Judging Freedom - Lt. Col. Tony Shaffer: Can Ukraine Be Saved?

Episode Date: June 20, 2024

Lt. Col. Tony Shaffer: Can Ukraine Be Saved?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, June 20th, 2024. Lieutenant Colonel Tony Schaefer joins us now. Tony, as always, a pleasure, my dear friend, and thank you for your time. Thank you, sir. We have a lot to talk about, almost all of which centers around President Putin and his trip to North Korea. Of course, it's hot in the news this morning. But before we get there, I would like to talk to you about his offer for a peace plan, whether

he sincerely intended it, whether it was just intended to bigfoot the crowd that was meeting in Switzerland, and whether you were surprised at the West's summary dismissal of it, as we say, before the ink was even dry. We'll start with that. What did he hope to accomplish by what sounded to me as a rational means to end the military operation in Ukraine. Let me frame it in a way that's going to upset a lot of people. Go right ahead. He's doing to us what we did to him during the Cold War. He is being Reagan here.

And I know this is going to upset people because they're going to go nuts. But no, look at what he did. He said, look, we're in a a strong position but we're willing to talk and i think the man was sincere i think it's like yeah look um we can continue to to knock your nose knock you in the nose and bloody bloody your nose but we're willing to talk and of course dismissal was uh very you know marxist because uh because as has been pointed out by a lot of folks who are not necessarily conservatives, the idea of having a peace conference like Zelensky did on the 15th in Switzerland and not inviting the opposition is insane. So I think Putin took a page out of Reagan's playbook and played it back. And I know

that's going to upset a lot of people by me saying that, but it's absolutely correct. And let me add to that just one other little thing. He's going about doing what the Reagan administration did to the Soviets. He's strengthening his ties with his allies. The North Korean agreement is real. They're going to continue to cooperate. Now it's a pact. It's formalized. And by the way, the Russians have been providing nuclear technology to the North Koreans for a while. I used to sit on something called the Nuclear Strategy Forum. We used to get briefed on who was present at the nuclear tests by North Korea, and Russia was always there with their technicians. He's working right now to help North Korea avoid sanctions. That's a big issue.

And oh, by the way, he played the China card. Think about that, Judge. Nixon played the China card back in 72. Putin played the China card back on us. By playing it, he was able to stabilize his economy. He was able to find an alternative to the uh to the uh Swift system remember we kicked him out of Swift which is the global currency exchange system yeah kicked him out so okay well so there he's literally finding ways to be uh Reagan back at us and oh by the he's

going after the currency he's been working as partICS, trying to work with non-aligned nations to establish essentially a new condominium, a consortium that competes against the G7 and doing well, the Moscow Exchange and other things. And one last thing I want to throw in regarding that is that they are now working with the Saudis to remove the dollar as the fiat currency for all global energy transactions. That's huge. That happened last week. Nobody here's talking about it, Judge, but this is all because Russia's playing their cards very effectively, and we've got the high school debating team in charge not playing at all. A great analysis. I'm chuckling, Tony, because I just saw your shirt. Does it say send lawyers,

guns, and money? Yes. This was my... This is a Warren Zevon song, Lawyers, Guns, and Money. This was my spy class, the farm's theme. Our theme song was Lawyers, Guns, and Money. And I'm wearing it in tribute to my dear friend,

Colonel, retired John Tempom, U.S. Marine Corps. He passed last night at 830, so I'm wearing this in tribute to his being our class leader and him being an amazing- I am sorry for your loss, but what a great T-shirt. If you have a- He'd want me to wear it today. He'd want me to wear it. If you have one that's washed and clean and a size small,

save it for me. Back to matters significantly more important. Did Putin mean what he said, in your view, in the statement he made for the conditions for ending hostilities? Or when he said it, did he know that Zelensky and company would never and the West would never, ever agree to that? I think he knew they wouldn't agree, but I think he made the offer anyway. And I think it was sincere. The idea of freezing the conflict where it's at, entering into a discussion on how to demilitarize Ukraine. I think that's what they're going for. They're never going to allow Ukraine into NATO. And I think when he was rebuffed, I think they'd already planned and did execute the flotilla coming to Cuba. That is not a small issue. The flotilla, I think it was a total of six or eight ships, submarines included, which are boats,

