Judging Freedom - Netanyahu's Dangerous Overreaction w/Alastair Crooke fmr Brit amb

Episode Date: October 12, 2023

Netanyahu's Dangerous Overreaction w/Alastair Crooke fmr Brit ambSee 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, October 12, 2023. Alistair Crook joins us for his weekly session with us. Alistair, thank you very much for spending your time with us. How, in your view, did the Israeli government get caught so flat-footed by the attack on Hamas, given the reputation that Mossad has, given the resources Mossad has, and given its interrelationships with MI6 and CIA? I think, I mean, there are probably a number of answers to this, but I mean, there are two very clear ones.

First of all, there is hubris, the sense that nothing could happen, that, you know, I mean, Hamas wouldn't be able to do anything. You know, it's just a gang in Gaza. So I think hubris is one thing. So they underestimated Hamas's capacity, just as in 2006 Israel completely underestimated Hezbollah's capacity and were beaten in that war in 2006. But I think the most obvious one is, as they've said very clearly, and I remember a friend of mine said a little while ago,

he instructs at the War College in D.C., and he said, you know, the strange thing is about this modern generation of students that I'm teaching is they've got no empathy. They've got none at all. So when he says, so, you know, when you mention China, that's a closed book. We have no idea. When you mention Iran, oh, that's a sort of satanic cult. You mention Russia.

Well, that's some Byzantine thing. There was no, the point here is no emotional intelligence and no, if you like, there was also no sense of trying to sort of understand or wanting to understand what the other was like. So I think that was one part of it. What's the other part of it? The other part is simply AI. Because what he said was they're trying to compensate for this process of this sort of lack of empathy and lack of sources. Of course, because they've got very few sources, real sources. I mean, human sources that are really able to give proper intelligence. We have few of those. And so he said, what they're trying to do is, you've all heard those things, you know, that the data of gatherers have only got to have you tick like on about five or 20 articles, and they know everything about you. And they know, you know,

your politics and everything. And they, and he said, that's what they're trying to do to Iran. They're trying to find, you know, get huge amounts of data points and then let AI sort it out. But the problem with AI is it doesn't have emotional intelligence and it doesn't have experience. And in my experiences, you know, it takes a great deal to be able to say, oh, you know, that doesn't make sense. Why is the person saying that?

And then you have to pursue it. But you have to have that sort of instinct. I mean, intelligence is an art as much as it is a science. And, you know, if you, yes, they had, they, Shin Bet, the security service, said they could sort of see into everyone's bedroom. Okay, but how are you going to, you know, two and a half bedrooms? Are you going to check?

And what's AI going to say about, you know, the threat to Israel from that? It's just, you know, too much intelligence, too much data points being gathered and leaving it to AI because there aren't enough people to go through all of this. And anyway, they're not experienced. And anyway, they are poor at doing the intercepts and transcriptions of the conversation if they have to. So someone has leaked. I don't know if the Egyptians themselves did, if some disgruntled member of Mossad did, or if it was CIA or MI6. The view or the story that Egyptian intelligence warned the Israeli military and it ignored the warnings.

I'm going to play a clip for you now of admiral kirby the spokesperson for the national security council not wanting to answer that this is from fox news my friend and former colleague neil cabuto who has a congressman nicole the chair of the house armed services committee on watching kirby and then Congressman McCaul says, oh no, the Egyptians did warn them. Watch this. Can you speak to the reports that Israel was warned by Egypt?

I can't. McCaul from Foreign Affairs made that allegation this morning saying that that was something that members were told on the Foreign Affairs Committee. So has that been discussed at all? or is that something you're looking into? I can't speak to specific intelligence matters.

Again, there will be a time to look back at this, as we always do and we will. Right now, we're sharpening the intelligence gathering and cooperation and sharing with Israel, as we should, since they're involved in active operations, and we're making sure that they get the tools they need. All right, so your intelligence might be saying one thing, Chairman. John Kirby might be holding cards close to his vest. His and at the White House says another. Who's right?

