Judging Freedom - Ukraine Russia War Changing Global Order_ Alastair Crooke fmr Brit ambassador

Episode Date: June 6, 2023

See omny.fm/listener for privacy information.See 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 Tuesday, June 6, 2023. It's about 1030 in the morning here on the East Coast of the United States. Alistair Crook joins us from Italy. Alistair, it's a pleasure. Thank you for all your time on the show. You recently write that the initial burst of European excitement at Western pushback against Russia has dissipated and turned into an existential dread. How can European public opinion move 180 degrees in 18 months? Because it wasn't public opinion. It was elite opinion.

The European elites, many of whom have been invested in, you know, Brzezinski's, Zbigniew Brzezinski's plan to destroy Russia and the heartland, and Ukraine being the spear tip of this proposal. Many of them, like Germany, like Merkel, parts of Europe had been invested in this heavily with Team Biden. And so they were absolutely cock-a-hoop because it seemed for a moment Europe was going to actually be on the world stage. The European Union was going to unseat a major government

by its financial war alone and collapse it quickly. Of course, it never happened. It was actually the converse happened. And it's Europe that has ended up weaker. But at that early moment, it was full. You know, Europe was standing six feet tall. They were suddenly, finally, as they'd always hoped to be, a big player on the world stage, joining top table with Washington,

deciding about the future of the world. Wasn't to be. Now, what is the basis for the European animosity toward Russia? Is it a carryover from fear of the old Soviet Union? Is it a failure to recognize the commercial value of Russia today as a trading partner, as opposed to the th schism of the, you know, when the Orthodox Church was thrown out of Christianity into its own Christianity. It's been a long process, and don't forget, we've had big wars against Russia. Germany has fought two bloody wars against Russia. And I think the exact animosity become Israeli because Europe felt it was so close to bringing down Russia

and forcing it into the Western sphere during those Yeltsin period. Right. Neoliberalizing everything, privatizing everything. It almost crashed. And then Putin came and saved the day. And not only saved the day, turned the whole thing around about. They can never, I mean, I think Obama and Clinton could never forgive him for that.

Never. And yet the Europeans have made themselves so dependent on NATO and so dependent on the United States. Could the EU hold its own militarily? No, not at all. I mean, absolutely not. I mean, at the moment, they could perhaps position 30,000 troops at the most from all of Europe, I mean, all NATO states. They have no weapons, no artillery shells, they're completely bereft of equipment, they couldn't hold their own in it. But what the story of NATO is a complicated one, but essentially it became to be seen amongst the

liberal elite, not the ordinary people, but amongst the liberal elite, it seemed to become, particularly at the time of the Yugoslav war, the breakup of Yugoslavia, the Kosovo incident, it seemed to be an instrument for correcting wrongs and injustices. It was NATO was going to bomb and take over a country because there had been a massacre in Kosovo. And this animated, and then NATO suddenly became a sort of an instrument of expressing virtuosity, not a military alliance. It was a sort of moral crusading force for good in the world

as it was seen by the elites. The public as a whole have been much more skeptical and much more cautious about this. What is the pulse of the public in Europe today? Does it lead the elites or does it follow them? It looks as if there's going to be a big bust-up on this. There's a really seminal crack taking place. It's most obvious in Germany, where a recent poll has shown

that Scholz's party has very little support, that one in five Germans supports the right party, Alternative für Deutschland, the Alternative for Germany party, which is opposed to NATO and opposed to the war in Ukraine, one in five, and the Greens have slumped to 13%. Let me make sure I have this correct. The right-wing party, is this neo-Nazi? No. I mean, at one stage, there were

some neo-Nazis that came into it, but it was founded by two German economists, originally, who were opposed to Germany joining the Euro and going into the European Union. So it was very mainstream, and there were some far right that came into it shortly after, but then they were removed,

and it's become very popular partly because of immigration. And Germans were shocked, nearly fell off their seats when they picked up Dizite a few days ago. And Dizite reflected the poll that the majority in Germany are not Germans any longer. Migrants are now the majority of the people of Germany. And Germans were, I mean, really astonished at this. And it's changing politics, that in itself, plus inflation, plus the cost of living, plus the de-industrialization of Germany is pushing everything to the right,

not just in Germany, but in Brussels with the EPP party, which is the sort of Brussels coalition of center-right. All of these are moving, and the movement against the Greens is growing everywhere because their policies seem to be just not viable. I mean, it's just ridiculous in these circumstances when people are trying to survive and not buy heat pumps for their house or change the heating of the house from gas,

which works perfectly well to sort of renewable fuels. People are up in arms against this. Have the Greens become pro-war? That's almost unthinkable. Originally, they were completely the opposite. They were traditional left-wing peace party. And then it started to change in Kosovo, marked the change. It started to change before that, but in Kosovo, the party broke. And some of the Greens and people like Annalena Baerbock is the the foreign minister of Germany is the sort of lineal successor to that they became pro-NATO pro-war they saw war and there was an EU sort of ideologue who I knew quite well, Robert Cooper, who wrote about this new soft power empire that

would be Europe, and that it was fine to disregard international law. It was fine to put in protectorates into states that were not conforming to the values of Europe. I mean, literally, you know, regime changed them. But there was no army. There was only America. And so this meant that they had to get much closer to America, because Europe has no army. Here's what you wrote yesterday, quoting someone named Lily Lynch, a Belgrade-based writer. No political party in Europe better exemplifies the shift from militant pacifism to ardent pro-war Atlanticism than the German Greens. Yep, that's correct.

