Judging Freedom - Prof. John Mearsheimer: Trump and the Russia/China Alliance.

Episode Date: January 2, 2025

Prof. John Mearsheimer: Trump and the Russia/China Alliance.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, January 2nd, 2025. Happy New Year to everyone. Professor John Mearshalmer will be here with us in just a moment. But first this. We're taught to work hard for 35 to 40 years. Save your money, then live off your savings. Unfortunately, there are too many threats undermining the value of our hard-earned dollars. The Fed's massive money printing machine is shrinking your dollar's value. Just the cost of groceries is absurd. Let me be brutally honest. I think the dollar is on its way to being extinct.

Not just here, but globally. The BRICS nations, led by Russia and China, threaten to remove the dollar as the world's reserve currency. Central banks have been shifting away from the dollar and into gold. And if we go to central bank digital currency, that will not only destroy the dollar, but we will lose our freedom. We will lose our privacy. They can track anything we do. You need to take care of yourself and your family. So here's what you need to do. Immerse yourself in knowledge and information. The writing is on the wall now is the time to consider shifting some of your dollars into gold and silver as your bedrock financial asset call my friends at lear capital the leader in precious metals investing for over 27 years

they help me diversify into gold and silver. They can help you too. Call Lear today at 800-511-4620, 800-511-4620, or go to learjudgenap.com. Professor Mears-Schoenberg, welcome here, my dear friend, and happy new year to you and your family. Thank you for all of our time together last year, and I hope we can do it again in the year that just began yesterday. Can you tell us the nature of the relationship between Russia and China at a diplomatic level? Are they allies? Do they have a mutual defense pact, or are they friends? I think they're allies. They don't have a mutual defense pact, but they have a deep-seated interest in helping each other as much as they can. I mean, you have

a similar situation with regard to Russia and Iran. It's quite clear that the United States has its gun sights on all three of those countries, and you can even throw in North Korea. And given how powerful the United States is, those countries therefore have a deep-seated interest in working together to thwart the United States at every turn. So China has a deep-seated interest in making sure that Russia doesn't lose in its war against Ukraine plus the West, and the Russians have a deep-seated interest in helping the Chinese in their battle with the United States. So these are two very close friends or allies, call them what you want. It's interesting that you mentioned North Korea. My understanding of

North Korea vis-a-vis Russia and China, and my understanding is from you, so if I've misinterpreted this, please correct me, is that the Chinese are not happy with the North Koreans and the Russians are. Well, the Chinese have their problems with the North Koreans. There's no question about that. The North Koreans are a real independent variable. They pretty much do what they want. And sometimes that causes real heartache and headache for the Chinese because the Chinese don't want the North Koreans provoking a war in East Asia. And they don't like the idea of the North Koreans angering the United States. So there's real tension sometimes between China and North Korea. And you want to remember that for China, North Korea is a very important piece of real estate. It's a buffer

state between South Korea, where the United States forces are located, and the Chinese border. And indeed, in 1953, the Chinese entered the Korean War because we had crossed the 38th parallel and were moving up towards the Chinese-North Korean border. So China and North Korea, they have a mixed relationship. At this point in time, the Russians and the North Koreans have a very good relationship, and there's no reason to think that that's going to change anytime soon. Have we been able to determine conclusively if Russian troops are in Ukraine fighting against Ukrainian troops along with Russian troops? You mean, are there North Korean troops?

I beg your pardon, if there are North Korean troops in Ukraine, yes. Thank you. I've not been able to figure out for sure what's going on there. It's so hard to say because the West and the Ukrainians have a vested interest in spinning that story to make it look like the North Koreans are deeply involved, to make the Russians therefore look more sinister and to facilitate support for aiding Ukraine down the road. And I don't trust Western propaganda or Ukrainian propaganda very much. So I don't know what to think. Yeah, and the Western and Ukrainian propaganda is that North Koreans are being slaughtered by the Ukrainian military.

Yeah, any time we're talking about numbers and you look at what the Ukrainians are saying mainly, but also the West, about the number of Russians who are dying or the number of North Koreans who are dying, you know those numbers are greatly exaggerated. It's really quite remarkable the extent to which Ukraine minimizes the number of its own casualties and maximizes the number of the Russian casualties. If anything, the Ukrainians are suffering far more casualties than the Russians. And there's all sorts of evidence of that. You know, there's been a recent spate of articles on the number of dead bodies that the Russians and the Ukrainians exchanged with each other. In other words, when people are killed in combat, the Ukrainians will return the dead bodies to the Russians and vice versa. And in the last three exchanges, there have been 10 Ukrainian bodies for every one Russian body.