Well, we do know the Egyptian intelligence did refer this to Israel. And I can't get into any more depth. Pretty interesting. He, of course, has a top security clearance. I don't know where he learned that from, and I don't know if he's revealing classified information in another story for another time. As you know, that's a third rail here in the United States,

revealing top security secrets. But you heard what he said. The Egyptians warned the Israelis. Now, if true, then the hubris is monumental. Well, what I hear, which may, you know, I don't have access to these things, but what I hear is that the message that was sent by the Egyptian was that something big is building. Now, I know, you know, as a government official, former senior official, I mean, what do you do with that? I mean, they say, you know, something big may be happening. Where? When? Whom? And if they say, well, look, we don't have any detail, you know

what they're dealing with. It's chatter. It's chatter on the internet that they've picked up and they've come to conclusions something is happening. Well, they may be right, but, you know, you can't put a whole state on, you know, maximum alert because someone said, well, maybe something big is coming. You just can't do that. So I have sympathies with them if they didn't do that. Unless you have something specific, if you don't have specific intelligence, you can't wind up a whole state into maximum alert. All right. No matter how this ends, how bad is this politically for Prime Minister Netanyahu that this happened on his watch? Oh, it was a disastrous catastrophe. I don't know how long he'll stay in power.

Probably not that much longer. Maybe after the invasion of Gaza he will be required. I mean, they have formed a unity government. So, I mean, he's sort of in place for that. But it's a disaster. But, you know, it was much more than that. It was not only an intelligence disaster, but the army malfunctioned. I mean, there were just no troops. I mean, there's no one on alert. The whole command system for the troops completely imploded and broke down. So, I mean, you've got two things. You've got one is the intelligence failure.

And secondly, you've got the fact that the army was all over the place. And even so, now, when they're planning this attack in Gaza, I mean, we see stories all the time that the reservists haven't got clothing, haven't got the uniforms, haven't got the equipment that they need, and that they haven't got transport. I mean, in many cases, you know, the parents were having to transport them to the front because it was, you know, the army was in such disarray. So, I mean, combined, the two things, disaster. Do you know if reservists, as many thousands said they would a few months ago, are refusing to report for duty? Or has the horrific nature of this conflict sort of melted away their opposition to Netanyahu's efforts to cow the judicial branch of the government? As expected, they went immediately back to their jobs. I had no doubt

that that would be the case. You know, that was just a narrative that came out that, you know, this was endangering Israel's security because the pilots were not turning up. You know, if the army was serious about it, they would have told those people, either you turn up for duty tomorrow at 0800 hours, or you're on if you like, or else you're going to be disciplined and you're going to be put on a charge. I mean, you know, these were military people. They can be reservists, but they,

you know, they're subject to law and they can't just choose not to. That they didn't do that, that the army didn't do it, was reflective of the fact that the army was engaged in putting pressure on Netanyahu and was, if you like, collaborating in that. I mean, many, even left-wing journalists in Israel have said, you know, there was a coup, an army coup in process from the top layers, which are the sort of generals in the Ashkenazi, in order to remove Netanyahu's right-wing government. Well, they may have succeeded. Who knows who's actually running the so-called unity government? It is before this happened.

Are you of the view that the Israeli government was willing to just throw the Palestinians under the bus in order to achieve a rapprochement with the Saudis? Look, you know, I think this Saudi rapprochement has been very much overhyped. I'm not even sure it was ever going to happen. But it suited both Netanyahu and MBZ, Mohammed bin Salman, to say, ever closer, we're getting closer, we're getting closer. They had different political interests, but they were jointly interested in just saying, yes, this is going least, on the nuclear issue and on the security pledges that would be made to Saudi Arabia.

Big problems about these things. So whether it would have ever seen the light of day, I don't know. Would it have changed much if there had been one? I don't think so. I mean, there's lots of Saudi you know, Saudi, Gulf, Israeli contacts have been going on for some years now, sharing on intelligence and security. So, you know, but what it's presented as is a complete fake, is that this would suddenly create an anti-Iranian alliance that would stand with Israel.

