Judging Freedom - Scott Ritter: [ScottRitter.com] - Can Ukraine Survive Trump?

Episode Date: January 23, 2025

Scott Ritter: [ScottRitter.com] - Can Ukraine Survive Trump?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, January 22nd, 2025. My dear friend Scott Ritter joins us now. Scott, I want to spend some time exploring your thoughts and observations about Ukraine in the era of President Trump. But before we do, I have to ask you questions about Israel. Is this a ceasefire or just a inauguration pause? Well, I think it's a ceasefire. At least I believe Trump wants think it's a ceasefire. At least, I believe Trump wants it to be a ceasefire. What it turns out to be, we don't know. But, you know, Israel, this isn't a gimmick by Israel. Israel was compelled to do this against its will.

The Israeli government has paid a heavy price. You know, the coalition that Netanyahu, the governing coalition is collapsing. Ben-Gavir, the extremist minister has resigned, taken his party away. Not only that, but, you know, by the last thing Netanyahu wanted was to bring these hostages home under these terms, because he is under judicial attack right now. Attack is, I mean, rightfully so. The Israeli courts are coming after him for breaking the law, for lying to the Israeli people, for misusing classified information to deceive the Israeli public about the hostages. The fact is, every hostage that died in Gaza was killed because Israel wouldn't allow them to come

home. Israel could have taken this deal that it has here at any time, but it didn't. That's not because of Hamas, it's because of Netanyahu. And so if this was a gimmick, I mean, Netanyahu is paying a huge price for this. Now, he apparently has been given a green light to clean up the West Bank. And so some people say, well, you know, he's trading the ceasefire in Gaza for, you know, moving forward in the West Bank. But, you know, that may come back to bite him as well. But I think the Trump administration is serious about bringing it into this fight because look at what's happened Trump now doesn't have to worry about going to war against Yemen because the Yemeni linked the ceasefire to their cessation of ballistic missile attacks and against Israel and attacks on Israeli shipping so that comes to an end um there's no reason for Hezbollah now to continue the fight

in defense of Hamas because there's a ceasefire. Iran, likewise, is disengaged. This creates opportunities for peace. And that's the strategic goal and objective of Trump. Now, how Israel spins this is Israel's business. But I have a feeling that there's going to be continued pressure placed on Israel not to violate the ceasefire in Gaza. Do you accept what our friend Phil Giraldi has written about? Chris Hedges has written about it as well, and that is the Stephen Witkoff articulated side deal, which is that if the IDF goes back into Gaza for any reason, even offensively, that is ostentatiously violating the ceasefire, the U.S. will back them. If Netanyahu wants to extend the settlers, you just alluded to this, by force in the West Bank, the U.S. will back them. And this horrific NSO Pegasus thing, the zero-click software, which Joe Biden stopped from being introduced

into the United States and forced the FBI to mothball, would have the sanctions lifted on it, and the Israelis can sell it here. This is the most pernicious software out there. You're probably familiar with the way it works. Do you accept the existence of that side deal? Netanyahu has alluded to the fact that he has transcripts of conversations that reflect the first two talking points. I'm not so confident as about the Pegasus software because I can't imagine the national security establishment greenlighting Israel's ability to blanket collect on Americans. I mean, this is not the, we know that Israel spies on us on a regular basis. We know Trump administration knows that as well.

And so let's sit there and say, well, we know you're spying on us. So here, let's help you spy on us more efficiently. I have trouble with that. But the first two, I'll modify the first statement.