And overall, if you look at the exchanges over the course of this year, it's almost an 8.5 to 1 ratio. In other words, 8.5 Ukrainian bodies for every dead Russian body. And this tells you that many more Ukrainians are dying than Russians. And given the artillery imbalance and the air power imbalance between the two sides, this is hardly surprising at all. But again, if you look at the propaganda that comes out of Ukraine that's repeated in places like the Wall Street Journal and the New York Times, you'd think the reverse was true and that the Russians were suffering 8.5.

Well, the number that we keep getting from our various colleagues on air, Larry Johnson, Alistair Crook, Scott Ritter, is that the Ukrainians have lost about 600,000 troops, which is an extraordinary amount of young men. This is not injured. This is killed. I would not be surprised at all if 600,000 Ukrainians have died. I've said before that the Ukrainians admit that roughly 80 plus percent of the casualties on the battlefield are inflicted by artillery. And if you take into account that almost all the news accounts over the course of this war have said that the Russians have somewhere between a 5 to 1 and a 10 to 1 advantage in artillery, the Russian casualties have to be much lower than the Ukrainian casualties, and the

Ukrainian casualties have to be enormous, right, just given that artillery imbalance and the fact that artillery is the principal killer on the battlefield. And you remember what I said a few minutes ago about when they exchange bodies, that there are many more Ukrainian bodies than Russian bodies. So the fact is that probably about 600,000, maybe even more Ukrainians have been killed, which is a horrifying number. Oh, my God. Right. How do you evaluate Russia today, economically, political stability, self-perception, diplomatic relations with other countries? Well, I think militarily there's no question that Russia is in much better shape today than it was at the start of the war. And General Cavoli,

who is the Supreme Allied Commander in Europe, has made this point very clear. The Ukrainian army is in much worse shape than it was when the war started, and the Russian army is in much better shape. shape politically or diplomatically, I think the Russians are in good shape. I think the Russians would prefer to have good relations with the West, especially with the United States. But given that that's not the case, I think they've done a very good job of improving their relations with the rest. And you see this, I think, reflected in the success that BRICS has had. So they're doing well diplomatically and economically, they've beaten the sanctions.

There's no question that they are suffering from high inflation rates at this point, or a high inflation rate at this point in time. But that is not, fatal flaw. And I would imagine that with the passage of time, they can fix that problem. So I think the Russians are in pretty good shape. Same question with respect to the Chinese. Economy, politics, self-perception, international relations. Well, I think the Chinese economy, by almost all accounts, is in trouble. Is it in significant trouble? I think that's too strong. But I think the Chinese have real problems at home economically, and I think that that has a political spinoff. I mean, I think the government in China,

Xi Jinping's regime, is deeply interested in trying to fix problems at home and avoid getting into trouble abroad. One might expect, given the fact that the United States is pinned down in Ukraine and pinned down in the Middle East, this would be an ideal time for the Chinese to put pressure on Taiwan or to expand into the East China Sea or the South China Sea. But you don't see much evidence of that. And in fact, what you see is that the Chinese are hunkering down at home and trying to, you know, fix their problems, mainly on the economic front, and hoping that that will then solve the political problems that they have. But the Chinese have, I think, big problems at home economically at this point in time. Do the Chinese and the Russians view the United States as morally bankrupt,

perhaps in some measure because of our funding of genocide in Gaza? I think there's no question that they view us as morally bankrupt. I think once you get outside of the West, almost everybody thinks that the United States and the Europeans are morally bankrupt. I mean, we are supporting, and I'm choosing my words carefully here, we are supporting a genocide in Gaza. And it's a genocide that people see on their computers and on their TVs on a daily basis. So they know exactly what's going on here. And the hypocrisy is just quite stunning because the West makes a big deal of the fact that it is morally virtuous, that we are an exceptional nation. We stand taller, we see

further. And when you think about the fact that we're a complicitous and a genocide, I mean, it looks like hypocrisy in the extreme. So I think outside the West, people understand full well that we are morally bankrupt. And I think even inside the West, there are lots of people who just began to lose hope that we have our moral gyroscopes in place when it comes to dealing with the Middle East. And Israel, how does it fare today, economically, politically, self-perception, diplomatically. I'm going to guess that diplomatically it's probably the most isolated country in the world. Except for in the West, because the West, you know, supports Israel unconditionally. Certainly the United States

supports Israel unconditionally. I think Israel's self-perception has improved greatly since October 7th. I think everybody would agree that the Israelis were really down and felt like they were on their way out after October 7th. What happened on October 7th was a stunning blow to their self-image. And there's no question that today they think they're in much better shape. But I'm one of those people who does not believe that Israel is in great shape today. I think Israel has all sorts of problems. As I've said before on the show, you know, despite all the talk about defeating Hamas, they have not defeated Hamas.