according to the Navy, just saying. And the nuclear submarines were there to remind us that, oh, by the way, we know where you live. And I think it was in direct response to the West rejecting his peace offer and the announcement at multiple levels by the Biden administration saying that U.S. weapons and NATO as well, U.S. and NATO weapons can be used to hit the interior of Russia past the conflict zone. So I think Putin was sincere, but he sent a strong message saying, if you don't want a deal, then there's always penalties. All right. A couple of observations from this end. He used the word negotiations three times, meaning there's still meat to go on these bones and we're willing to talk. He did not mention whether or not Ukraine

would have an army. He did not mention Odessa. He did not mention the Black Sea. Now, there are other things he didn't mention, but these are hot points with the Ukrainians. Do you think he did not mention them because they're open to negotiations? Do you think it was absurd for the West to say, forget it, we're not even going to talk to you? Yeah, it was completely absurd. Again, you know, I found it interesting. Zelensky, the president of Ukraine, well, kind of the president since his terms expired and there's no path forward so that we can debate that as well. But Zelensky worked so hard to get all of the global leaders into switzerland for this 15 june meeting and the first clue that wasn't going to work was the chinese it's like yeah

russia's not coming they're in the conflict so there's no real peace conference without them so that was the first failure and then the communicate at end, a bunch of countries wouldn't sign it. So Zelensky, I think, is, you know, in a box. And oh, by the way, when has Kamala Harris done anything to be notably successful? By the way, Judge, did you know that she said the other day that community banks were important because they're in the community? Did you know that? I didn't know that.

That was like, wow, mind blowing. You went to law school for that. Yeah. Anyway, but back to the topic, Putin was completely sincere about wanting to have items on the table that could be moved around, negotiated, and discussed. But Zelensky and the West are essentially in a death pack as far as I'm concerned at this point, because the West and Ukraine, NATO, seem to be completely committed to destroying an entire generation of Ukrainian men because they are not willing to do what's necessary to end the conflict. At this point point you're not going to beat the russians in the battlefield i found it funny that john kirby funny man john kirby or spokesman depending on what day it is right uh said that he was asked directly what will be the path for ukraine's

entry into nato and he said to beat russia it's like yeah it's not in the cards it's not in the cards so doesn't it doesn't the cards. It's not in the cards. Doesn't the State Department understand this? Doesn't the State Department know the war is immensely unpopular, that the last thing the Ukrainian people want is for more of this generation from 25 to 35 to be slaughtered? I don't think anybody cares at this point. Again, Zelensky has now passed his term. I think his term ended last month in May. Right. He's, you know, remember, you know, Judge, you and I think share the interest in study of history. Even during of the Civil War, there was an election.

Why Putin canceled the election, why he's suppressing free speech, why he's arresting journalists, which came out this morning, is just beyond me. Why anybody listens to him? He's not the head of the state. Another question. With whom would Putin negotiate? He's not going to negotiate with Zelensky, the head of the the head of the army, He's not actually trying to achieve peace. At this point, NATO is being provocative for no good reason. And it's like, this is the way I'm looking at it. They keep poking the bear. And it's like, if that bear takes a swipe at you, what are you really going to do? Because you've already given all of the resources, all the weapons to Ukraine that you would have to use to fight Russia. I think Putin knows that.

And at the same time, you're only going to achieve more chaos and more bloodshed. So at this point, the West continues to believe somehow, by some miracle, using Ukraine as a bulwark, as a point of brisance against Russia, you're going to collapse Russia and get rid of Putin. It's insane. It is not going to happen. And I don't know how many failures there have to be over and over before the neocons, the neolibs and neocons all figure out that what they're trying to do is not going to work and is simply going to create conditions of chaos and global, I think, global failure across the board. Not to raise your blood pressure, but this will. Here's Admiral Kirby.