It's not that Israel can go in any time. I believe that it is if Hamas violates the ceasefire and Israel is compelled to return to Gaza, that the United States will back Israel's decision to do that and whatever tactics Israel employs that we won't tie their hands. But I don't think, because then there's, if it is, oh, Israel can do anything at once, then there's no reason to have a ceasefire. I do believe that the ceasefire is serious and that if Hamas abides by its obligations, that the Trump administration will not greenlight an Israeli offensive back into Gaza. Does the U.S. foreign policy establishment, do the Zionists in the U.S. foreign policy

establishment, which is many of them, maybe most of them, understand that Netanyahu is not worthy of belief or trust? First of all, let's start with the Zionist-in-Chief, the President of the United States. He knows that. Why do you think he reposted Jeffrey Sachs' damning commentary on Netanyahu. He knows the truth about Netanyahu. I think that many of the pro-Israeli, pro-Zionist elements within the United States government, within the Trump administration, have a similar approach towards Benjamin Netanyahu. He's a liar, a cheat. He's not a friend of the United States. And when you're operating at that level, you know, you do get access to the counterintelligence briefings about what Netanyahu does against the United States, you know, ostensibly behind our backs. He's not a friend of America. And everybody in power knows that.

But what they're doing is they're separating their disdain for Netanyahu, the man, with their support of Israel, the nation, and Zionism. Has he overplayed his hand? Has he just sucked dry too much from the U.S.? I think so. I think he's at the point right now where he's a useful tool, but he's no longer a friend and an ally. Is Trump going to be under his sway the way Biden was? No. Look, Trump, like I said, he reposted Jeffrey Sachs, a condemnation of Netanyahu. It's the other way around. Look, in the first term, Trump was very much under his sway.

Netanyahu briefed Trump and sort of owned Trump, got inside Trump's head. But I think Trump, in the intervening time, learned a lot about Netanyahu and how he operates and understands that Netanyahu is not his friend. And I think Trump today is viewing Netanyahu as a useful tool, but not a friend or an ally. Here's an ally of Donald Trump who will be whispering in Trump's ear on an almost daily basis. And he wants Trump, you'll know who this is, to bomb Iran. Cut number four. This war will never end with Hamas in charge of Gaza, politically or militarily. Their days are numbered. And the next question for the world is what do we do about the Iran nuclear program? That's where we're going to move to next.

There's diplomacy. There's a one in three chance you'll degrade the Iranian nuclear program through diplomacy. There's a 90% chance you'll degrade it through military action by Israel supported by the United States. So the next topic I will be engaging in with President Trump is to take this moment in time

to decimate the Iran nuclear program because they're so exposed. Help Israel deliver a knockout blow. What does that mean? You're going to urge him to have Israel bomb Iran's facilities that are underground and would require U.S. military support to actually be effective? I'm going to urge the decimation of the Iranian nuclear program. I don't think diplomacy works.

This is a religious Nazi regime. They want to destroy the Jewish state. They want to purify Islam and drive us out of the Mideast. It would be like negotiating with Hitler. I am hoping there will be an effort by Israel to decimate the Iran nuclear program supported by the United States. And if we don't do that, it will be a historical mistake. Man, he gets worse with the passage of time. Yeah, I think he didn't read the memo. Trump is moving away from imperialistic wars of choice. Trump ran on a platform that said, we're going to get out of these war entanglements in the Middle East,

that the policies of us going in and playing policemen are failed policies and we don't want that. Lindsey Graham didn't get the memo. Or if he did, he's just so hate-filled that he just refused to talk. There is not a snowball's chance in hell that Donald Trump's going to do anything that Lindsey Graham just said. Not a snowball's chance in hell. Donald Trump's going to do anything that Lindsey Graham just said. Not a snowball's chance in hell. Everything's moving in the other direction. I know that Bibi will try and drag Trump. Not at all.

It won't even start. The conversation won't even begin. Because, first of all, Israel can't attack Iran without us. And we're just not going to play that game. And I'm pretty sure we're on record with Netanyahu that that's just not going to happen. Trump has said, go back in the campaign, that he wants to have negotiations with Iran about their nuclear program that lead to the lifting of sanctions and the normalization of relations. That's the president of the United States. That's the man who was just sworn in. You know who wasn't sworn in as the commander inin-chief of the United States of America? Lindsey Graham. Lindsey Graham is a hate-filled,

