Judging Freedom - Russia advances its Ukraine offensive

Episode Date: July 22, 2022

Jack Devine - fmr CIASee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

This new year, why not let Audible expand your life by listening? Audible CA contains over 890,000 total titles within its current library, including audiobooks, podcasts, and exclusive Audible Originals that'll inspire and motivate you. Tap into your well-being with advice and insight from leading professionals and experts on better health, relationships, career, finance, investing, and more. Maybe you want to kick a bad habit or start a good one. If you're looking to encourage positive change in your life one day and challenge at a time, look no further than Tabitha Brown's I Did a New Thing, 30 Days to Living Free. In the audiobook, Tab shares her own stories and those of others alongside

gentle guidance and encouragement to create these incredible changes for yourself and see what good can come from them. Trust me, listening on Audible can help you reach the goals you set for yourself. Start listening today when you sign up for a free 30-day trial at audible.com slash wonderyca. That's audible.com slash wonderyca. That's audible.com slash wonderyca. Hi, everyone. Judge Andrew Napolitano here for Judging Freedom. Today is Friday, July 22, 2022. It's about 3.40 in the afternoon here on a hot and steamy east coast of the United States.

My guest today is no stranger to all of you who watch us. Jack Devine is a former senior official in the Central Intelligence Agency with a specialty and expertise on Russian espionage. And he joins us now, and he's one of our regulars. Jack, it's always a pleasure. Welcome back to the show, my friend. Good to be back with you, Judge. So from your empirical observations and from your communications with your present and former colleagues, isn't it pretty clear that this war in Ukraine is over and the Russians have won?

Well, Judge, nothing like a stunning open hearth. So no, I don't think they've won at all. I love you. I love you so much, Jack. I like to give you these tough ones to start with. Well, it's not uncommon, Judge, that you and I aren't exactly on the same point on every issue. So I think I'd rather describe there's almost like a stalemate

developing okay the russians cannot occupy ukraine they cannot occupy the whole country they cannot bring it into their orbit they might get some of the you know they'll get the dumb bus but the ukrainians aren't quitting and this really once if we keep the resolve on this, let me just make, the Russians can only fight so long. They can only provide so much weaponry. Same on our side. We can only fight so long, right, and it boils down. But right now, the Russians gained a little territory. But, you know, weapons are pouring into, pouring in may not be the right word, but important weapons are going to Ukraine.

And I think we're looking at a stalemate. But Putin will not give in. And Zelensky's not going to give in. So, you know, we can get a peace agreement. I don't think so. Does President Putin want to occupy the whole country? Does he want to take over Kyiv? Or is he satisfied with those two regions, which in America we're calling Donbass, which is really more than that,

which he now occupies and controls? He had huge ambitions. I mean, for years, Russia is a relatively small player economically, politically. There is oil, for sure. You know, but, you know, when you get beyond this, a one-product economy, largely. His invasion, you remember, it started at Kiev. I mean, they were going to Kiev. They were trying to bring down the government. There's no question.

See, when they went in in 2014, they really rolled in pretty effectively. And they thought for sure it was a rerun. They were told the West wouldn't, they would roll over. His intelligence was terrible. So I think it's a different issue. I think he wanted it because Russia with Ukraine has a different place in history whenever they have the Ukraine as part of their system. The economic base, agricultural base, and the talent of Ukrainians. So it's something he wanted. He may now have to be satisfied with a small slice. He's got to convince people that the small slice was a victory, but he won't convince me. I think he's hurting. Is he satisfied with the land that he now has? Do you think the Ukrainians could win that

land back if Americans supplied them with the military equipment that they're looking for? Well, this is a really important call. This, in other words, if the Ukrainians decide they're going to get it all back, this will be a protracted conflict. Russia cannot let them, whatever it takes, Putin cannot afford, or he might as well just, you know, go out to Siberia and find a little hut and, you know, blow out his brains, not to be too graphic. But my point is, if he loses Donbass, it's not sustainable politically. But the Ukrainians could make life really miserable for him. And the other thing that Putin is very interested in watching, there's a grain deal that may take place. Looks like they've signed documents. That doesn't mean

it's going to happen exactly. But there's a little bit a little the oil a little bit of that's going up I'm beginning to wonder if he's trying to find something that looks normal that this is kind of normal and what I have is we're going to settle for this but there's he's not going to say he's going to settle for it so I think we're seeing signs here that he's maybe trying to stabilize the situation because he knows he can't go any further. Just one note, he's banking on us folding. In other words, he's banking that we will not stay the course with him because if we do, his life will be, his situation will be much worse. Right now, Jack, you just used two interesting pronouns. He's banking on us folding, and if we do, is this a proxy war between the United States

