Judging Freedom - Scott Ritter - Ukraine Russia UPDATE

Episode Date: May 18, 2022

#Ukraine #scottritter #russiaSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Hi everyone, Judge Andrew Napolitano here for Judging Freedom. Today is Wednesday, May 18, 2022. It's 1145 in the morning. My guest is the former Marine and intelligence professional Scott Ritter, who has been Judging Freedom's go-to guy and remains Jud judging Freedom's go-to guy and remains judging Freedom's go-to guy for intelligence and military analysis of the military activities in Ukraine between the Ukrainian forces and the Russian forces. Scott is also the guest that produces the most viewers, which every time he has been on has exceeded 100,000. My thanks to you for following us, and Scott, my thanks to you for being here as always. Welcome to Judging Freedom. Thanks for having me. morning when I woke up and before I had a cup of espresso and after I said my morning rosary, I turned to LewRockwell.com, which is the website that I visit every day and

which carries my column on Thursdays. And I see the lead story saying Scott Ritter switcheroo. And I thought, well, it's got to be some sort of a joke. And it's quoting you with a substantially different analysis of the chances of the ukrainian forces effectively resisting russian forces than has been the analysis that i've heard you articulate on this show is that a fair summary of what i read and we sent it to you, so you read it as well. That's a fair summary of the author's assessment and take. Yeah. Okay.

So have you changed your view? Has information or intelligence or awareness of military data come to you, which causes you to look at the Ukraine-Russian conflagration in a different way than you've articulated on this show before today? One of the first things you learn in the military, especially military intelligence, is A, no plan survives initial contact with the enemy. B, no plan survives contact with the enemy., if you get married to a course of action, you're going to be defeated. Things change. Let me make it clear right off the stop. Russia is winning the war on the ground. Nothing's changed. We see that today with the surrender of hundreds of personnel from Azovstal. We see that with the ongoing special hundreds of uh of personnel from uh as of stall we see that with

the ongoing special military operation on the ground uh where russia is grinding away at the ukrainian forces they've already achieved an important uh pocket in the severed donetsk surrounding hundreds about thousands of ukrainian soldiers uh and and And their victory in the Donbass region is inevitable. There's nothing that's going to happen that changes that. But when Russia started the special military operation, they had two primary military objectives and one political objective, a very important political objective that had two parts. The primary military objectives were denazification.

We see that taking place in Mariupol. They've destroyed the Azov regiment. They're in the process of destroying other far right-wing neo-Nazi, ultra-nationalist military units. So this is an ongoing success. Demilitarization was another one. This meant destroying that aspect of the Ukrainian military that had beenality on the part of Ukraine, that Ukraine could never join NATO, never consider joining NATO and be neutral in perpetuity. And two, to transform the special military operation into an event that changed the outlook of NATO so that it would accept a new European security framework along the lines which Russia had transmitted to the West in December of last year. Now, when this conflict first started, the United States had been providing hundreds of millions of dollars

worth of military aid, including lethal aid to the Ukrainians, primarily in the form of Javelin anti-tank rockets. The British provided their own and so did other NATO members. But these light weapons were not sufficient to change the nature of the battle. But since then, things have changed. Since the last time we spoke to President Biden, you know, his is signed into law a new Lend-Lease Act that opens the door for tens of billions of dollars worth of military aid package. Now we're talking sums that equal the amount of money Russia spends on the totality of its military budget in one year. Let me just stop you to make sure I understand this correctly, Scott. The $40 billion aid package, the one that Rand Paul tried to stop and 11 Republican senators voted against and President Biden has since signed into law, that $40 billion alone, which when added to what we've already sent comes to $53 billion, the $40 billion alone to aid Ukraine is more than Russia spends all year on its entire military?

Yeah. When you add the $40 billion with the other thing, we get the $53 billion figure. That's more than Russia spends in an entire year on its entire military. Now, if you don't think that that alters the reality somewhat and what it does, and it's that combined with another thing that you heard, which is that in Poland and in Germany, as we speak, thousands of Ukrainian soldiers are at American and Polish military bases being trained on high-tech equipment. Now, normally, in a time of war, those kind of locations would be targeted and bombed and destroyed and disrupted. But they're not. NATO has created a strategic depth to this conflict that didn't exist when this conflict started. of the location of the stockpiles of equipment and where American troops or American human beings, I don't know if they're soldiers or not, are training Ukrainians? They're aware of what's going on in Poland. They're aware of what's going on in Germany.