And in fact, there was a big piece in the Jerusalem Post yesterday that made exactly this point, that Hamas is alive and well. They have not decisively defeated Hezbollah. The Houthis are lobbying missiles at them. There are all sorts of wicked centrifugal forces at play inside of Israel that have not been resolved at all and are not going to go away in the near future. In fact, they're going to get worse with the passage of time. There's a lot made of the fact that Syria has fallen, and this is of great advantage to Israel. I think it's of some advantage to Israel in large part because it cuts off the conduit of where arms from Iran flowed to Hezbollah. So I think there's no question that the Israelis have benefited in that regard. But it's not clear that Hezbollah won't be able to solve that problem over the long term and continue to get arms from

Iran. But I don't think that the fall of Syria greatly improves Israel's strategic position. And with regard to Iran, there's all this talk about Iran now being vulnerable and the United States and Israel thinking about attacking Iran. I don't think that Iran is a big fat target for Israel and the United States. I don't think that Iran is a big fat target for Israel and the United States. I don't think that we can take their nuclear capability out over the long term. And I think Iran is going to be around for the long term. And in all likelihood, it's going to end up getting nuclear weapons. And that is the ultimate nightmare for Israel. Right. I guess your argument is that the Netanyahu rejoicing, his government's

rejoicing, and the Israeli populace rejoicing over the demise of Syria will be short-lived. I think that's true. I think that Benjamin Netanyahu is a superb politician. There's just no getting around that. The guy has nine lives and his ability to survive, you know, is really quite remarkable. And I don't want to take that away from him. And he's done a brilliant job of spinning Israel's recent successes in a way that makes it look like Israel has won a series of decisive victories and is in the catbird seat now and is going to remain that way forever. I don't think that's the case, as I just said. And one other point you do not want to lose sight of is that Israel has long prided itself on providing for its own defense. It did not want to depend

on other countries. The Israelis are now in a position where they are remarkably dependent on the United States for their security. If you look at the diplomatic constellation of forces surrounding Israel, you look at Egypt, you look at Jordan, you look at Syria, and you look at Lebanon. The United States is of great importance for helping Israel to deal with its neighbors. And in terms of military support, we provide a huge amount of money and weaponry for the Israelis. They could have never executed this genocide without support, lots of support from the United States. Plus, we provide them with diplomatic support. If the International Court of Justice or the International Criminal Court moves against Israel, we go to great lengths

to protect the Israelis. So the Israelis are heavily dependent on us. If they ever lost American support, they would be in really deep trouble. Didn't they fight wars against Egypt, Syria, and Jordan without American military support, at least not to the extent that it is today? Absolutely. In the old days, the Israelis could defend themselves. There's no question that they had to get certain armaments. Early on, it was from the French, and before that, the Czechs, and then later from the Americans. They needed armaments from abroad, but they were in a very important way an independent fighting force that could fight its own battles. That's

no longer the case. Just think about these recent conflicts where Iran launched missiles at Israel. It did it on two occasions. Iran launched missiles at Israel on two occasions. The United States played a key role in fending off those attacks. The Israelis could not do it themselves. So Israel is highly dependent on the United States. You take the Americans out of the equation, and as I said, Israel would be in real trouble. So President-elect Trump said, I think on New Year's Eve, if the hostages aren't back by the time I'm inaugurated, they'll be hell to pay. What more could he possibly do? There's nothing he can do. You know, there's this whole rhetoric that goes around these days that, thank God, Donald Trump is now in

office and Joe Biden is leaving because Joe Biden didn't do enough to help the Israelis, and Donald Trump will do enough to satisfy Israel's demands. Joe Biden basically gave the Israelis everything they wanted. Where's the evidence that Joe Biden wasn't supporting the genocide? He's called Genocide Joe for good reason. I mean, this is not a serious argument. Trump is not going to be able to give the Israelis anything that Joe is not giving them. Going back to Ukraine, Trump says, or has said, the war will be over within 24 hours as soon as he's inaugurated. Well, how can he do that? He cannot do that. I mean, he and his advisors now recognize that this is a problem that probably has no solution. Or if it has a solution, it's not an easy solution. I'm sure that they fully understand now that this is a real problem for them to solve. the Victoria Newlands, the Lindsey Grahams, the Tom Cottons, the Mike Pompeos, the neocons,

recognize that their experiment in Ukraine using it as a battering ram with which to drive Vladimir Putin from office has been a dismal, catastrophic failure? Well, I think they do believe it has been a failure so far, but they believe the situation could be rescued or can be rescued. I think that's the difference between me and you on one side and them on the other side. You and I basically think the Ukrainians are doomed, and the longer that you continue this war, the more damage you're going to do to Ukraine. And therefore, it would be good to settle this one as quickly as possible and get the best deal you can for the Ukrainians. That's their view. But on the other side, they believe that if we double down, if we recommit ourselves to helping