and Russia? That's not how it started. It was just an aggressor invading a country, right? Now it's turned into somewhat of a proxy war now because Europe, all of Europe knows this story of the invasion, you know, when one party invades another part of Europe. They've seen throughout history, horrible things. So that's why they've got their backup. So yeah, I think once he went in, it eventually evolved in it, but it never started that way. The US wasn't interested in the war. Let me tell

you, every intel person, every pilot, all about China. Don't worry about Russia. Right, don't worry about it. That's why I wrote a box, and he's counting on us, thus being the NATO and the U.S. and some selected other allies, to fall. He thinks the election will come. That will change things. I think he's terribly overestimating that. That may be the only thing that Democrats and Republicans

agree on. And I think he's counting on, you know, the economic situation that we won't have the ability that he will have because he will crush

his people rather than yield. Do we have American boots on the ground in Ukraine but out of uniform? Are special ops there dressed as civilians?

I don't know the answer. I would say, A, I don't think so. B, I hope not. Now, I had the experience in Afghanistan in the effort to get the Russians out. We never had U.S. troops on the ground. And the reason was if we were, then it was going to be the U.S. against Russia in Afghanistan. So we were very, very careful. I think the chief out there let Charlie Wilson think he was in Afghanistan when he was in the mountains of Pakistan. But we were meticulous. You don't have to be there on the ground in this particular case. You can train in other places.

And what I've read, let me put it what I've read, you know, we've done a lot of training the last few years. In other words, they are much better repaired now. Their strategies, weapons, and I think the Russians showed themselves to have a pretty weak army and surprised all of us. Your former colleague, Phil Giraldi, quoted President Biden in Poland two and a half weeks ago as saying to American troops, you're going to Ukraine, and then he sort of, as he likes to do, whispered or mumbled with his hand over his mouth, some of you have already been there.

Is that true? I'm highly skeptical. Think if you lose an American. Now, there are contractors. There are American former this and former that's in there on contract. I'm talking about active duty military regular army. Yeah, and I think that's highly unlikely. And if those guys are there.

But I don't see it. I think this is the political risks are high, and I'm not sure exactly why that would be necessary. If they're there, and they're out of uniform, and they get captured, they do not have the protections of the Geneva Convention. They can be summarily executed as spies. That's another reason why I'm skeptical. We know that. I mean, people know that. Why put somebody at risk? You don't have to. There's a lot of people that have served around the world that you can send in there and Ukrainians can come out and then go back in. I mean, that's not a problem with the border.

I don't see the need. I really, you know. What information is Intel giving to the president? Are they telling him what they think he wants to hear? Are they giving him a true feel for Russian dominance in eastern Ukraine? I've known a lot of analysts and I've been in the process myself. 95% of my career was in the operational side, but I was responsible in a couple of key places for the analytical product, what actually goes to the president and policy people.

The integrity of the reporting historically has been very, that doesn't mean it's not, that mean it's right or that, I mean, sometimes it's wrong, but the integrity, and I'll just give you one example. You know, if if you tried if I tried to change an analyst report, because I didn't think the sentence was clear is politicalization. But the point was, most of them really took great pride in your product and didn't like you to fiddle with it. And if you'll humor me for a second, I was very proud when I

was head of the counter-narcotics program. We wrote a community report saying the drug problem is going to get worse. Everyone else said it wasn't. We dissented. We dissented on our own product. We said our own product is flawed and you should listen. That's when you have a dynamic. All right.

But does Intel do this... I think he's getting the right... That doesn't mean it's right, but he's getting it the way they really see it. Okay. Why did Ukraine just fire their chief prosecutor and their head of Intel?

Oh, you love these questions. I know you know the answer, and maybe you can't say, but tell us what you can say. Well, it's interesting. If you're sitting in Ukraine, I mean, I think there – I actually don't want to inflame some things that I think are really small potatoes, but let me come to this. I think they felt under pressure, real or unreal, that they had to show that they were moving on corruption, and there were critics out there saying there were too many pro-Russian people around Zelensky. And I would say, well, if they're pro-Russian and Zelensky's doing what he's doing, you know, put a couple more of them in there, right? But there were people that have a different view of Russian. So I think there was tremendous

pressure to take action. The wording is very careful. The wording is it wasn't because they are either a spy or they did something wrong. They just didn't get it right, which is a little bit different. In other words, they didn't see the situation coming, but I think it's what they call a political firing, which I hate. I only saw one of them in the agency, and I raised hell because you don't fire people politically inside the CIA. You fire them because of incompetence, not because we've got to appease Congress because they feel something may or may not be true.