And that's nonsense because they obviously haven't been seeing the news. I mean, Saudi Arabia is a candidate member for the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, of which Iran is a member, and has applied and joined the BRICS organization, of which Iran is a full member. They're working together. China did a reconciliation between Saudi Arabia and Iran a few months ago and guaranteed it. And it's showing results. And they are working quite closely together. So the idea that it would suddenly turn into a great anti-Iranian alliance, Israel is nonsense. It wouldn't do that. I mean, the whole Middle East has moved on. It's reorientated towards China and Russia. It's not about Iran. And Iran has sort of

moved much more closely to China and Russia and Asia, and is a full participant in that sort of alliance between the powers, the big powers. Does Western intelligence assume that Iran played a role in weaponizing or supplying ammunition, whatever, to Hamas? I don't know what they think. It's very hard to know what they think. It's very hard to know what they think. But there's absolutely no evidence that they were directly involved. And the United States says the same thing, that there's no evidence that they were involved. Look, I mean, it's one thing Iran has had a long relationship with the Palestinians. It supports the Palestinians, has done, always. And yes,

they help the Palestinians from time to time. But there have been times when Hamas has fallen out with Iran. And then there have been times now to get there much more, they're closer together. But I mean, that doesn't imply that Iran was directly involved in this. And the Iranians, the Supreme Leader has said that as well, as everybody else, that they were not involved. I mean, the part that would have been involved in the planning of this, if anything, would have been Hezbollah, but not, and also parts of Syria, perhaps the Syrian forces. In the past two days, we've heard things from the Israeli

government like we're going to invade and wipe out Gaza. We heard one of the Israeli ministers saying there'll be no buildings left standing. The people that survive this will be living in tents. One of the hard right fanatical members of Prime Minister Netanyahu's government referred to the Palestinians as subhuman. What are the dangers of Israeli overreaction of the concept of collective punishment, punishing innocent human beings for what some people among them, but most did not, did? There are two major risks. One is the direct risk that if Israel sends its troop, I know Gaza quite well. I mean, it's an urban sprawl.

The buildings are all over the place. Hamas live underneath in tunnels and in bunkers, and the whole place is riddled with tunnels. And I've seen this happening in places like Jenin and Nablus in the north. It's a nightmare going into a place like that. Nightmare. You can't go by the road. You can't move in the road for snipers. You dare not go into the houses because they may be booby trapped.

You have to move by knocking down the wall of one house to get access to the next house to avoid the roads. You move meter by meter and the cost to the Israelis who have got little experience of this sort of warfare will be huge. I wouldn't be surprised if it turns into Bahmut for them. I mean, literally, you know, a sort of killing field for Israeli forces. They're not able, they're not equipped or trained really to do this type of, I mean, really hard urban guerrilla warfare. They will suffer badly.

Listen, I mean, don't misunderstand. Everyone knew this would come after what Hamas was planning. Right. Let me stop you for just a moment. We're going to put up the live screen showing Gaza and Israel. If you look in the upper left-hand corner, you'll see one of the major Israeli strikes there. You'll see that plume of smoke coming up. But morally and politically,

what are the dangers of overreaction? Some Americans who have been cautioning Prime Minister Netanyahu don't overreact have been criticized by his supporters here in this country. The clearly overreaction and collective punishment largely brought this about. Exactly. And the consequences is, and some of those, like senior officials, I think it's Giorgio Elan has said, you know, we want to create a humanitarian disaster. This is the only success that we can get out of a major disaster. But this is where the strategic problem comes in, because in the north you have Hezbollah, who have set a red line. If you invade Gaza, then we open a new front against Israel. And Hezbollah have tens of thousands of smart cruise missiles and swarm drones,

and they have the ability and their fighting force is very, very effective, honed in Syria, well experienced. So then you open a new front. What happens then? Will it expand to Syria? Quite possibly. Then you have a multifarious front war. I mean, this is an existential threat. And I just can't believe that, you know, Israel is going ahead. You know, I appreciate that they're angry and they're in a state of heightened emotion. But, I mean, they don't seem to be thinking this through very clearly. It really could end up, I mean it, like a meat grinder, a bahmut.