Ukraine, eventually we can wear the Russians down. The sanctions will eventually kick in. We can give Ukraine the weaponry it needs, and we can, you know, pull Ukraine's chestnuts out of the fire. I think this is delusional, but they, of course, have a deep-seated interest in believing this could be done, because if it's not done, and if Ukraine loses, it's going to be clear to the world that they have lots of blood on their hands. Going back to Syria, do you foresee adversity between the Israelis and the Turks over land in Syria? I've been thinking a lot about Syria, and I think that's one possibility. Another question you have to ask yourself is what about the new Syrian government and the Israelis? Do you think the new Syrian government is going to be

happy over the long term about the fact that Israel has cleaved off a big chunk of land that belongs to Syria? I don't think so. Here's the leader of the new Syrian government. A couple of months ago, he was cutting people's heads off. Listen to him today. Cut number one and cut number two, Chris. Russia is an important country and is considered the second most powerful country in the world. And there are deep strategic interests between Syria and Russia. There are deep strategic interests between Syria and Russia. Syrian weapons are all Russian. Many of the power plants are Russian with Russian expertise, and there are great cultural ties between Syria and Russia. We do not want Russia to exit Syria, as some would

like. Syria cannot continue without relations with a large regional country like Iran, but they must be based on diplomatic relations, respect for the sovereignty of the two countries, non-interference in internal affairs, and only relations that are compatible with the interests of the two countries without interfering in the matters of sectarian hatreds. We hope that the new American administration will not follow in the same approach as the previous administration in continuing these sanctions and will lift them without entering into negotiations or bargaining. His master at MI6 wrote a nice script for him. I think what's going on here is that he understands, Jelani understands, that the Russians are a potential ally, an important potential ally.

I think he understands that the Turks are an important potential ally, and maybe even the Iranians. You want to think about what was just said in those two clips that you played. One is the Syrians are interested in keeping the Russians in those two bases or at those two bases. And the Syrians are interested in talking to the Iranians, right? And we know the Syrians and the Turks are working close together today. That leaves out two important players, the Israelis and the United States. Now, you know the Israelis and the United States are joined at the hip. And the Israelis basically drive our policy towards Syria. And what Israel wants to do is it wants to break apart Syria and

keep it broken, right? The Israelis do not want a government that can control all the territory that is Syria, because that is a potential enemy. They don't want Jelani to dominate all of Syria. They want to keep Syria broken apart. And of course, this means that that's what the United States will want to do. Well, if you're running the government in Syria, you have a vested interest in working against that. And then the question is, who can you turn to to get help to deal with the Israelis and to deal with the Americans? And the answer is you start to think about the Russians, you start to think about the Turks, and you start to think

about the Iranians. And I want to underline the word think. I think that's what's going on here. I think the Syrians are coming to the realization that the real adversary is the United States, because the United States, of course, is doing Israel's bidding. And Israel wants Syria to be broken into a number of different parts. And Israel wants the freedom to roam into Syria whenever it wants and destroy this or destroy that. And of course, the Syrians don't want that. So they're looking for allies, i.e. the Russians, the Turks, and the Iranians. By the way, if that's true, the Iranians are back in Syria. That's a real possibility here. It's hard for me to believe that the new government of Syria would have the Turks as an ally. Doesn't Erdogan want a third of Syria to become part of Turkey?

Well, you want to remember that the new government in Syria was sponsored by the Turks, so they have good relations. And exactly how the Turks are now thinking about conquering territory in Syria is an open matter. We'll see. I think there's no question if the Syrians discover that the Turks want to cleave off a huge chunk of territory in the north, this will not sit well with Syria. But assuming that doesn't happen, that the Turks are smart enough to avoid trying to recreate the Ottoman Empire, you could end up with a situation, as I described to you a few minutes ago, where Syria, Turkey,

Iran, and Russia are working quite closely together to help create a stable Syria. According to Alistair Crook, on January 17, Russia and Iran will be signing a mutual defense pact. Well, this is hardly surprising. This gets back to our earlier discussion when you were asking me about Russia and China, and I threw in Iran, and then we both started talking about North Korea as well. I think the Iranians have a deep-seated interest in having close relations with the Russians, and the Russians have deep-seated interest in having close relations with the Iranians. These four countries, North Korea, China, Iran, and Russia, are mortal enemies of the United States. And I think all four of these countries have now reached the point where they understand that the United States is, and I want to emphasize this word, a mortal enemy, and that they therefore have to work together to do everything they can to contain the United States.

Professor Mearsheimer, this has been a fascinating conversation. Thank you very much for your time. Thanks for everything you did for us last year. I hope we can continue our weekly chats in the new year. Likewise, and happy new year to you and your family and to all the viewers. Thank you. Thank you, Professor Mearsheimer. All the best. Coming up at five o'clock, the always worth waiting for Max Blumenthal.

Judge Napolitano for judging freedom. Thank you.