This is on June 17th, so just three days ago, saying first they have to win. Cut number 11. First, they got to win this war. They got to win the war first. And so, number one, we're doing everything we can to make sure they can do that. Then when the war's over, no matter what it looks like, they're still going to have a long border with Russia and a legitimate security threat to the Ukrainian people. That's why the president at the G7 signed our bilateral security agreement, joining what some other 14, 15 other countries have done the same thing, to make sure that for the long haul, Ukraine's defense industrial base can continue to

make sure that they have what they need to defend themselves. And that includes assistance from the United States. That's the long haul. That will help them defend themselves while they work on the necessary things they have to do, like any member of the alliance has to work on, for instance, on corruption before they can apply for NATO membership. But we do believe that NATO is in Ukraine's future, and we're going to work with them every step of the way to get them there. Wow. So the agreement Biden signed, Biden is probably a lame duck, but anything can happen in the election. But that agreement cannot bind a successor because it's not a treaty ratified by the senate biden uh knows that zielinski has no authority to sign any agreement in behalf of ukraine and the agreement is silent on nato yeah and let's not

forget this the five billion a year is stolen it's the interest on the money that the Russian state has in Western European banks. That interest is Russia's. And the West is stealing it and going to give it to Ukraine as a loan supposedly to be paid back. I mean, could this be any more absurd if W.C. Fields had concocted it? Well, it's convoluted, ineffective. And I think it's meant to try to, first off, spread the blame around, Judge, like, oh, we're all doing this. And yeah, theft by a group doesn't make it any better than theft by an individual. And that's what they're doing. And I agree that that interest is Russian interest. They are literally jeopardizing the entire system of the SWIFT system, the banking system, the U.S. and European banking system by

doing this nonsense, people will come to recognize that maybe you can't trust the West. Oh, by the way, there's BRICS. Maybe there'll be another circumstance which will allow that to happen. The more they focus on Russia with tunnel vision, the more the rest of the world's moving on and leaving the west and it's in its uh post-world war ii uh order so the biden administration is doing this this is their decision i don't think joe biden's doing it i don't think joe biden's smart enough to order uh tapioca in the morning for god's sake i i think it's more about uh those who are advising him valerie jared uh i think obama's involved i think a lot of these folks uh being essentially marshaled and and pushed by the neocons both you know and and neolibs to try to continue to do this because

it's insane it's irrational and again for the record as i've said from day one the the the russians will not be defeated by Ukraine. The numbers aren't there. And the more you bring in an ineffective, completely unfocused NATO, all you're going to do is create antagonism and chaos. And there's not going to be any benefit to anybody. And you're just going to see continued bloodshed on both sides for no good reason. Here's Jake Sullivan speaking from Switzerland three days ago saying, ultimately, Ukraine will negotiate. Cut number four. President Zelensky has made clear, including here in Switzerland, that ultimately,

this war will have to be determined at the negotiating table. The United States' goal has been to put Ukraine in as strong as possible a position on the battlefield, so it is in as strong a position as possible at the negotiating table. Does he know what he's talking about? Well, it's going to have to be at the negotiating table, but these people, to include him, don't want to do it. And think about the irony of that very clip. Joe Biden at that moment in time was out in California hanging out with Barack Obama and Gavin Newsom's hair trying to raise money. And it was true. I mean, come on. He was out there and it was all about the fact that Biden's focus is not Ukraine, despite the great words of John Kirby.

