Judging Freedom - Ukraine War - Is the Black Sea ‘War’- the Real War? w/ Alastair Crowe fmr Brit ambassador

Episode Date: August 10, 2023

Ukraine War - Is the Black Sea ‘War’- the Real War? w/ Alastair Crowe fmr Brit ambassadorSee 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, August 10th. Where does the summer go? 2023. Alistair Crook joins us now from the hills of central Italy. Alistair, always a pleasure. Thank you for joining us. You have a very interesting piece out this morning, or soon to be out, about has the war shifted from the so-called spring, the so-called summer offensive, to a war on the Black Sea. But before we get to that, sources have reported to us just early this morning that the Polish government has removed the numerous Ukrainian flags that had been flying around the Polish parliament building and other government buildings in Warsaw.

Now, this is just symbolic, but there must be some substance behind the symbolism. What are your thoughts? Well, you're quite right. There has been a shift. Something is changing. And that is there have been really quite bad feelings expressed, first of all, from Kiev about Poland and about that, you know, if there's going to be an involvement with Poland, it would be strictly temperate. And that didn't go down too well in Poland.

And so there's been a tit for tat. Relations are souring. There's no doubt of that. But also there's another thing that is taking place which may be affecting it, and which is that the polls, I mean the polling of people polls, the polling in Poland is showing no real support for government's position on either going in or taking a position in Ukraine, particularly amongst the young. So while there's general sympathy for Ukrainians in a, if you like, humanitarian sense, there is almost no support, really very little support. And elections are coming up very shortly in Poland. So I think this explains why there's tenseness between the two at the moment.

So the Polish government, which had, as we say in the West, an itchy trigger finger, which has 90,000 troops at the Polish-Ukrainian border, intermingled among and training with 40,000 American troops from the vaunted 101st Airborne. The government, which seemed very bellicose in its words, is now seeing the handwriting on the wall that if it expects to stay in office, the Polish public is not interested in or supportive of their bellicosity. Is that a fair summary? Fair summary. Fair summary. That's right. And I don't think there's any appetite in Europe for their ambitions. What was the bellicosity based on? I mean, do the Poles fear that former Russian President Medvedev's threat to march all the way to the Polish border is serious?

I don't think it's so much. I mean, they don't know what Russian intentions are going to be. No one is sure of that. But I think they're mostly concerned about the domestic situation. As I say, the popularity of this government is fading very fast, and Ukraine is at the center of it. And these plans that they have, I don't think there will be great support from European NATO for some sort of safe zone that the Poles might like to try and instigate in Poland following the sort of Libyan precedent. I don't

think Europeans, I mean, can see the writing on the wall. The offensive has failed. The military forces of Ukraine are severely depleted in many different dimensions. So they can see that and they don't want the Poles to start it all off again because where would it go? I mean, there's not going to be a sudden breakthrough because the Poles institute. It's purely about Polish politics and Germany is opposed to it very strongly because it is jealous of Poland and does not want to see Poland becoming. If Poland took all of the parts of Ukraine and Belarus that theoretically they would like to take,

that would make them bigger than Germany. You can imagine Germany is not so keen on that. And yet Germany, we'll play the clip in a minute, Germany is sending, I think, 30 more of those enormous Leopard tanks to Poland. I mean, Colonel McGregor might say it's too little, too late, but 30, is it a significant number or is it just symbolic? Well, I've seen that they've had to buy them all for an arms dealer. Oh, jeez.

They're leopard ones in their old leopard tanks and they're trying to buy them all for an arms dealer that had them in storage. And then they're going to refurbish them and theoretically say, look, I mean, the mood in Germany is changing so rapidly. And again, you know, the antipathy towards this conflict is growing. I mean, the government is in serious trouble now. And, you know, four out of five Germans are not supporting this coalition or the government. The polling is changing dramatically. Schultz is still trying to play between Biden on one hand and Brussels and trying to keep everyone happy, but he's not keeping the German public happy, and that's becoming very, very evident. He might be keeping President Zelensky happy. Here's President Zelensky yesterday coming one step short of blowing an air kiss toward Chancellor Scholz. Watch this. Patriot launching stations. I thank Germany and Mr. Chancellor personally for fulfilling this agreement. It will definitely save thousands of lives of our people. It will definitely bring

us closer to creating a full-fledged sky shield for Ukraine. We work to ensure that our defenders of the sky have more air defense systems and missiles for them. Our entire territory needs much more air defense systems than we have now. I have no doubt that F-16S will be in our skies. I guess it's symbolic, not substantive. These things have been sitting around in storage and not even owned by the German government. They're Leopard 1s, not Leopard 2s even. They're very old things, and they're not very effective, and they will need to be put in order before they can really reach it.

