Judging Freedom - Prof. Jeffrey Sachs: Can Netanyahu Steal Syria?

Episode Date: December 17, 2024

Prof. Jeffrey Sachs: Can Netanyahu Steal Syria?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 Tuesday, December 17, 2024. Apologies for the late start. Professor Jeffrey Sachs joins us now. Professor Sachs, always a pleasure, my dear friend. Thank you for sharing your time with us. I want to speak at some length about what's going on in Syria, particularly the reprehensible land grabs in which the IDF has been engaging. Ambassador Murray told us this morning that the IDF has seized land equivalent to three times the size of the Gaza Strip. But before we get there, there was an assassination this morning of a very high-ranking general, General Kirillov, outside of his apartment building in Moscow. It was startling, and he and his aide were killed by a bomb. The Ukrainians have taken credit, so to speak, for it. What does this tell you, Professor Sachs, about the state of the war between Russia and Ukraine, that Ukraine would do something like this? This kind of terrorism should have no place even in the context of war. But what it means is that we are continuing to be at the brink of disaster, that at any moment this war could spiral into something even more god-awful than it is right now, into escalation, nuclear escalation. What is happening is that

governments or leaders are saying, we have no respect for any limits. And this is especially, by the way, and I know people will take exception to this, but this is on, quote, our side, the U.S., Ukraine, Israel. We are murdering foreigners that are, yes, adversaries, but are often negotiators or senior officials of government. This is state policy of Ukraine. They didn't even try to hide this. They, as you said, took credit for it. The United States murders foreign officials.

And by the way, I think it's true to say domestic people as well. And Israel absolutely has been in the business for decades of murdering its so-called or self-defined adversaries. But in particular, in the last couple of years, the ones that it's murdered are its political interlocutors, the very ones aiming to negotiate ceasefires or peace agreements, the political negotiator of Hamas, the leader of Hezbollah. And these are outright assassinations. These are not killings that are in the context of military actions where buildings or blocks or cities are bombed. These are targeted assassinations. Well, my God, where are we going with all of this?

I can tell you, the longer this continues, the more danger that we just end up all getting blown up. You know, this was so well-planned, so methodical, so neat and clean, so to speak. It's almost as if the Mossad did it. Well, by the way, there's a lot of interaction of the CIA, the Mossad, the Ukrainian intelligence. Yes, these are methods that are championed by, again, I'll say it, quote, our side, although you don't really feel it's much for us, the normal people. But these are deliberate methods, and you won't hear complaints or scoffing. Not at all. It may have been done together with the U.S. Who knows? And when Israel does these things, murdering the very people that they're negotiating with the U S it doesn't blink an eye because probably it's been done together

with, with the U S it's so astoundingly reckless and our, um, uh, in, in former intelligence community, a colleagues of yours that are on the show have nothing but praise for the professionalism of the Russian intelligence community. I'm sure that they will soon find out who's behind. I'm going to run a clip from President Putin. Now, this is before the murder of the general. This was yesterday when he was addressing a large contingent of his senior defense folks. I'd like your thoughts on it, Chris. Cut number 13.

At the same time, under the guise of a mythical Russian threat, they simply scare their population with the fact that we are going to attack someone. The tactics are very simple. They bring us to the red line through which we are retreating from the ancient Soviet Union, now Russian threats. Meanwhile, the NATO countries themselves are increasing military spending near the Russian borders. The formation and cobbling together of NATO have long gone beyond the so-called zone of its historical responsibility. In addition, the so-called eastern flank, the alliance is increasing its presence in the Asia-Pacific region. With the support of the United States, new military and political alliances are being formed

that undermines the security architecture that has developed over decades. I think he's got his finger right on the pulse of things. By the way, the general that was murdered was in the audience. He wasn't shown in the clip that we saw, but he was there. We're heading towards World War III, and this is actually chortled in Washington, war with China by 2027, and so on. If the Biden or Biden-Harris administration had continued, we would go right over the cliff. The question now that is extremely important is whether Donald Trump will do something different. And he might, by the way. There is, at least in his rhetoric, repeatedly statements that we should not be at war with Russia. We should not be at war with China.

He says that repeatedly. Because if it's real, it's a huge advance on what we have of this outgoing administration, which has been absolutely dreadful, which has made it its point to be absolutely disrespectful and caustic and even murderous about the red lines of our adversaries. Now, the issue with the incoming Trump administration is that there are people of all ilks in Washington in the new administration, some stated hardliners, some people who say we've had enough war, we have to end the war. We have President Trump's rhetoric. We have three war zones, by the way. Of course, we have Ukraine, we have the Middle East, and we have East Asia. And some people say, oh, war in this one, but not in this one. Some say, why are we provoking World War III in any of these places? Donald Trump has talked about that he doesn't want war with China, that the two countries could solve problems

