Judging Freedom - Prof. Gilbert Doctorow: Kremlin on Trump’s Call for Ceasefire.

Episode Date: February 5, 2025

Prof. Gilbert Doctorow: Kremlin on Trump’s Call for Ceasefire.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 Wednesday, February 5th, 2025. Professor Gilbert Doctorow joins us now. Professor Doctorow, always a pleasure, my dear friend. Of course, I want to talk to you about the Kremlin and the latest the conflagration, which from my perspective is genocide, in Gaza? That's precisely their view. They don't use other terms than what you just used. Mr. Putin himself has said publicly that he was heartbroken to see what is going on in Gaza. So that is, they are on the same page as you are. Does the Kremlin have an opinion on this? In other words, this could involve the Kremlin if the Israelis, backed by the Americans, decide to attack Iran? I mean,

does the Kremlin foresee a role for itself in resolving all of this, or is it just going to sit back and watch? Well, they have to take their cues from Iran. And when they signed this long-term comprehensive cooperation agreement with Iran just a few weeks ago, it was clear that Iran is satisfied that they are safe. They were not rushing into the arms of Moscow. They did not conclude a defense component or a mutual defense component, and that is precisely because they anticipated that they will find some resolution to their conflict with Washington. I believe that such a view would have come about because of back channels from Washington, which suggested to them that this was feasible. So in that case, Moscow takes its cues from Tehran. One of President Trump's golfing buddies is Senator Lindsey Graham, who has extremely harsh, in my view, over-the-top, almost maniacal views of the relationship of the United States to Iran. Chris, I don't have the

number, but the Senator Graham clip that we have been playing of him from one of the Sunday talk shows. Professor Doctor, I'd like your thoughts on this. So what this resolution does, it lays out the case against Iran's nuclear ambition. Bibi and the Israelis are going to have to make a decision relatively soon what to do about the Iran nuclear program. This is not an authorization to use force. But I am here to tell you and the audience in the world that I think America should support an effort by Israel if they decide to decimate the Iranian nuclear program because I think it's a threat to mankind. Israel is strong. Iran is weak. Hezbollah, Hamas have been decimated.

They're not finished off, but they've been weakened. And there's an opportunity to hit the Iran nuclear program in a fashion I haven't seen in decades. I think this is crazy. What do you think? I think he's caught on a time warp. What he's saying is totally outdated and totally bypassed by events. I think, as I said, that Mr. Trump's team have given signals to Tehran that they are ready to talk at a, of course, not immediately, but in the near future when things calm down a bit. I think that Mr. Netanyahu was bought off yesterday

by these promises of America taking control of Gaza and turning it into a luxury resort. This is absolutely unfulfillable. I think most everybody, even Netanyahu, understands that. But it gave him something to walk away with, to speak about his great friends in America, when he has most likely given up plans to continue the military operations in Gaza, and has most likely given up his greatest ambition, which was what you said at the outset, to decimate the nuclear installations of Iran. But for Senator Graham to say that Israel is strong, Iran is weak, I mean, this is simply not true in February 2025.

What has that man been saying that is true for several years? He is a one-man propaganda organization, and he does that in Kiev when he visits them. He says what he wants to say even has no bearing on the real situation. So this is in line with his overall behavior. I'm going to play a clip of President Trump yesterday saying that the United States will own the Gaza Strip. Take a look at Prime Minister Netanyahu's body language. I don't even know if he knew ahead of time what President Trump was going to say. Chris, number four.

The U.S. will take over the Gaza Strip, and we will do a job with it, too. We'll own it and be responsible for dismantling all of the dangerous, unexploded bombs and other weapons on the site, level the site and get rid of the destroyed buildings, level it out, create an economic development that will supply unlimited numbers of jobs and housing for the people of the area. You were talking tonight about the United States taking over a sovereign territory. What authority would allow you to do that? Are you talking about a permanent occupation there, redevelopment? I do see a long-term ownership position, and I see it bringing great stability

to that part of the Middle East and maybe the entire Middle East. And everybody I've spoken to, this was not a decision made lightly, everybody I've spoken to loves the idea of the United States owning that piece of land, developing and creating thousands of jobs with something that will be magnificent. I don't want to be cute. I don't want to be a wise guy. But the Riviera of the Middle East, this could be something that could be so magnificent. If we can get a beautiful area to resettle people permanently in nice homes and where they can be happy and not be shot, not be killed, not be knifed to death like what's happening in Gaza.