Look, Zelensky's talking to his public. I mean, he's trying to keep from being thrown out of office, I suspect, more than anything. I mean, the mood is pretty brittle in Ukraine because, you know, the troops see where things are and they see that they're being sent off, you know, for what? To die for some forlorn cause of trying to sort of breach Russian defense line, which is never going to happen in their view. And so there's a great deal of unhappiness. There have been even entire brigades refusing to sign,

even though there's consequences, to obey orders, even though the consequences are dire, therefore. So, I mean, that was it. And the sky zone is just, you know, I heard what others have said about it, but I understand what he's talking about really is a no-fly zone. We've had no-fly zones in Iraq. We've had no-fly zones over Syria. He wants a no-fly zone so that Russia will not be able to attack.

Well, who or what could possibly enforce that? Only absolute dominance of the airspace by the United States and NATO. And even then, it's problematic because Russia has by far the best air defenses in the world at this stage. And why are the reasons you don't have a no-fly zone over Ukraine is because it's not possible to enact it. It would take us into war with Russia, but the Russians would prevail in terms of the air power. The Americans could not create, could not escalate to a point of air domination as they have tried to do in other places. Those days have gone. They're over. An old era that has passed. Do you think that the Ukrainian government has recognized that the spring offensive,

which morphed into the summer offensive, has failed? Utterly failed. Yeah, they do. And I notice what's quite striking about it is they suddenly turned on the Americans, just as the Americans have now turned on Kiev and on the Ukrainians for not having following their training and their message and their doctrine about how to win this war. And they say they made a mess of it. Now the Ukrainians are hitting back and saying, well, you promised, you promised things, and where are they? You know, it's fine for you to say they're coming, but it's too late if you

don't produce them now. I mean, there's some merit in this argument. You can understand they feel like that as they see their troops being decimated, some,000, according to Russian figures, simply since this offensive started. Recall that of those that, you know, were being trained and everything for this offensive was only 60,000 troops in all. So, I mean, no wonder they are feeling tetchy about it. But now there's conflict between America. Things are changing and the Americans are shifting. It hasn't, I think, become settled, but there's a very clear line appearing in the mainstream media

in the United States and reflected in Europe. You know, it's over. It's finished. It's not going to work. The offensive, it's now accepted as reality. And now from that, we're getting the second part, which is also the sense that, well, what's the point of negotiations? Because the whole idea of this was that it would be on the back foot. And then they would have put forward and they would say, let's sit down and negotiate from a position of Ukrainian strength. And if you like, virtual capitulation on the part of Russia.

And this hasn't worked out. So that strategy is not functioning any longer. Gary, can you get the clip of President Zelensky speaking as if the return of Crimea is a foregone conclusion? Take a look at this, Alistair. This is about as unrealistic as you can imagine. Today, I held a meeting on the content of our return policy, specifically regarding Crimea and its reintegration. It is obvious that after the content of our return policy, specifically regarding Crimea and its reintegration. It is obvious that after the liberation of Crimea from occupation, economic opportunities, personal security for people, and a sense of real freedom, which has not been there since 2014, will return there.

But all of this should not be just abstract. Every detail of the de-occupation of Crimea should have a specific meaning. How exactly normal life returns, what exactly this means for Crimea and for all our people, this should be clear to everyone. Step by step, we are making the deoccupation of Crimea more and more achievable and well thought out. Or worse than making a promise that is dishonest is making a promise that cannot be kept. Yes, and it's not about that. He knows perfectly well. Everyone knows it. And this is the problem. When there was a Jeddah meeting, when they had the Global South come together and Jake Sullivan

and others came to address them just a few days ago. It was all was scheduled that this would follow a successful offensive and this would be the time that they push the Global South to come closer to Washington and support the Ukrainian 10-point peace plan. But it didn't go like that. The Global South reacted against it and said, listen, this peace process, this 10-point plan is for the birds. It has no chance of being secure. And furthermore, we won't come to any more of your meetings unless Russia is present at it. And finish with this stuff. And so part of that 10-point plan, of course, hinges entirely around Crimea. And so what we just saw Zelensky trying to do is trying to resuscitate and say, look, my plan is not that, you know, this is the plan still.