Absolutely. But it would be an attack against NATO that would trigger Article 5, collective self-defense. So Russia is not going to take that step. The other thing is, you know, one would say, OK, that's fine. But then Russia could interdict this equipment as it comes in. And I think I and others anticipated that Russia would have a greater success rate of interdiction based upon earlier performance. And, you know, but I was as surprised as anybody to find that complete batteries of the M777 howitzers were appearing on the front lines and being employed against Russian troops. Now, it doesn't change the outcome of the fight, but it changes the political nuance of what we're talking about here, because you can't demilitarize an enemy that

is reconstituting forces as quick as you are destroying them this elongates the conflict and it also emboldens zelensky not to achieve a a you know an outcome to this conflict. It means that Ukraine will extend this conflict. There won't be the permanent neutrality that Russia is demanding anytime soon. And it's also emboldening NATO and others to expand NATO. Finland and Sweden are now applying for membership. This is the exact opposite direction that Russia wanted to take this from a political standpoint. So my argument is that the fundamental reality of this war has changed. We have to recognize that it has changed. It doesn't mean Russia isn't going to win special military operations. They are, as we speak. What it means is that the conflict has gone beyond what it was when the special military operations started. And does Russia have sufficient military force

to change that outcome? And I feel it is- Last time, the last two or three times we spoke, and I don't know if you accidentally touched your microphone or moved it. Maybe you can get a little closer to your face. Okay. Okay. Thank you. That happens. The last few times we spoke, you were critical of the American government for supplying material to the Ukrainians, which effectively extended the war, resulted in needless deaths of Ukrainian

civilians and Ukrainian soldiers, because the ultimate outcome would be a Russian victory anyway. Is that a fair summary of what you said, Scott? Yes, and it's my position today. Well, has your position changed? Do you say that Joe Biden and the Congress have done something good by the additional $40 billion? Is it going to cause Vladimir Putin to pause in his ongoing efforts to capture parts of Ukraine? No, it won't cause any pause on the part of Russia. Russia is committed to victory today as they have been. What it's going to do is expand the scope and scale of this conflict in ways it doesn't need to go it's going to lengthen the suffering of the ukrainian people it's going to for instance the longer this war drags on you know what is ukraine noted for besides corruption and nazis it's noted for wheat and you know I I

have a garden in my backyard every year we grow nice cucumbers and tomatoes but you know what doesn't happen if i don't plant the seeds and cultivate the ground they don't grow what's not happening in ukraine right now they are not sowing the wheat they are not sowing the barley they are not sowing the corn they are not sowing the barley. They are not sowing the corn. They are not sowing the grains that feed not only the people of Ukraine, but much of the world. The longer this conflict goes on, right now, you are permanently disrupting the annual production of crops. Ukrainian people to starvation. You're condemning people in Africa to starvation. You're condemning people in Europe and the United States to hunger. This is needless suffering. Can the United States, through the provision of billions of dollars of military assistance, elongate this conflict? Yes. Does it change the way that Russia has to respond in order to achieve its political objectives? Yes. Does that make the world a far more dangerous place? Yes. Has Russia lost one

third of its troops, its total amount of troops in Ukraine? Is that figure which has been floating around this week correct? No, it's not even close to being correct. Look, Russia suffered the bulk of its casualties early on in the conflict. The Russian government came out and acknowledged suffering close to 1,500 dead and 5,000, 6,000 wounded. Since that time, I would imagine that that number probably has doubled, maybe tripled at the most. But, you know, we're three months into a very serious war. But Russia is the one of the reasons why this combat, this conflict is proceeding at the slow pace that it is. You hear from a Russian general, this isn't World War II. We're not shouting, hurrah, and going over the trench line and rushing the Germans.