Why would they want to return? The place has been hell. What do you think? This is really Donald Trump doing what he does best in his own mind. It is complete dissimulation. It is speaking dissimulation. It is speaking to Netanyahu. As you suggested, Netanyahu, by the body language, was hearing this for the first time while he was at the microphone.

And he was first amused that he got quite interested in what Trump was saying because he hadn't heard it before. And this proves to me that Trump has no intention of following through on it. He knows it's impossible, but it is the way, it is the off-ramp for Netanyahu. Netanyahu can go home claiming a big victory. It puts an end, or it should put an end, to his plans to continue bombing Gaza, because the whole thing becomes American property.

And so if this trick works, then you can say that Trump, by his own very peculiar methods, has put a stop to the genocide. We'll see. Nothing is clear. And it's precisely this opacity, precisely this confusion that Trump is using as his negotiating tool. I wonder if Netanyahu's government will survive, because of course we know, and I'm going upon how you want to look at it, in more slaughter and genocide to resume. But as you say, I don't know how Netanyahu could do that now in light of this seemingly off the wall and probably legally impossible suggestion that Trump has just made. Trump is stupid like a fox.

Yeah, yeah, nicely put. All right, do we know if the President Biden pipeline of U.S. military equipment and ammunition to Kiev is still flowing, Professor Doctorow? No, I have no information about that. The Russians aren't talking about it, other than the fact that we knew last week that 90 slightly used and shop-worn Patriot missiles were sent, were delivered to Ukraine, or Poland, on their way to Ukraine.

So in that sense, part of the pipeline was open, we can assume, but other parts also were open. But everything is finite. The Russians are day by day destroying anything that comes in. So even if the pipeline is open, and even if a few billion dollars worth of munitions and other types of armaments are delivered, it will not keep the Ukrainian army going very long. And that is all the more true. They don't have men to deploy, to use this equipment. They're short of spend. If Donald Trump is continuing the Joe Biden pipeline, even if they've closed the spigot just a little bit, what does this tell President Putin? That the new administration is willing to kill Russian troops,

just like the previous administration. The Russians are ready for everything. As I've mentioned before, their basic disposition as to view the United States government power and policy is determined by the deep state. In this regard, I think they're looking elsewhere. I'm sure that they're looking at the attempts by Trump and by Musk to dismantle the deep state. Certainly the attack on USAID is what that is all about. So their attention, as I said, would be on the deep state,

and they have to be taking close watch over what Trump is doing in this precise area. We think of a deep state, oh, typically, the sense of a deep state is continuity in government. However, from time to time, there are disruptions. In 2003, 2004, there was a massive disruption of the deep state by Dick Cheney, who chased out whole areas of confidence,

whole swaths of the Deep State to install people who were going to practice his type of neoconservative policies. That changed the Deep State dramatically. Not that there weren't neocon people there before, but now they became the only people. So it is today. The American media is reporting this morning that the Trump administration has offered buyouts to every, and this is hard to believe, and of course the number is secret, but to every single employee of the Central Intelligence Agency. Now, if they all took the buyout, put aside the cost, that would decimate the American intelligence

community until those human beings could be replaced by people of equal experience. I'm not a fan of the CIA, but there is a service that they perform when they engage in legitimate gathering of data from other countries. I think on an interim basis, the government could simply enlarge the outsourcing that otherwise does and which probably accounts for more than 50 percent of the open source intelligence that is gathered by the U.S. government. So it's not as though they have no means of making up for the loss of personnel. The question in everything that Trump is doing, and I'm calling it a destructive, disruptive action, his wrecking ball, is to remove those institutions, those,

as they say, agencies, and those personnel who have brought us forever wars. Right. We were celebrating when, this goes back four years ago, we celebrated when Newland saw the handwriting on the wall and resigned. But that was one person. That was Newland. There may be a few people around here. The vast majority of staff in the State Department, sorry to say this, I think they'll be next for the sledgehammer, in the State Department, in the intelligence agencies, these are people whose time to shine came under Dick Cheney when he empowered and he brought in people like that who shared his philosophy, political philosophy.

