Judging Freedom - Prof. John Mearsheimer : Putin’s Calculus: Why Russia Might Welcome a Long War

Episode Date: November 13, 2025

Prof. John Mearsheimer : Putin’s Calculus: Why Russia Might Welcome a Long WarSee 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, November 13th, 20205. Professor John Mears Sharmer will be with us in just a moment on what is the Russian calculus? Does President Putin want a long war? But first this. History tells us every market eventually falls. Currencies collapse.

And look at where we are now. 37 trillion in national debt. Stocks at record highs defying gravity. So what happens next? Groceries, gas, housing, everything's going up. And this dollar, it buys less every day. When the system breaks, your stocks won't save you and your dollars won't either. But one thing will, gold.

I've set it on my show for years. Gold survives collapse. central bankers know this and billionaires know it that's why they're buying more is it too late to buy or is it just the right time call my friends at lear capital to find out ask questions get the free information there's no pressure and that's why i buy my gold and silver from lear and right now you can get up to twenty thousand dollars in bonus medals with a qualified purchase call 800 511 46 or go to Learjudgednap.com today. Professor Mirshammer, good day to you, my dear friend. Thank you, as always, for joining us. Thank you especially for accommodating my schedule, not your usual day or your usual time,

but you are always welcome here, my friend. Before we get to President Putin's plans and the tolerance level of the Russian elites and the Russian people, a few questions about Israel. From your understanding, has the Israeli prison rape scandal strengthened or weakened Prime Minister Netanyahu standing amongst the Israeli people? I think it's probably had not much effect. And the sad reason is that so many Israelis support the rapists and don't think that the rapist should be prosecuted.

And of course, that's Prime Minister Netanyahu's basic position. So the fact that he's behaving in barbaric ways with regard to this terrible rape is not going to hurt him politically. And in fact, it may very well help him. I don't know if this was staged. Chris has a clip here. So I don't know if this is spontaneous or staged. But this is the courtroom before the judge. comes out. This is the actual courtroom where these guys are appearing. A, they have masks on,

B, there's a crowd there, applauding them. How can a country whose government endorses the most indefensible and reprehensible behavior imaginable show its face on the international scene and expect to be treated as a sovereign? Well, the problem here is. here for Israel is that its reputation is in tatters, that it has long portrayed itself as this noble liberal democracy, the only liberal democracy in the Middle East, a country that has Western values, you know, the whole argument. And what's happened since October 7th is that it's been exposed that that is a distortion of reality. And in fact, the more you look at the Israelis, the more they look like Nazi Germany.

And this is just one more manifestation of this. This is a country that is in deep trouble. It's become a nightmare. And more and more people recognize that. And what that means is that Israel supporters in the West and Israel itself are going to enormous lengths to cover up this basic fact that's hard to ignore. But Israel is a country that is in deep, deep trouble.

I see that Prime Minister Netanyahu's a principal advisor for a number of years, Ron Dermer, who was born in the United States, has resigned, quote, to spend more time with his family. Now, I never believe that excuse whenever I hear it, particularly when someone who has great levers of power available to them. So I don't know if anything's going on over there or if it's just the cyclical time in Mr. Dermas' life to change his work. And of course, Prime Minister Netanyahu was publicly excoriated, even berated. You'll actually appreciate this. Chris, I don't know which number it is. So yeah, watch this, Professor Emerichheimer, number seven. Benjamin Netanyahu, I blame you for the mindset in October. The greatest disaster this country has ever known happened on your watch.

Even if you sleep with a clear conscience, we will not forget, we will cry out over the abandonment and a state commission of inquiry will be established. I blame you, Netanyahu, your personal corruption has become a national plague. Every corrupt person becomes your partner. The bigger the file you have on someone, the more convenient they are for you. I blame you, Netanyahu, because you have forgotten what it means to be Jewish. Trump returned hostages in your place, while you shamelessly were busy trying to get him to grant a pardon. I blame you, Netanyahu.