You've got to stick with the facts. Anyway, this is a political firing, and I think there's a tendency to read more into it than I think really is warranted. When is the Biden administration going to stop sending billions in cash and in hardware to the Ukrainians? I mean, how much longer can this go on, Jack? Well, where we began is I think we're heading into a stalemate which will naturally require less resources on the military side. But Judge, that country has been ruined from houses, hospitals. There is a rebuild that will be massive. So if anyone thinks there's a peace dividend at the end of this, they're mistaken.

Because my sense in everything I've read is there's a lot of discussions taking place in the capitals in Europe and the United States. Well, what will that rebuild look like? And I don't want to rattle your cage, but, you know, a trillion dollars is not outlandish. taking place in the capitals in Europe and the United States. Well, what will that rebuild look like? And I don't want to rattle your cage, but a trillion dollars is not outlandish. Oh, my goodness. But certainly hundreds of millions of dollars over a five-year period. All right, let me ask you about the political rebuild. I mean, what will the new Ukraine look like?

Will it be truly neutral? Will it be a part of the EU? Will it be a part of NATO? Will it be pro-West? Will it be pro-Russian? I mean, Putin cannot afford a truly independent Western allied Ukraine having a common border with Russia. He simply can't afford it. He created just that. He personally created it because it's in the West. It's an ally. Now, NATO is like thumb in your eye.

Maybe we don't want to go there, but he's in you. He's on the other side of the fence. There were more people that were ambivalent about Russia in the Ukraine until he invaded. And now I know a lot of Ukrainians try and find somebody that thinks Russians can find anybody, you know,

because they've all shut up and gone away. So he's created that environment. How popular is President Putin with the elites, with the governmental people around him, with the intelligence community, and with the person in the street in Russia? I think this is a fabulous question because I think the elites, like many, are not stupid. They know what happened.

They know he went in and he got it wrong and that they're paying a price, right? They know that they are not part of civil society now. You know, their yachts, you know, they're not going to be able, they're not going to be welcome to parties anywhere. So the elites are not happy. The intelligence services and the military, my sense of it is they didn't want this war.

This is not helpful. Look how they look, right? So I think they're not happy. They think it was a bad decision. Some of them believe that. Others believe it but won't say it. No one's going to say it. Now, where it gets tricky is with the populace.

But you don't have enough political juice to have action. I'm just telling you discontent but afraid of Putin and afraid to do anything or tell anybody they might do something. Is he locking people up? Well, I heard maybe as many as 5,000. Now,

the other thing, how long are they locked up? He's doing a lot of suppression in the social media, not Google all somewhere but he's i think that was i don't want to get that wrong but my point is there's a lot of he's he's clamping down you know you better be you better walk in step a lot of people self censor self-discipline themselves because they don't want to take a chance. But I did want to make just one point about it.

He has a strong constituency there that is unreconstructed. In other words, they actually felt comfortable in the Stalinist world. Some population, some part of that population identifies with old Russia, the Soviet Union. He has substantial support, particularly out of the big cities in the cosmopolitan. The other thing that he said, which you will regret that he meant it, a lot of the best people have left.

So some of the best people that could make an opposition left. But it leaves the country with, you know, missing a generation of the best and brightest, which somebody's going to pay for over time. I think he has plenty of support still, but it's the type of thing, his feet are of clay.

If it starts to go, then you'll see all the people that I told you I wasn't with them. He's a lot more vulnerable than he may realize in the West. He will fall of his own. I've said this in March with the Wall Street Journal. He will fall of his own weight.

He's created his own demise and it'll be the Russian people. And for God's sakes, the US don't run covert operations in there because it only strengthened his hands. It will happen. He has created those conditions. Last series of questions. How is his health? You know, look at him holding the edge of the table.

Look, he has his face is swollen. My wife's hairdresser in New York said he's a Russian. He said, oh, that's Botox. But my point is, how sick is he? Look at him. I mean, I mean- Jack, he used to run a thousand CIA agents and you're basing your judgment on your wife's hairdresser?

No, but see, he wanted me around to Botox. My point is, he may have something, but it's not, in my view, it's not, in my view, it's not impacting on his ability to be one of the meanest, nastiest autocrats in history. He's among the elite now. So he may have pathological issues. He may have some health issues.

But he is still functioning. Tell me when he's not functioning and I'll tell you, okay, now we have a serious medical issue. This has been every president, every autocrat, we always are writing these about the doctor. We run around collecting urine samples to prove that his enzymes are up or whatever. But they go on. Look at Casper, they go on. So I wouldn't count on that. I would just, yeah, you know, it's part of a game that's played when you look at people you don't like. Jack, agree or disagree, you're a great guy and appreciate you coming on. We'll check in with you again in a couple of weeks. See if the status of the conflict is as you have maintained. Always a pleasure, my friend. I can always count on fun questions.

Thank you. But look, they ought to be discussed. Thank you. Thank you. Judge Napolitano for judging freedom.