Gaza is just a perfect situation for one of those meat grinding operations. We're going to segue into your cranks. I have some questions I want to ask you about that. But first, I want you to watch what I thought was a very smart analysis of the mistakes the United States has made in the Middle East, and it's from a Russian President Putin, with no notes, speaking extemporaneously. I'd like your thoughts on what he said. Unfortunately, we can see a sharp deterioration of the situation in the Middle East. I think that many will agree with me that this is a clear example of the failure of the policy of the United States in the Middle East, which tried to monopolize the resolution of the conflict, but unfortunately wasn't concerned with finding compromises acceptable to both sides.

On the contrary, it promoted its own ideas about how this should be done, put pressure on both sides, first on one side, then on the other, every time without taking into account the fundamental interests of the Palestinian people, bearing in mind, first of all, the need to implement the UN Security Council decision on creation of an independent, sovereign Palestinian state. Sounds pretty rational to me, Alistair. It's on the nail. Exactly true. And, you know, I was involved with the Oslo Accords for many years between the Palestinians and the Israelis. I mean, they were built on false premises. And their main element was to give complete discretion to Israel. And of course, just like we see in Ukraine, this has been used to expand, if you like, to always have more room

for maneuver for Israel and to give Israel the leading edge politically and militarily in the region, because it suited the United States just as it suits the United States to have NATO right up alongside Russia, to have the, if you like, Israel with this cutting edge, which the United States guaranteed, right in the middle of the Middle East. So there was no negotiation, certainly certainly for 20 years nothing that could lead to some sort of an agreement does Israel go to the head of the line now when it comes to foreign aid is Ukraine either secondary or almost an afterthought at this point yeah I think, I mean, let's see what happens. But I mean, either this is an opportunity

for the United States to pivot out of Ukraine while all the attention is devoted to Israel and what's happening on the ground, or else they will try and plug on with it. But certainly, you know, it was heading in that direction anyway. But what we see now is that it's, they're reaching the end of the line, both in military equipment and in finance. And it can't go on for much longer. The state won't exist for much longer.

And I think this also gives the opportunity for now for Russia to do its offensive while all the West is focused on painting their buildings in blue, white, and blue to go and finish off Ukraine with their offensive. So I think it opens many sort of horizons. Here's Admiral Kirby. I thought this was a shocking statement, and you pointed it out to me in the wee hours. We'll run the clip, but pay careful attention to what he says at the end, where he refers to either the money and military train from U.S.

to Ukraine or the U.S. patience with Ukraine's losses. It's not clear what he's referring to, but the phrase, typically American, and we all know what it means, that we are, quote, at the end of the rope. But in the near term, we've got appropriations and authorities for both Ukraine and for Israel. But you don't want to be trying to bake in long-term support when you're at the end of the rope. And in Ukraine, on the Ukraine funding, we're coming near to the end of the rope. Wow. That is the first time that an official spokesperson for the United States government, from President Biden to Secretary Blinken to Jake Sullivan to Admiral Kirby, said anything quite like that. You and I and our other colleagues have been talking about an off-ramp for 16 months now, and all of a sudden he goes

end of the rope. Yep, that's it. It's over for Ukraine. Oh, it'll peter on for a little bit longer, but it's over. I mean, the EU have got no weapons to give them. There's no money being agreed so far. And the United States, it'll be, if they give anything, it'll be sometime they have to resolve the whole question of what happens in the House and who's the speaker and what. But the first bills are going to be for support of Israel. I don't think it'll work for the president simply to tack onto that

100 billion for Ukraine. I don't think it'll pass for the president simply to tack onto that 100 billion for Ukraine. I don't think it'll pass. Oh, my goodness. Alistair, the president wants 100 billion for Ukraine. I don't know how much he wants for Israel. He wants 40 or 50 billion for Taiwan. I mean, he wants to wrap all of this up at once. The neocons in both parties love it. But I agree with you. Patience is wearing thin here. Alistair, my dear friend, thank you very much. Thanks for your time this morning. Great, as always, great insight.

Thank you. Thank you very much. Of course. More as we get it, my friends. Thank you for the subscriptions. We're up to 210,000. Wow. Our goal is a quarter of a million, only another 40,000 by Christmas time. Thank you

for helping us get there. Justin Napolitano for Judging Freedom. Thank you.