Racism has always served you. It has torn us apart from within. You turned half the nation into an enemy. We will cleanse the poison you have poured here for 30 years. We will return to being a united society. I blame you, Netanyahu. You've ever seen anything like that to the face of the Israeli Prime Minister in the Knesset? No, I haven't. But the sad part of the story is that she is not in the Israeli mainstream. I think

she's basically a fringe character. I don't hear that many progressives like her left in Israel, sadly. But just going back to Ron Dermer, my instinct is your instinct, which is to believe that Dermar's leaving because he's unhappy with what's happening inside the Netanyahu government. And if you think about this whole situation, one would expect that people like Dermer and people in the Israel lobby as well understand that Israel's public face is a disaster for Israel and that Israel's public face is making it almost impossible for the lobby to defend Israel. And therefore, you would expect that they're encouraging Netanyahu to fundamentally alter his behavior, not only towards the Palestinians, but in terms of how they deal with issues like this rape of this Palestinian prisoner. This is just disastrous for Israel.

So I would bet, I'm not sure of this, but I would bet that someone like Dürmer, who is an American who made Alia to Israel, is telling Netanyahu and company there has to be a fundamental change here. that Israel can't go on like this because it's just disastrous in the long term. But he, of course, is getting nowhere. And the end result is that he bailed out. Now, that may not be true because we don't have all the evidence here. Right, right. But can Prime Minister Netanyahu afford to change plans without losing those two fanatics and whoever else votes with them

and the Knesset, Ben-Gabier and Smoutrich? Well, there's two points. be made. One is that I don't think he can afford to do it because I don't think it's just Ben Gavir and Smotrich. I think the fact is that the center gravity in Israel is so far to the right that it's very hard to shift positions now. But the second point is, do you really think that Netanyahu wants to change his position? Do you think he's being forced to behave the way he is and he's just in a straight jacket? I don't think that's the case. I think that what he is ultimately concerned with here is the long-term goal of cleansing the West Bank and cleansing Gaza.

And he sees what's happening now as a wonderful opportunity. He has this war that started on October 7th. We call it a genocide. He calls it a war, but it is a genocide. It's an opportunity to drive the Palestinians out. And furthermore, he has President Trump in the White House. And President Trump is in a very vulnerable position now. And it's very easy for the Israelis and for the lobby to manipulate Trump to allow Israel to continue the ethnic cleansing.

You know, the lobby has dispatched some decidedly unappealing characters in the United States to advance their cause. here is perhaps the most unappealing of them, but I'll let you comment. Chris, cut number six. We were hit on 9-11. We took a bigger hit than we took at Pearl Harbor. Are you aware of that? There's a lot of young people who aren't.

They're being brainwashed to the opposite. If Stalin had his way, America wouldn't have been existed. But we're told, no, no. Eisenhower was wrong. We're told Churchill's the bad guy. Hitler's misunderstood. And these guys, they are desperate for normal, regular Americans to debate them. To debate what?

They belong in a mental institution. The point is, I despise them because they're trying to use the cover of conservatism in the American flag to justify the unjustifiable. We've seen their type before, Mr. and Mrs. America. We've seen it in Europe, we've seen it in Germany, we've seen it in the United States, in the 1930s, although it wasn't this bad. They try to steal MAGA, they try to steal America first, but these people are reprobates. This is our generation's war. It's a non-fighting war. But it's more daunting.

It's more complicated because it's from within. Abraham Lincoln talked about the enemy within. President Trump has talked about the enemy within. are here. We have a responsibility as tens of millions of patriotic, America-loving people to do what? To talk. To speak out. To reject people like this. Your thoughts? Fascinating. Let me tell you what's going on here. If I'm having written a book on the Israel lobby, I understand the game that Levin is playing. Levin's principal target here, of course, is Tucker Carlson. Tucker Carlson is the most formidable threat to the Israel lobby and to Israel in the United States

today. And Levin knows that, and he's been on many platforms making explicit arguments against Tucker Carlson. Basically, what he's trying to do is portray Tucker Carlson is someone who's not patriotic, who's not American loving, and who is really the enemy within the United States. He portrays himself as America First, but that's not really true, is what Levin is saying. Now, to be perfectly clear on this, there is probably nobody in the United States who can surpass Tucker Carlson in terms of his love for America. He is an America first person to the core. It's just no question about that. And the idea that he's some inner threat to the United States is a ridiculous argument. Now, the question is, what's going on here with Levin? Why is he

making that argument? Right. The argument that Tucker is making about Levin and about the lobby itself is that they are not America first. They are Israel first. They believe that the United States should support Israel unconditionally. In other words, we should support Israel no matter what. That means when America's interests and Israel's interests are in conflict, we should support Israel. We should privilege Israel. Now, Tucker is pointing this out. He's pointing out that people like Levine are really not American firsters.