I'm not going to say it, but you know what I mean. He is a horrible American, a horrible human being, and I don't know why the people of South Carolina keep voting him into office, but he's a pimple on the bottom of history right now. That's it. That's his only function. There's nothing about what he said in terms of Israeli policy that's going to come true. That's the exact opposite direction that President Trump wants to lead the United States. Are Israel and Iran preparing for war against each other as we speak, Scotty? No. The fact is the head of the Iranian Revolutionary Command just came out and said that, for instance,

Operation True Promise 3, the massive 1,000 missile attack, everybody, he said, that's off table. We're not going to do that. We're not looking to have a war with Israel. That's not what we want to do that. We're not looking to have a war with Israel. That's not what we want to do. And right now, the Iranian president has the concurrence of the Supreme Leader, Ali Khamenei, to pursue diplomatic discussions with the United States with an eye of bringing this nuclear issue under control to the point where the United States can begin lifting economic sanctions. That's the strategic direction that Iran wants to go into,

that the United States wants to go into. And frankly speaking, Israel at this point in time also wants to. And look, even the Israelis are saying after the collapse of Israel, Project Iran, which was their giant project that Benjamin Netanyahu has been promoting since 1995, that's no longer important. Israel is now talking about Turkey and the threat, the long-term threat that a resurgence of Ottomanism, resurgence of the Ottoman Empire in Turkey represents. And that, I think you're seeing a strategic shift in Israel as well. So Lindsey Graham, once again, is just out in left field.

And I just I'm dismissive of the television anchor that was questioning him. I'm afraid I don't know who she is. She had an implication in one of her questions. I wonder if it's correct. that the Israelis would be unable to destroy the Iranian underground development of nuclear materials without U.S. aid. Is that true? That is 100% correct. Okay. Now to a cut on tape that I think you will have the opposite view of as we segue into Ukraine, Trump and Putin. Chris, cut number eight. We've heard his commitment to do everything to prevent World War III. Of course, we welcome this approach and we congratulate the newly elected President of the United States on his inauguration.

We have never been against dialogue. We have always been ready to maintain peaceful relationship with any American administration. I have said that many times. We would love to see the dialogue built upon equality and mutual respect, considering the common positions on our country on a number of international issues, including strengthening security and political stability. We're also open for dialogue with the new US administration on the Ukrainian conflict. The most important thing here is to eliminate the fundamental reason for the conflict. That's the most important. And as for settling the situation itself, its goal should be not a brief ceasefire, not just getting some time to regroup and rearm and carry on the conflict, but long-term peace based on respect to lawful interests of all people and nationalities living in the region. And of course, we're going to fight for the interests of Russia and its people.

This is actually the goal and point of the special military operation. That is a serious diplomat, a serious leader. Articulate, clear, crisp, open-minded? No doubt about it. I mean, there's a reason why Vladimir Putin is the leader he is. There's a reason why Russia is where it is today. Is he perfect? No. Has Russia made mistakes? Of course. But the bottom line is Russia has never deviated from its strategic objectives, its stated strategic objectives when it comes to the special military operation. And those strategic objectives remain the same today.

Ukraine will never be a member of NATO. And never means never. Not in 10 years, 20 years. That's the General Kellogg nonsense. We'll delay their entry for 10 years. That's a non-starter, and the general must know that by now. Everybody knows that by now, even Trump. But the general keeps repeating the propaganda. Two, there won't be a frozen conflict. If you saw, you know, Putin was very diplomatic,

and he said, you know, we're not looking to have a ceasefire so people can rearm. Russia has, through tremendous cost to itself, achieved the strategic initiative and dominance in this conflict, a war of attrition, where Russia has achieved the mathematical dominance over Ukraine. Russia has won the war of attrition. Ukraine today is collapsing on the front line. And Russia will continue to keep making the advances that it's making. There's nothing Ukraine can do to stop it. There's no amount of equipment or manpower that can be brought in to stabilize this situation. The attrition machine is so much in favor of Russia right now that it just grinds away whatever the Ukrainians throw at it. Why would Russia stop the conflict and allow a reset so everything Russia has sacrificed for over the course of the last three years will be thrown away? Russia is just not going to do that. There