Well, look, Donald Trump is truly against forever wars, and I hope he is. You know, he doesn't always say what he means. He doesn't always mean what he says. It's about time that he rid the government of the culture that supports the forever wars. And in your view, and I agree with it, and it's well documented, this culture has existed and metastasized since 2001, when Cheney did, then Vice President Cheney, did what you said he did. Was there another suicide, bombing, execution, killing in Russia of a significant member of President Putin's administration in the past 48 hours, a man by the name of Sarkissian? In his administration, I'm not sure what he was doing, what his job title was recently, but he was a very active participant in the resistance in Donbas.

And when going back to the very start of the rebellion of these regions against the coup d'etat government that the U.S. had installed in February 2014 in Kiev. So he's been around for a long time. He was in a very active and leading position militarily and politically in the Donbass. There he is. Now, was he murdered in or around his own apartment in Moscow? That's what it appears to be. And he, unlike the case of a general, Kirillov, who was murdered several months ago and who was seen to be living in an unprotected apartment building, which facilitated the actions of his murderers, this particular gentleman was in a gated community, so to speak. It looked like a secure building. So it took a lot of intelligence work to find a way to overcome the defenses that were protecting him.

Wow. General Kellogg, who is President Trump's emissary, go-to person, whatever you want to call it, this is not a job recognized by the federal government. and Russia has suggested an immediate ceasefire in two elections in 2025, one for the presidency of Ukraine and one for a new parliament. How does the Kremlin react to that? I mean, the Kremlin agrees that President, well, that Vladimir Zelensky has no legal authority whatsoever under Ukrainian law or international law, but how do they view what General Kellogg has suggested? And why would he make a suggestion publicly without knowing ahead of time how the Kremlin will view it? I think that it all depends on what else is going on. That is to say, if what other feelers are being put out to the Russians, if this is all that Trump has to offer, then the answer is a big net.

President Putin has made it clear there can be no ceasefire unless the preconditions that he said back in June of last year are met. The first of those preconditions is the withdrawal of Ukrainian forces from the boundaries of the pre-war Donbas oblasts. As I've said, about 95 percent of pre-war oblasts of Lugansk is in Russian hands, but only about 65% of the oblast of Donetsk is in their hands. So the Ukrainians would have to pull back. That I don't think will change. However, let me just say that what else could be going on is a hint that bigger issues will be discussed when Trump and Putin meet. That could give the Russians something to think about

and maybe be a bit more flexible on the timing and conditions of a ceasefire. So I wouldn't want to be dogmatic about it. I would say I don't think they will be dogmatic about it if other things are going on that interest them more. Here's Dmitry Peskov, the Kremlin's chief spokesperson, addressing the issue of the legitimacy or illegitimacy of President Zelensky, cut number one. President Zelensky's powers have ended. President Putin has already spoken about this in sufficient detail numerous times. No one can dispute this because it is absolutely the obvious legal reality that exists in Ukraine.

And therefore, of course, the very idea of holding elections in Ukraine, from the point of view of legitimizing the leadership, I want to remind you of Putin's very recent statement that this legitimization is necessary for the legal recording of any agreements in terms of conflict resolution. You can't really dispute that. No, you can't. And that is why Kellogg has introduced this whole new subject of forming a legitimate government in Ukraine. But the timing, of course, is essential. The Russians will not wait months and months for a new Ukrainian government to be shaped,

because they're perfectly aware that the West would use this time to rearm and to reman the Ukrainian army, which is totally unacceptable to them when they are on a roll as they are right now and when the Ukrainian army's front lines are crumbling. Do we know, Professor Doctorow, if NATO and others are arming the Ukrainians as we speak? Professor Doctorow We assume they are, because yesterday the Russians reported a very big drone attack which destroyed, they say, 1,000 mercenaries, well, foreign advisors, a vast number of people that was reported to have been killed by the Russians. So presumably there's still more around, yes.

Wow. Thank you very much for your time today. Fascinating. Thank you for letting me take you into the Middle East as well. Your thoughts are very illuminating. Of course, we enjoy your time and it's a privilege for me and I hope you'll join us again next week. Well, thank you so much. Sure. Coming up later today at one o'clock this afternoon, Matt Ho at two o'clock, Max Blumenthal at three o'clock, Phil Giraldi at four o'clock, Scott Ritter, Judge Napolitano for Judging Freedom. Thank you.