They're Israel firsters. So what Levine is doing here is he's wrapping himself in the American flag. He's trying to portray himself as the true. American, somebody who is really America first, not Israel first, which of course is not true, and at the same time portray Tucker and people of his persuasion as the inner threat or the enemy within the United States. This, of course, is a ridiculous argument, but it's part of the propaganda campaign that the lobby engages in all the time. Am I blinded by my distaste for Levin and my affection and respect and friendship and agreement with Tucker, or is it fair to say,

Levin, as their principal spokesperson, no wonder their hemorrhaging support. This is not an appealing argument. No, but Levin is a good person for them. This all shows you with desperate straits they're in, because you cannot have a reasoned argument against Tucker Carlson. If Tucker Carlson goes up against someone in the lobby and they have a reasoned debate, Carlson would cut that person from the lobby to doll rags. It would not be close. It would be Bambi versus Godzilla. So what happens here is you bring out someone like Levin and he makes all these wild charges

and he says crazy things that do convince some people. But the problem here is that so many people now are. understand what is going on, and they understand what the Levinz of the world are up to, that it has become almost impossible for them, people in the lobby, to win these kinds of arguments. Let's move on to the war in Ukraine, if we could. Do you think that President Putin is calculating a long war, taking his time to defeat the Ukrainians no matter the level of impatience in his government or amongst his

people? There's absolutely no question about it. I mean, this war, this coming February will be a four-year-old war. So we're past the three and a half year point mark now. We've already had a long war. And what's going on here is that Putin understands that given the formidable defensive positions that the Ukrainians have been fighting from in eastern Ukraine, the fact that they've been fighting from these cities and that the Russians have to go into cities and reduce the Ukrainian forces in there, he runs the risk of the Russian army suffering massive casualties. And the last thing that Putin wants to do is see huge numbers of Russians coming back in body bags. So what he's done is he's moved in a very slow and deliberate way.

And he substituted firepower for manpower in his strategy for winning this war. And when you do that, it's going to take much longer than if you just go charging forward with, you know, frontal wave attacks. So it has taken quite a bit of time because he is minimizing casualties. That's why you want to remember that all these claims that the Russians are suffering enormous casualties, they're bleeding themselves white, or false. That's not happening because the Russians are behaving in a very deliberate way. The second thing you want to remember is that this is a war that's taking place on a long front.

There are many points of contact along a front that's probably about 750 miles long. And the Russians will push in one area, and when they make a successful offensive, the Ukrainians invariably shift reserves to counter them, which weakens them in other places. The Russians then go to those other places, and they start a new offensive there. So the Russians are slowly but steadily pushing the Ukrainians back along the entire. entire front, and they are bleeding the Ukrainians white. The Ukrainians are in deep trouble, and at some point they will crack. Do you give credence Professor Meersheimer to the theory that the Russian version of the military industrial complex, which includes the intelligence

services and senior military people, want the war to go on for their own benefit, just like the American military industrial complex wants the Ukraine war to go on for their benefit. I mean, stated differently, do you sense any adversity between the sort of liberal attitude of Foreign Minister Lavrov lets end the war and reestablish normal relations with the West at a number of points? and the FSB, let's curtail the use of cell phones because they might be in the hands of Ukrainian Intel and MI6, and we've got to keep fighting this war for a long time. No, I don't see any meaningful evidence that the military industrial complex in Russia wants this war to continue, or even that the military industrial complex in the West,

or the military industrial complexes in the West want this war to continue. I think even without the war, countries in the West are going to end up spending lots of money on defense. The Europeans are committed to increasing their defense budgets, regardless of what happens in Ukraine because they've portrayed or they've convinced themselves that the Ukrainians, that the Russians are this mortal threat that they have to deal with over the long term. But more importantly, I think the political elites are in charge in every country, not the military industrial complex. And I think the political elites in every country would like to end this war. Of course, the Russians want to end it on their terms, and the Europeans and the Ukrainians want to end it on their terms.