will be no ceasefire until the terms that are acceptable to Russia have been agreed to. Russia is not going to stop in a good faith measure and let Ukraine rebuild, let the West rearm, let NATO think that it can intervene. Right now, the entire West is off balance because of the victories being won by the Russian forces, by the supremacy of Russian defense industry, by the superiority of the Russian economy. And so Russia is not going to concede any of these advantages to allow the President of the United States to get a politicized talking point. If Trump is serious about peace, frankly speaking, he needs to fire Keith Kellogg,

or at least silence him, and bring in better advisors. Trump, if you're listening, call me. I'm very happy to talk to you about it. I wish he would call you. The show was Face the Nation. The questioner was Margaret Brennan. She asked a great question. And that was Vladimir Vos listening on audio only. That, of course, was President Putin on the day of Trump's inauguration yesterday uh Trump said the following uh about the war in Ukraine cut number 13. President Zelensky would like to have peace he's told me that very strongly he'd like to have peace but it takes two to tango we'll see what happens anytime they want I'll meet I'd like to see that end. Millions of people are being killed,

and they're being killed. It's a vicious situation. And they're now largely soldiers. A lot of people have been killed in the cities. They look like demolition sites. The thing with Ukraine is that many more people died than you're reporting. You're not reporting the real numbers. And I'm not blaming you for that. I'm blaming maybe our government for not wanting to release those numbers. Many more people died than what you know about. Do you know what he means when he says

many more people died than what you know about? He doesn't even know what he means with all due respect to the president. He's repeating garbage numbers given to him by Keith Kellogg. Keith Kellogg has said that 700,000 Ukrainians all the president he's repeating garbage numbers uh given to him by keith keller keith kellogg you know has said that 700 000 ukrainians and over a million russians have died well there's no evidence for that not a million russians look the the the bbc and meduza who are not pro-russia pro-friendly have done um a deep dig into you know russian obitu. And what we can get from this data, which roughly correlates,

is that around 90,000 Russian soldiers from the Ministry of Defense have been killed in the fighting since the special military operation began. Just to put this in perspective, the United States lost 58,000 Americans in 10 years of fighting in Vietnam, and that's a national tragedy. So in three years, Russia's lost 90,000. Now, this doesn't include the casualties from the Donetsk Republic or the Lugans're getting in the area of around 150,000, 160,000 dead. You can add on to that, say, three times that number. You're probably looking at a number of around 500,000 wounded. So a total of between 650,000, 700,000 casualties total for Russia. That's huge. It's a big deal. But it's not a million dead. The Ukrainians, on the other hand, we're talking about a minimum of 700000 dead, possibly up to 1.1 million dead.

And then you add on to that the wounded. And, you know, we're talking about multiple millions. That's the number that Trump might be saying we are being underreported. But the matter is, it's Ukraine that suffered the casualty. There's a reason why Russia is winning the war of attrition. And it's because they're killing more Ukrainians. Right. What is the status of the Ukrainian and NATO-backed incursion into Kursk? Well, I mean, you know, they put their best-trained and best-equipped troops

into this effort, and they have dug in. And so the Russians are doing what the Russians do, which is a slow attrition-based approach towards eliminating Ukrainian positions. If you take a look at the rate of advance in Kursk, it matches the rate of advance of some of the most heavily defended sections of the Donetsk Republic where the Russians are still advancing you know, advancing slowly a kilometer here, a kilometer there, a kilometer here. That's what the Russians are doing in Kursk. Russia will liberate all of Kursk, but they're not going to sacrifice. You don't win a war of

attrition by giving the enemy an opportunity to kill you. And you know the Russians will use their firepower superiority to grind down the enemy and slowly push them out of of territories and that's what's happening the Russians are pushing the Ukrainians out killing the Ukraine system launched a counter-offensive uh timed with Trump's inauguration everything's political for them the idea is they thought they're going to come in and give Russia a black eye. The counteroffensive fizzled. Pretty much the entire counterattacking force was destroyed. Now the Russians are back to driving the Ukrainians back. Do we know, Scott, if the United States Department of Defense is still operating under orders issued by Lloyd Austin and Joe Biden to deliver military equipment to Ukraine? Or has that stopped since the