together. Well, if such rhetoric is actually turned into action and addresses what President Putin accurately stated in that clip. He stated accurately that there is a massive Western U.S.-led military buildup that is taking place across all of these conflict zones and that it's extraordinarily dangerous, if President Trump aims to wind this down, my own view is give him three Nobel Peace Prizes, one for ending the Ukraine war, one for ending the violence in the Middle East, and one for ending the potential utter disaster in East Asia, if he does it? And this is the big question for us. Well, and then you and I, before we get to Syria, you and I this morning each read a reprehensible piece by Mitch McConnell, the outgoing majority leader in the Senate, which sounded like John McCain on steroids. And I fear

that that view, that America must continue its hegemony, that America must dominate, I fear that that view is shared by more than half the Republican senators, well more than half. Yeah. So the key word in this piece, which people can download from Foreign Affairs Magazine because it's made, I think, openly available for everybody, is primacy. Right. Mitch McConnell says is we need U.S. primacy. What U.S. primacy means to Russia or to China is the U.S. wants to lord it over us. The U.S. wants to dominate us. The U.S. wants to have its way and threaten us as it will. What it literally means in the case of Russia is the U.S. wants to put its missile systems and its military bases in Ukraine along our border or in the South Caucasus in Georgia, and in fact, do whatever the U.S. wants. That's what primacy means from the Russian point of view. It's, of course, a matter of

core national security for Russia to reject such a world that Mitch McConnell is calling for. What primacy means in East Asia is that the United States surrounds China with its military in Japan, in Korea, in Australia, New Zealand, in Southeast Asia, in the East China Sea, in the South China Sea, in the choke points in the Indian Ocean, in the Straits of Malacca, that the U.S. puts in intermediate range missiles in Korea or wherever it wants. From China's point of view, again, this is fundamentally against China's core national security, especially when they saber rattle about Taiwan and so forth, which is part of China, and the United States says is part of China. So when Mitch McConnell talks about primacy, we have to understand from the point of view of the other parties, they see this as dire and direct threat to their core national security.

Is that really making America safe by making Russia feel that they're absolutely at the brink or on the knife edge of war? Does it really make the American people safe when China feels that the United States is threatening China's core national security? Of course it doesn't. It leads to a world in which we are at each other's throats and we're seconds away from nuclear war. And as we've talked about, the doomsday clock of the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists puts us at 90 seconds to nuclear Armageddon. So Mitch McConnell expresses, yes, a popular view that is absolutely insane. I'm sorry to say it. It's insane. It is a view that says we're going to act in a way which is going to put us to the very brink of nuclear war. Why would any U.S. politician say such a stupid thing? But of course, Mitch McConnell's an old and stupid man, I'm sorry to say. Go, leave already. This is so dangerous for us. leading to massive arms buildups around China and a surge of China's own military spending in

response to the U.S. military spending. Enough of this. This is 30 years of delusion that has brought us to the brink of nuclear war. And it's really time for Mitch McConnell to leave, but at least he did us a slight favor by being so blunt about the idiocy of the foreign policy that he promotes. So reckless and so dangerous and so lacking the most basic core insight that if we want to be safe, you don't put the knife on the throat of the other side when it's a nuclear superpower and expect that's going to make us safe. Right. Professor Sachs, switching gears, does Syria still exist as a geopolitical entity? No, not for the moment, because it is multiple military forces that are fighting each other, that are dividing up the country. And we have Turkish-backed jihadist forces. We have American-backed Kurdish forces. We have the Russian presence on the coast.

We have Israel having invaded Syria three days ago. We have these absolute madmen in the Israeli government, two ministers, Smotrich and Ben-Gavir, who are mad, absolutely mad, saying, yes, this is greater Israel now. This is where we stand. And all of this is pointing towards wider war. And, of course, Netanyahu, always for dragging America into yet another war, wants to drag us into a war with Iran now. And that's part of the immediate plan, not even hidden from view. Israel has bombed the air defenses of Syria. And there are stories coming right and left that, of course, this gives an open airspace for the United States entry to bomb Iran. And Netanyahu hasn't been Netanyahu if he hasn't basically said every single day to the United States, go to war with Iran. And of course, he's saying it again now. Israel, to create now a greater Israel that encompasses not only Israel, not only Palestine,

but parts of Lebanon, parts of Syria, and to listen to some of these nutcases, parts of Egypt as well, because if you look at the texts from 700 BC, well, it seems like part of Egypt is promised to these zealots. So this is really, really. And what does the U.S. administration do? That's all fine. Everything's fine. Whatever Israel does, that'll be temporary. We support this. Not a glimmer

of coherence. Anyway, we're counting the days for Biden to leave. But I'm worried with the incoming Trump administration also, there hasn't been a voice yet that says, let's ratchet down the war in the Middle East because the power of the Israel lobby is both parties and it's very powerful and it's very dangerous and what will what will happen in your view to all of this real estate Ambassador Craig Murray told us a little while ago I mentioned this in the introduction to the show that Israel Israel has already seized Syrian land that is more than three times the size of the Gaza Strip. I mean, would any international order, would the UN, would any other countries beside the US recognize the legitimacy of this? It's just theft. Of course not. Well, it's not only theft. It's completely illegal in international law. The world will obviously oppose this. Israel has not only seized