And the fact that their terms are irreconcilable is when in this war a long war. It's not the fact that the Mick in each one of these countries is. insisting that the war go on and on. Do you detect any deleterious domestic consequences to the long war, which is now, as you say, in its fourth year? Where? I'm sorry, in Russia. No, I think that Putin has waged the war in a way that has kept the population satisfied

with his conduct of the conflict. I don't think he's caused himself's significant problems on the home front. I think at this point in time, almost everybody in Russia understands that the West is a mortal enemy. It's hard to miss that basic fact. And I think that almost everybody in Russia understands that Ukraine in NATO is an existential threat to Russia. So I think the basic goals of the war cut in a way that allows Putin to have much support or continue to have much support from below. And with regard to the conduct of the war, as I said before, Putin is doing a very smart job in terms of how he's waging the war because large numbers of Russians are not coming back in body bags. And he's also not drafting people and throwing them into a meat grinder.

The people who are fighting on the front lines are volunteers. And when you have volunteers fighting, they're not dying in large numbers, and the cause is considered to be legitimate, you're okay. And I think Putin is in a very good political position in terms of his domestic audience. President Trump has stated several times, as recently as earlier this week, that though the United States arms are going, to Ukraine. The United States is not paying for it. That is, the European governments are paying American arms manufacturers and getting licenses from the State Department to ship it directly from the manufacturers in the U.S. to Ukraine. Is that true? And if it is, where are the Europeans getting this money from? Well, it is true that we've basically stopped sending weapons that we pay

for to Ukraine, that the Europeans have to buy those weapons. They have to pay for those weapons and then give them to the Ukrainians. But the key point, which you were getting at, is that the Europeans don't have the money. It's estimated that leaving aside the weaponry that the Ukrainians need about $100 billion a year to wage the war. And the Europeans are trying to figure out where they can get $200 billion to give the Ukrainians to fund this war for Ukraine for two more years. And they don't have the money. Well, they'll have to steal it. Where will they steal it from? The Russian deposits in European banks. Yes, that's exactly right. That's what they're trying to do. But it's so far proved impossible to do that because the Belgians who

have the money and their banks are unwilling because of the threat of being sued down the road to allow that to happen. And there are other countries like Italy, France, and Germany that have cold feet as well on this issue. So it's not clear that you can get agreement inside Europe to steal this Russian money because of the long-term economic and political consequences of doing this. So it's hard to see how the Europeans are going to be able to provide sufficient funding for Ukraine to continue this war. And when you marry that to the manpower problems that the Ukrainians are having on the battlefield, you read these reports in the mainstream media about the number of desertions in the Ukrainian army. 20,000 people deserted in October. Their estimates are that there'll be 100,000 desertions this year.

This is an army that's on the ropes as it is that's badly outnumbered as it is. And when you throw in those fantastic numbers of desertions, and then you marry that to the fact that we can't support, or the Ukrainians can't support themselves financially, it's hard to see how the Ukrainians can possibly stem the tide. Professor Mearsheimer, thank you, my dear friend. I know it's not your usual day, your usual time, but it is your usual audience, and we deeply appreciate it. Safe travels. We'll look forward to seeing you next week. And I'll look forward to seeing you next week, Judge. Thank you, my dear friend. All the best. And come, if you're watching us live in 20 minutes, Pepe will be here.

I say here. God only knows where he is. But at 8.45 this morning, Pepe Escobar, at 11 this morning, on the destruction of Maga by Epstein Kirk, the response to Charlie's murder, and Israel, Max Blumenthal, and at one o'clock this afternoon, Matt Ho. Judge Napolitano for judging freedom. Thank you.