team.

And Putin will use either cyber or use drones or could possibly even use a military incursion to be able to test NATO and test Article 5 and whether NATO will respond. I think we have to take this very seriously. I'm all that Putin would want to, I'll use his phrase, test NATO? No? With one drone. This is a propagandist speaking to what he expects to be an audience of fools. Anybody with more than the kindergarten education understand the vast discrepancy between

this kind of threat the Panetta's talking about and the scope of the war that's ongoing. It's like the focus that major media have each day on whether 16 civilians died here or there or eight died there and there were children or no children. This is, again, it's addressing what they assumed to be an audience of utter fools. When you consider the scope of the conflict where perhaps one and a half million Ukrainian soldiers have died, perhaps 500,000 or 400,000 Russian soldiers have died.

And three times the number on both sides are people who are maimed for life. To speak about 16 people here or there, it's like talking about shark attacks in the world. It is utterly meaningless. And so it is with everything the penit is saying. It's just pure propaganda. Has the United States lost the respect of the world?

Repeatedly in various administrations going back to George Bush Jr. It loses it and then it recovers it. When you are the strongest military force in the world, then people will give. you a pass when the next administration comes in and they assume they're dealing with new people and have to be respectful of them. The president's administration certainly has lost the respect of the vast majority of leaders around the world. Wow. What is the United States doing in Ukraine? Is it just intelligence,

assistance, CIA to Ukrainian intel? I can't answer that question because it is by nature of something that would be concealed in every possible way. But if it is only doing that, it's only doing what you've said, which is providing the reconnaissance information necessary to program missiles and drones, even if it is not actually helping to supply those drones as the US company was doing in its factory near Kiev before. destroyed by the Russians, that is of decisive importance. At the same time, it stands apart from what the Europeans are doing. It is not contingent on anything that Europe is doing, and it must give the Europeans pause,

because they are not a party to that. And the United States can at any time withdraw that, and they're left high and dry with a Ukraine that is going to fail in a matter of days or weeks. So the United States is not a party to the daily support, the oxygen support that the EU is providing to Ukraine. And that is, from the standpoint of Mr. Putin and Kremlin, that is already pretty good.

What is the Kremlin's view of the corner into which Donald Trump has painted himself in Iran? Well, this is discussed on Russian television. Their view is that it was self-imposed, a self-inflicted wound. They don't see an off-ramp for him

any more than you or I do. They are not particularly unhappy over that. The extent to which they stand by Iran is something we cannot determine. When I had been asked by others,

about the Russia-Iran relationship, I call out something different. The point is that what Iran is doing, and I've said this on press TV, Iran, what Iran is doing is utterly remarkable and puts to shame most every other country that opposes American global legitimate. They are standing up. They are not a nuclear power. They're standing up to the world's second most powerful nuclear nation. and they are fighting determinedly and with their heads held high.

That is unbelievable. It makes most of the leaders of the world put some to shame, including the incumbent in Beijing and in Moscow. So that is the impact Iran is having in the world more than anything else. Here's a very articulate foreign minister Arachi. saying in his own words what you have basically just summarized Gilbert. Chris, cut number 14. And well, our brave armed forces, who truly sacrificed everything they had,

managed to render the world's largest and most formidable army, completely helpless and ultimately defeated it. And please understand, this is not just some empty slogan at all. It is a profound reality that the entire world is now openly admitting to and acknowledging with great respect. that in the recent war, it was the Islamic Republic of Iran that proved itself to the world. And it clearly showed us that it is truly a remarkably tough, resilient, and completely invincible power. I have heard this many times from foreign ministers of other countries,

from officials of other countries, that you Iranians have created a wonder, the exact same phrase. You have astonished the whole world. version of that Chris cut number one well it's open now we're taking a lot of shit it's open now look the only one that has control of the Strait of Hamos right now is the United States Navy we have a blockade that's been infallible it's a steel wall and we let people in that we want to let in and those people come in and they've been coming in and they're going out so it's actually open now we do not let them go into Iran they're not admitted into the straight to go to Iran Well, Barn minister Arachi is uttering an opinion based on facts.

The President of the United States is detached from reality. I agree with the complete. The dignity of the Iranian leaders like that option is remarkable. It makes up for a period when they were less dignified. When Peschian was given the microphone, it was considered to be the speaker on the point on behalf of Iran to the world. He has faded into the background, which is a good thing. And the military, the military, is the revolutionary gods,

have assumed operational control of Iran's foreign policy and military policy with Arakji supportive of what they've achieved. That is a changed world. And I think that the reality, the reality of this boldness it pairs in such a stark way with the inscrutable, if less than honorable, defense of national interests that we see in the Kremlin today, that is proven not by my words, but by the actions of other states.

I have said in the past that when Russia was doing very well in the war, countries which were sitting on the fence, like Kazakhstan, like Uzbekistan, and who were being courted by the United States and received visits from the United States and talk about cooperation. That all closed down and they lined up very nicely like ducks behind the Kremlin. Now we see again that these countries are floating off. Kazakhstan is making various statements, its leader, has made various statements,

which are equivocal about relations with Russia. Vuchic in Serbia, the great friend of Moscow, is behaving peculiarly, shall we say, by receiving Zelensky and making statements about how Ukrainian sovereignty has to be respected, national borders respected. All of that is a perfect barometer of the credibility of Moscow in the world. And I say it has fallen sharply. Not my credibility with me doesn't count for anything. Credibility with these national leaders counts for everything.

And it is failing because of the obvious discrepancy between Russia's defense of its sovereignty and Iran's defense of its sovereignty. Gilbert, Dr. O, thank you very much, my dear friend. Always a fascinating conversation and deeply appreciated. We'll look forward to seeing you next week. Thank you so much. Sure.

coming up later today at 2 o'clock this afternoon on all of this actually it's a very interesting topic is the united states a republic or an empire colonel lawrence wilkerson and at three o'clock the great phil geraldi judge napal tano for judging freedom