Oh, this is our first. No, this is a throwaway. This is something that the Democrats, if they saw benefit from actually ending the war, they would. Right now, they benefit financially. They benefit by having all this power with no interest in actually using the power to benefit the Ukrainian people in this. And so Jake Sullivan is correct in that it will have to be negotiated, but Ukraine is not going to be able to negotiate from a position of authority. It's just not going to happen, nor is NATO. And the more they do the gimmicks, one day it's special missiles, next day it's special artillery, then it's special, oh, we have new authorities, and now the F-16. The more they use these little wonder weapons as somehow the miracle that's going to win the war, the more they simply cause death and destruction of Ukrainian soldiers and keep the door open for miscalculation that could lead to a wider conflict.

Switching to President Putin's trip to North Korea, I gather it's a given that the trip would not have taken place and the agreement signed would not have taken place without the express approval of President Xi in China and his advisors, and that President Putin probably discussed this with President Xi when he was in Beijing last month. No doubt. And again, this goes back to Putin playing the Reagan game against us. All the work that was done by President Trump, and I've been to the DMZ, I've been to the joint security area where President Trump walked across into North Korea. It was unprecedented and opened the door to talk little Rocket Man down. That's what he was trying to do. As you know, I was one of the advisors of the-

That's all now been undone. Undone. Undone, thrown away. And I think had Trump had a little more time, he was trying to incentivize little Rocket Man stepping away from the brink of war, actually potentially reconciling and getting the financial benefits and economic benefits of being closer to South Korea. South Korea is a powerhouse, for goodness sake. He was trying to actually end the war. And for those who may not remember, the Korean War is not over. It's at an armistice. There's actually still a state of two armies facing off each other across the 38th parallel, I believe. Yeah, with about 35,000 American troops there. That's correct. We have a tripwire. Yes.

So that's my point. Trump was trying to resolve that. Biden didn't even have a representative. Get this. He doesn't even have a full-time representative in the State Department working Korea is that their missiles are duds that fall into the Pacific or the Sea of Japan. Is that accurate? Or do they have serious offensive weaponry that can reach Honolulu or Los Angeles? So let me be clear, not not say anything I'm not supposed to regard in class, but so the, the march of North Korea to having effective nuclear weapons started back in 1990, in the early 1990s, the first indicator that they had weapons was under the Clinton administration. And oh, by the way, since I was running an operation and I was working with Jim Woolsey back then, when he was director of CIA, it's another story for another day. But we knew that they had about five nuclear weapons and about 92. By the way, when the Clinton

administration was trying to say, oh, we're trying to stop the North Koreans from getting nuclear weapons. So I'm not asking just about nuclear, I'm asking about hypersonic. I'm going to get there. So I'm just trying to... So what the North Koreans had to do is not simply have nuclear weapons. They had to find a path to miniaturization. Miniaturization is the key. So to have effective weapons where you can launch things into a suborbital or orbital flight, you have to have reduced the weight. So what they've been doing,

Judge, is during, since the 90s, they've also developed ballistic missile technology to match warheads. And that's what they're working on. They're working on perfecting both together. And the answer is yes. From our information, they've perfected being able to launch small payloads, which could still have nuclear weapons or some sort of explosive or other warhead on the missile. And they could hit as far as Hawaii, maybe the West Coast and California, maybe. But I'm telling you that based on the involvement of the Russians, the Russians have been involved in this. They've been able to develop a partnership before the agreement signed by Putin to actually have to purchase and share information technology with the Russians, series of ballistic missiles that could easily strike the U.S. possessions in the Pacific and potentially further. And it is a credible threat.

This is something I've dealt with. I actually worked with Tulsi Gabbard when she was a member of Congress on this because she had concerns, correct concerns, that Hawaii would be threatened by by north korea and again for the record trump was the only one who seemed to take this seriously and right before he came into office barack obama was uh was saying that a strike on north korea may be necessary to stop them from doing the development well trump talked him down it got him to at least for four years to relax a bit but i think it's a credible threat that we have to take seriously. Okay, back to President Xi's trip. I just asked Professor Gilbert, excuse me, Dr. O, what President Putin accomplished by visiting North Korea.