What percentage of the population do they represent? Well, they've had a big following during this recent period. As I say, if you go back to the start of the Ukraine conflict, they were in government and were probably the most influential party in Germany and in Brussels. And now it's just gone down like a rock and now it's only 13% in in Germany and elsewhere it's falling and there's protests everywhere but there are other states too I mean besides France but Austria and Slovakia which are becoming much more pro-Russian. So there's a big shift taking place in European politics. I mean, in a sense, sort of reflecting a little bit,

but with a lag of what has happened in the United States in the sort of the fault line is between, if you like, the globalist parties that favor a green agenda, a militant, radical green agenda, and traditionalists who believe in traditional values. So where does all this fit in with French President Macron, who was excoriated, as you know, for warning that Europeans will end up becoming American vassal states. And we said this after he was excoriated for saying we can't accept the American rhythm of constant war. Is he an outcast in Europe? Semi-outcast, yes. But Europe, I mean, what you've just described reflects the other great fracture. Europe, the Ukraine war has fractured Europe into the East European, what I think it was one American leader called New Europe versus old Europe and it came about because old Europe was against the Iraq war and the East Europeans were in favor and are in favor of weakening Russia completely

and so there's been a tight alliance between the East European central and East European states and Washington against old Europe, France, Germany, Italy, etc. But at the end of this, it will be the Western states that will pay the price for Ukraine. Deindustrialization in Germany and France and Italy, economic unemployment, social tensions. That is what will be coming. Let me show you the most recent development in the war, which is the destruction of this dam. So there are the explosions. There's secondary and tertiary explosions.

The American media is portraying this as having been perpetrated by the Kiev regime itself, even though it is Ukraine that is being flooded by this. In a couple of minutes or moments, you'll see the massive movement of water. There it is. Massive movement of water flooding Ukrainian towns, villages, and the city of Kherson. I guess this means, Alistair, this is the beginning of the spring offensive the use of natural forces to destroy parts of Ukraine albeit parts held by the Russians. Look we don't know how it happened I'm not sufficiently sort of a military person to judge those explosions, what sort of explosive or missile was used. I almost wonder if it was not intended by either side. Because if you recall early on, the Russians withdrew from the Kherson province

precisely out of fear that that dam could be destroyed and that the area and their troops all flooded and that would cut off part of their forces on the other side of the river who would be isolated and could be surrounded and killed so they got out of Kherson precisely because of the fear of of that dam now since, although Russia does control the area around the dam, periodically the Ukrainians have been firing missiles at it. I mean, throughout this period, they've been firing MRLS rockets. Not very effective. They haven't damaged it. But this time they took out the sluice gates. not the foundations, they seem to be intact, but they took out the sluice gates. Did they intend to do that? You know, well, who benefits? It's not clear. The Ukrainians don't greatly benefit because it

thought they were thinking of crossing the river, the Dnieper River, and that they would then come up by Kherson and attack that way. Now it's impossible. The Russians have their defensive lines, some of their defensive lines may be flooded by this, it's not clear yet. Right, right, right. How do you see this ending? I mean, does it end now? Conflict. Or does it end 100,000 deaths and $100 billion from now? Well, two things is,

I don't think we're in the grand offensive yet. I'll tell you why. I mean, there are military operations taking place, and they've been all pushed back by the Russians, and they are all in Donbass. They've been in Donbass in this period, and there have been heavy casualties inflicted on the Ukrainians. But the original brigades that had training in Europe,

in Britain and, and elsewhere, as far as I can see, have not been deployed yet and seemingly are being kept, or maybe they just don't want to use them. So these forces they've been using are probably put together of conscripts and odds and ends from other forces, and therefore are not their best forces, is it a probing? Is it looking for a weakness on the Russian side, and then they can push through? I don't know. If we actually see all those forces deployed, then maybe we are in it. But I don't know that they even have the ability to to do a big a big offensive at this moment where it's all going is is quite interesting medvedev who is the former president and is the number two on their national security council has been talking that there are basically two options. Really, the slow, if you like, degradation of what they call the territory that used to be known as Ukraine.