this land, it's by many reports 15 or 20 kilometers outside of Damascus right now. This is a major invasion by Israel. And with these zealots, and they are zealots, they're 7th century BC zealots, by the way, that's what they are. They are saying, yeah, we're going to move in. We even see rabbis going to talk about the new settlements that are going to be in the Syrian territory that's captured. I mean, you just cannot believe the irresponsibility and the lack of an American foreign policy, because the Israel lobby owns American foreign policy completely contrary to America's interests. It may very well own the Trump foreign policy with even a greater depth of control than the Biden foreign policy because of the public statements he's made, Mrs. Adelson, the amount of money she's given, and other folks that he has appointed. Even Tulsi Gabbard, who has some views about the CIA consistent with yours and mine, is an ardent Zionist, as is everybody else in his national

security team. I don't know if they're all going to be confirmed by the Senate, but this is the mindset that he has chosen. I think that it's very important for- Sebastian Gorka. Sebastian Gorka sounds like Smotrich and Ben-Gabir speaking a little better English. I think that it's very important for people to differentiate two basic ideas. One is that Israel should have security, something that I believe in and agree with. And the other, this concept of greater Israel, based on ancient texts 2,700 years ago that ride roughshod on millions of people in complete violation of every standard of morality, ethics, and law of the world today. So if we're living in 7th century BC and guided by a quite genocidal text, by the way, which

these people read, and it says, go kill everyone in this territory because this is your territory. Well, that's the kind of world that we're going to get. Being in favor of Israel's security is one thing, but Israel has its borders on the 4th of June, 1967. Those are Israel's legal borders. The International Court of Justice just said that again, but that goes back 57 years, actually, to the fall of 1967 after the war in that year, when in UN Security Council Resolution 242, it was already said that those sort who are talking about the physical expansion of Israel, not only to rule over Palestine, that is the Palestine that isn't killed, slaughtered, or ethnically cleansed, but also Lebanon, Syria, and it goes on on the maps of some of these crazy people. So this is what we're up against. Now, is it really true that people in

the incoming Trump administration are going to champion a map of greater Israel that is a map that has Israel taking territory in Egypt, Lebanon, Palestine, Syria, Iraq onward? Is that really what we're going to do? Because then we're going to drive to the end of the world in nuclear war, because it's so crazy. You can't even imagine that people would say this. So people have to define their terms. It's one thing to support Israel's security. the delusions of people reading 2,700-year-old texts about slaughtering peoples so that there can be a greater Israel. It's a question of what we mean by all of these terms. Do you foresee American military involvement in Netanyahu's expansionist plans? Apparently, we are bombing portions of Syria, and we know there's a thousand troops on the ground. I would defy anybody to justify this in terms of American national security, and you would as well, I think.

None of what's happened in the last, I'll say, 21 years under Netanyahu's guidance has been for U.S. security. Netanyahu talked the American people into war with Iraq. That was his war. Netanyahu talked the Clinton people into overthrowing Muammar Gaddafi. Netanyahu talked the American government under Clinton into trying to overthrow Bashar al-Assad starting in 2011. Netanyahu talked America into wars across this region. Has any of this been about American security? No way. Not at all. America's more insecure, more in danger, more indebted than ever before because of this radical policy. So the one thing I'm hoping President Trump talks about making America great again, at least make America sovereign again. Let's have our own foreign policy, not dictated by another country, not dictated by Ukraine,

which could get us into World War III, not dictated by Israel, which could get us into World War III, not dictated by Israel, which could get us into World War III. Let's have our own foreign policy that is based on American security. I think he believes that with the exception of Israel, in part because of his longstanding relationship with the donor class. So that's the rhythm of this is, Jeff. I don't see any relief with respect to Israel. I don't see any relief coming. I just see, unless something happens domestically that removes Netanyahu from the scene, which is not unforeseeable, I don't see American foreign policy vis-a-vis Israel and America continuing to give Israel everything it wants changing under Trump. Do you?

Donald Trump should explain to his donors, thank you for putting me into office. I'm here to serve American well-being and American security. Thank you very much. is absolutely in the most decisive position, of course, in the whole world to keep us out of nuclear war, to keep us out of a spreading war. I'm sorry, whether it's Miriam Adelson or anyone else, they have no business even remotely trying to run American national security policy. None at all. And I think President Trump knows that. And I think it behooves him to tell his donors, thank you very much for all the support. And now I, as President of the United States, will look after American national security.

Professor Sachs, from your lips to President Trump's ears. Let's hope. Yes. Thank you very much for your time, my dear friend. I have pages of notes to discuss with you. I barely scratched the surface. Let's continue. We'll continue.

Certainly continue. One of these days we'll do it together in the same room and for a longer period of time. We have a short week next week. I hope we can squeeze you in before Christmas. Let's do that. Thank you. Thank you. Thanks a lot. All the best. Thank you.

Coming up later today and shortly at 12 noon, Scott Horton. At two o'clock, Scott Ritter. At three o'clock, Karen Kwiatkowski. Justin Napolitano for Judging Freedom. for judging freedom. Altyazı M.K.