We are going slow. We are pinpointing the enemy's locations. We are bombarding it. We are killing them. And we move on to the next location. Let me quote to you from the article in LewRockwell.com. Lou didn't write this article. Someone I don't know

by the name of Mike Whitney wrote the article. He quotes you as having said, quote, the military aid the West is providing to Ukraine is changing the dynamic. And if Russia doesn't find a way

to address this meaningfully, the conflict will never end. Did you, Scott Ritter, say that? Absolutely. And it's as true a statement as can be. When you commit 200,000 troops to the task of destroying 260,000 Ukrainian forces backed up by 600,000 reserves, that is a finite thing. You successfully destroyed much of Ukraine's heavy armored forces. You destroyed their petroleum refinery capability. I think I've told you before, when you don't have gas, tanks don't work. Well, guess what's happened since that time? Because of the provision,

Ukraine has reconstituted units that had been destroyed. Ukraine has received refined petroleum products from Poland. And unless Russia finds a way to stop this, this conflict will not end because 200,000 troops cannot resolve that problem. One of the other things you told us is that equipment breaks down, mud can destroy it, improper utilization, improper training on how to use it can destroy it. Improper utilization and proper training on how to use it can harm it. Do the Ukrainians now have the spare parts and the know-how to repair equipment when it breaks down, something they didn't have a couple of weeks ago when we discussed this last? There is some effort to train the Ukrainians's equipment, but it's not needed. Because, again, with this much money coming in, normally a rational player would say,

I'm receiving 200 pieces of equipment. I need to be able to maintain it to make it survive. What's happening with Ukraine right now is they're receiving 200 pieces of equipment, and it's going to get burned out on the front to be replaced by 200 more pieces of equipment. That's the thing that's happening here, is that normal military logic is out the window. When you have the... Let me read you the next quote. Again, this purports to be from you. It was my assessment that it would be very hard for Ukraine to absorb this new equipment and material,

but the howitzers are already operating against Russia and they're having an effect in the Kharkov region. Did you say that? Yeah, because it's the truth. The truth is, I believe that the M77 howitzers coming across the border would have such a substantial footprint that they could be identified, interdicted, and destroyed by Russia before they got to the front line. But the truth is they're already on the Kharkiv front line and they have been employed in an artillery barrage that prevented the Russians from conducting a river crossing. This is the truth. Here's the kicker. Again, this purports to be from you, from the article on lewrockwell.com. This is why I have radically changed my overall assessment, because I had been operating on the assumption that Russia would be able to interdict the vast majority of

this equipment, but Russia has shown itself unable or unwilling to do this. And as a result, the Ukrainians are having a meaningful impact on the battlefield. Did you say that? Yes, it's the truth. What do you mean by, quote, I have radically changed my overall assessment? Again, the assessment was based upon Russia's ability to close with and destroy Ukrainian heavy forces. And once having accomplished that, there wouldn't be the reconstitution of new heavy forces because NATO was not providing heavy equipment. But now that Ukraine is being flooded with equipment and they're able to train in Germany and Poland and this equipment is able to make its way into Ukraine, not being interdicted by Russia, that changes the calculus.

That means that Russia is fighting a different war today than they were fighting the last time we spoke. Was it right or was it wrong for the United States government to send this $40 billion worth of equipment in the past couple of weeks? It's as wrong as it can get because all you're doing is condemning Ukrainians to die. You know those artillery pieces that we talked about having a meaningful impact on Kharkov? Right. You know where they are today? Where? They're blown up. They're destroyed.

Ukrainians operating them are dead but new artillery pieces are coming in so it doesn't change the ultimate outcome russia will defeat the ukrainians what it's doing is prolonging this conflict and complicating any political resolution remember i've said all along russia is succeeding militarily, but war is an extension of politics by other means. And right now, it's being made more and more difficult for Russia to accomplish political objectives. That's the issue here. And war is about politics, not about the military victory on the battlefield. If it was about military victory on the battlefield, we would have won the Vietnam War. Has Putin lost support at home, either amongst the public or amongst his inner circle? Not at all. I mean, one only had to take a look at, you know, every May 9th, there's a Victory

Day celebration in Russia celebrating the defeat of Nazi Germany. And part of the Victory Day celebration in recent decades has been what they call the immortal regiment uh more than a million people marched in moscow holding the portraits of uh of their loved ones who sacrificed everything during the great patriotic war there's been there's never been more patriotism in russia russia will see this through. We're making it far more complicated by providing basically the annual defense budget of Russia in four months period of time to Ukraine. We are complicating Russia's military problem. We are complicating their ability to get the political solution they want. And we're sacrificing tens of thousands of

Ukrainian lives. Is this the right way to spend U.S. taxpayer dollars? I don't think so. We'll end at that. I hope you'll come back again, Scott, to give us another weekly report, whether there's a change in information on the ground or a change in the intelligence as you gather it. But as always, deeply grateful for your time with us today. Thanks for having me. Judge Napolitano for Judging Freedom.