I mean, that's the terms they're using now. The slow attrition of it or the rapid attrition. And what will follow from that? And he says, well, there may be that the Western lands will be taken by receiving European states, like Poland and Hungary and others, and there will be a, if you like, no-go zone between the two, or else it may go and there won't be a rump European state at all or a European state that might still want to go into Europe and NATO,

in which case he says then it'll be war probably. I mean, at one point he said that the Russian troops would march all the way to the Polish border. He doesn't rule that out. He doesn't rule that out. But I mean, his main point is, I mean, so much. I mean, this is his point, not mine. But I mean, it's so much depends on whether it's a slow collapse or a quick collapse.

But he regards the collapse is inevitable. And then what the Europeans are going to do with that and whether there will be an escalation from NATO that follows that. I know your field is diplomacy, politics, culture, but do you think there's a feeling in Europe that the Ukrainian military has defied expectations, that everybody thought the Russians would be farther west by now. I think the West has completely, although I'm not a military person, I've been in conflict for 35 years now, one way or another, I mean, in the middle of it, or mediating in it. I think the West has completely misread the whole of Russian intentions. The Russians never intended to go straight up to Kiev at the beginning. They followed the pattern of Syria, which was economy of forces, just enough of a show to try and, if you like, catalyze a peace process,

which happened. It was Turkey. It was the Astana Agreement. They did. They tried the same thing again, sort of saying, look, we're serious. This is a, you know, we all, there's a whole column marching down towards Kiev. It was 40,000 men. I mean, that would just about fill the Piazza del Popolo in Rome.

It's not going to take a city of 3.2 million. But it was a mistake. It was wrong. It didn't work. And then Russia has re, if you like, orientated, put in more forces. I don't think they want to go because Medea made a hint of this, and this was it. He said what we really don't want is because the West are rabidly anti-Russian. I mean, remnants of Hitler groups from the war and others and rabidly and strong, he doesn't want an insurgency to sort of have a base so close to whatever is the sort of final line between Ukraine and the West. Last topic, and we talk about this frequently, President Biden, he still has no exit ramp whatsoever. He's being challenged by

the nephew of Robert Kennedy, who keeps growing in the polls amongst Democrats, and who sounds more like Ron Paul than he does a mainstream Democrat. But I don't want to get into American domestic politics. I just want to underscore the pressures on Joe Biden. What does he do? He keeps shoveling billions into this, and he doesn't get any return, politically or militarily. It's strange because you probably saw Blinken, I think he was at Bratislava or somewhere, he said, look, no ceasefire. No, it's not going to work. We're not looking for a ceasefire.

We're not aiming for a ceasefire. What we're focused on now is either the offensive working or else we are going to a long-term build-up of the military forces in in ukraine rebuilding them re-equipping them giving the latest weapons but i i i you know better than i but like i mean you know i know kennedy and he and his, many of them feel, you know, all this money should be spent on the problems here in America. Yes, of course. And so the dynamic, I think, is becoming quite tense about this in the United States, exactly as it is in Europe, because we're already deeply into that sort of sense of deindustrialization that is taking place. Gary, can you get your hands on Secretary Blinken?

As I've made clear by virtually every measure, President Putin's invasion of Ukraine has been a strategic failure. Yet, while Putin has failed to achieve his aims, he hasn't given up on them. He's convinced that he can simply outlast Ukraine and its supporters, sending more and more Russians to their deaths, inflicting more and more suffering on Ukraine's civilians. He thinks that even if he loses the short game, he can still win the long game. Putin is wrong about this too. The United States, together with our allies and partners, is firmly committed to supporting Ukraine's defense

today, tomorrow, for as long as it takes. This can't be the opinion of the American public. This is just the Lindsey Graham amongst Republicans and the globalists amongst Democrats. They have no, I keep saying this, they have no exit ramp, Alistair. They entered a tunnel when, you know, they should have paused at the mouth of the tunnel and decided to take another way out.

They're too late now. They're in a tunnel, and I don't think they see any way of going back or sideways. They just have to go through to the light at the end, if there is any light at the end. What is the British involvement in the war in Ukraine? And if there is any, is it directed by the U.S.? Well, yes, it's very close. I mean, all this talk about, you know, the United States and not involved in what's happening in Belograd and things like that.

I mean, you know, this is what we call deniability. There are two things that are very important to understand. First of all, Britain never, ever will comment on its special forces, the SAS or the SBS. And at the same time, America will never comment on intelligence allies. And so that gives complete deniability to the US.S. And they say, no, we're not involved. We don't know anything about it. It must be the Brits doing it. But, of course, I do know those people quite well.

And they are like that with their American colleagues, with Delta and the SAS. I mean, they're in each other's pockets and going to each other's weddings. Of course, everyone knows what's going on. Alistair, always a pleasure. No matter how gloomy this is, your ideas always enlighten our understanding. Thank you very much for joining us, as always.

Thank you. My pleasure. Of course. More as we get it. Colonel McGregor, two o'clock this afternoon, Eastern. Judge Napolitano for judging freedom.