Here's the answer. He changed the world. I think he did a lot to save all of our necks. Because regardless of how it's being played by the mainstream media, there are people surely in the Pentagon who understood this as I understand. I think he's made it impossible for the neocons who run the show in the State Department and in the Biden administration more broadly to carry out what they thought was an easy shot. They have got the Russians in a corner and the corner is in the southwest, in the western part of Europe. Russia is in a morass that it will be stuck in that morass for years to come and the United States could proceed with its preferred scenario of how to maintain its global dominance by taming the Chinese. Agreed or disagreed?

So, I don't completely agree or disagree. I need to be a little bit measured. China has its own long-term objectives, which they believe they have the right to pursue based on their history. The Chinese believe much more because they're nationalistic than communistic that they have the right to change the global world order. It is what it is. Their military doctrine says that they will work to dominate the Pacific Rim, which they're kind of moving in that direction.

And I think China sees itself as the necessary global leader that the United States currently is. That's why I look at it. Will the Chinese be provocative about it? I don't think that they're going to go about it the way the Soviet Union did regarding threatening to do certain things in the military way back in the Soviet Union. But I do believe, Judge, that there are long-term desires by the Chinese to go beyond their current sphere of influence. I think the BRICS nations are moving in that direction. I think many nations now are looking at using other currencies besides the U.S. dollar, the fiat currency.

So I think there's a good chance that there will be some level of conflict. Will the Chinese invade or do something in Taiwan? I think they've got their own internal problems, their own internal economic and social problems that would prohibit them from doing that. Back to what Professor Doctorow said. It makes the, if he's correct, it makes the musings of President Obama, maybe we have to hit them to degrade their offensive weaponry, unthinkable. Because if we hit them, Russia could hit us, correct?

Right. Absolutely. That's what's going on. Yeah. You have this resurgence again, just like we did during the Cold War. We brought our allies together. We focused them on what we could do together to stop the Soviet Union from expanding or being aggressive. There's a great deal of thought being given now regarding how aggressive the west could be regarding preemptive strikes i'm not i'm a reagan guy i'm not for preemption i think that we have to be very careful and i think negotiation is always a better solution than antagonism but at this point you've seen and um barack obama's a neolib and he he's the same coin, opposite side as the neocons. And he and Hillary Clinton have never seen a war or conflict they didn't like.

Look what happened with Libya under Obama's watch. I just watched a video I did from 13 years ago when I was pointing out when, remember, Judge, you and Walter Jones and others were talking about the failure of Obama to notify Congress adequately, jumping in, spending $1.8 billion to take care of Gaddafi. Oh, yes. Oh, yes. I remember that. So things like that are consistent and common and regular on the left. All right. Last question, and I'll let you go, Tony. How much longer do you think the war in Ukraine can last?

The Ukrainian people have to be the ones to say enough's enough. And I don't know how they're going to do that. Until they decide Zelensky needs to leave and there needs to be a change, this thing can go on for a long time. NATO and the West seems to be committed to continuing to fund and equip the Ukrainians, despite the fact it's evident, and I've said this pretty much from day one, without outside influence, outside troops,

Ukraine will never win. The F-16s, Judge, just another wonder weapon that'll have no net effect on Russia. We'll have another effect. Professor Doctorow reveals from Russian talk radio and television shows that there is pressure on President Putin to level the non- residential parts of Kyiv. I mean, that would end it, wouldn't it? I don't know if it ended

or not, but I would send a message. I think the one thing that would stop it, the war is if we defund it, if we say we're not in, that would end it right there Well that's not going to happen before November 5th, you know that Right, so it'll

go on at least through November 5th, no matter what Tony Schaefer, thank you my dear friend, great analysis and we kept you a little longer than usual, but thank you for your time and for your thoughts, all kept it a little longer than usual, but thank you for your time and for your thoughts. All the best. Thank you.

Thanks for having me. Sure. Coming up later today at 11 o'clock Eastern this morning, Scott Ritter and at four o'clock Eastern this afternoon, Max Blumenthal, judge Napolitano for judging freedom. Thank you.