inauguration? There was a report that's gotten a lot of play that, you know, the Trump administration has frozen everything and relieved the entire team. I find that difficult to believe. First of all, many of the people implementing these policies are career military officers simply executing the orders. Why would you fire them? The second thing is that that would be conceding everything to Trump, I mean, to Putin. Basically, if that's true, that means Trump has made a decision to freeze, to deny Ukraine critical assistance for a period of 30, 40, 90 days. That would be saying we want Russia to win. Here, Trump is trying to be the tough guy. I mean, he issued another statement today,

we can do it the hard way, he said. Well, you can't do it the hard way if you freeze supply and all that. So I think that that report is inaccurate. What do you think he'll do? I mean, Zelensky can't even run the government if we stop the spigot of cash. Am I right? Yeah, no. Zelensky's in a panic. I don't know if you saw him in Davos.

He's starting to lash out against the United States. He sees the handwritings on the wall that it's game, set, match. It's over. He's already condemning the United States. He's already critical of Europe. It's not going to be a good time for

Zelensky. It's never pretty when these failed adventures collapse. And Zelensky is the leader of an entity that we created for the purpose of bringing harm to Russia. And Russia has succeeded in two and three years in defeating that, turning the tables. And we're in the end game status of it. It's either going to be a negotiation where Trump concedes everything to Russia that Russia wants, or it's going to be the Russians rejecting any intervention by Trump and gaining what they want through military force. One can end the war shorter with fewer loss of lives. The other

one will take longer, maybe even another year. But Russia is going to win no matter what. That's where we're at in this stage. There's nothing Donald Trump can do to reverse that. He doesn't have the defense industry to do it. He doesn't have the military to do it. He doesn't have the equipment to do it. Here's President Zelensky yesterday at his inarticulate best cut number 10. But will President Trump listen to Europe? Or will he negotiate with Russia and China without Europe?

Europe needs to learn how to fully take care of itself so that the world can't afford to ignore it. It's vital to maintain unity in Europe because the world can't afford to ignore it. It's vital to maintain unity in Europe, because the world doesn't care about just Budapest or Brussels. It cares about Europe as a whole.

Do you know what he's talking about? No, he doesn't know what he's talking about. I mean, he's trying to create something that doesn't exist, which is an independent, decisive Europe that acts free of American influence or direction. Does he think that Europe will come to his rescue once Trump turns off the spigot? I don't know if he thinks that. He's hopeful. He's praying. He's trying to create the conditions for that. But I was listening to other statements he made. I think he fully understands what's about to happen.

That's the total abandonment of Ukraine. Will the U.S. have to replace him since Putin won't speak with him? Yeah, I mean, this thing doesn't end with Zelensky in power. That's just a sad reality. Russia will not compromise on that. Remember, Russia, and Putin has said this, and Trump has alluded to this as well, you don't want to create a cessation of hostilities that retains the underlying problems that will only, if they're not resolved, will lead to the resumption of fighting two, three, five years from now. Marco Rubio, the new Secretary of State, said that as well. Zelensky is a problem that if left in will only lead to problems.

Russia will not allow a Zelensky-like government to stay in power. Russia wants that government removed and replaced with a government that will do Russia's bidding, will change the Constitution of Ukraine, to denazify Ukraine, to get rid of the Banderas, etc. That's the reality. And this is a reality that Trump is going to have to accept. Scotty, thank you very much, my dear friend. Your analysis on both hotspots is so excellent, deeply and profoundly appreciated. Thank you, my dear friend. Well, thanks for having me.

Sure. We'll see you again soon. All the best. We have a very exciting day for you tomorrow. Tony Schaefer, Gilbert Doctorow, Dr. Rand Paul, who's accused Tony Fauci of perjury, Kevork Almassian, Colonel Larry Wilkerson, Professor John Mearsheimer, Professor Jeffrey Sachs, and Colonel Douglas McGregor. Wow. I better get my rest. Judge Napolitano for judging freedom. Thank you.