Because the representative of Kiev at that Jeddah agreement, at meeting, conference, virtually said, well, yes it it won't fly um uh and then when he got back kiev said yes there's no change on the 10-point plan you know this is the plan total withdrawal by russia total removal of forces total restoration russian leadership to come to trial in a Nuremberg trial, including Putin, be tried, Russia to pay full reparations for any damage caused during the war. And, you know, the global side said, come on, I mean, this won't work, this won't work. And so he's really just trying to sort of justify the plan and say, no, we're still with this plan, even though everyone can see that it's just not working. So has the spring offensive, the failed spring offensive,

been translated to the Black Sea, about which you have recently written? Yes. I mean, it's open to really important questions because there have been and if you like a largely unseen war taking place. The bombing of certain Danube ports which are Ukrainian ports but which sit opposite NATO Romania. I mean, the NATO, literally a few meters on the other side of the river is a NATO state. But Ukraine has a couple of ports. Russia withdrew from the grain deal. And to make it clear that they were resolved in this matter,

they bombed one of those, if you like, Danube ports. And then there's been a tit-for-tat, which ultimately ended in the attack, which I think everyone has seen or read about, but there were others in the meantime. But the ones on Novorossiysk, which is a major port, Russia's commercial port, large quantities of oil pass through it, goods pass through it, 400 million tons a year.

This is a major and has been a major port for a long time. And so the attack on a tanker, a civilian tanker and a naval landing craft in those. The question is, was this NATO? Was NATO behind this? Was this, I mean, if you like, not just facilitated, but furnished and supported with NATO intelligence? Is this another Nord Stream pipeline? Well, if it gets out of hand, precisely, it's dangerous because, you know, an attack like this is no small matter on Russia's main trading port in the Black Sea on these attacks by, if you like, what we call maritime drones. These are sophisticated drones. It's very unlikely, in my view, that Ukraine would have either had them or managed them without either the Americans or British being directly involved

and perhaps giving the guidance. Because as you saw, they had a video of the actual moment of the attack. And the drones, there they are. And they're doing a little bit of correction here and a little bit of correction there, which suggests either there's someone very close by that is feeding in these directions, or there's someone overhead in an airplane that is giving these directions. So if this was NATO paid for, NATO facilitated, and maybe NATO carried out, wouldn't Russian intelligence know that? Yes, I think this is what's going on. I mean, they're investigating. Where did it come from? Where were those things that you've just shown? Where were they launched? From Romania? Because Ukrainian ports have just been severely damaged by Russia in this period. Where was their origin? Was there a mothership there? How much? Who was controlling this thing and where? These are not easy weaponry to use.

And there are really barely sort of a very few nation states that have this expertise. So but what does it mean for Russia? Does this mean, and this is the question, does this mean that as a war fails on the ground in Ukraine, that the West is sort of pivoting towards a new form of a longer term attrition against Russia by striking at its, if you like, sea routes, at its ability to function in trading terms? And are we seeing a new war of that also, which might involve longer-range cruise missiles? Zelensky is asking for this German cruise missile, the Taurus, which has 500 kilometer range instead of the 300 kilometer range of the storm shadows, the British storm shadows or the French scalp. So really almost getting to Moscow. But are we seeing a different mode of war, one, if you like, being wound down, one being backed down, one being shut down, the war, the land war, if you like, in Ukraine, and instead a new form of attrition

starting up. I think this is the question. And so what does Russia do? Does it hit back hard, both on the ground in Ukraine, and does it hit back against NATO in some calibrated way to send a message to NATO? No, we are not going to play this game. If you want to do this game, you risk going to full real war, in which case who's more vulnerable, our supply lines or your supply lines? Because it would be your tankers as well that would be attacked your supply lines and think what that would do to your rate of inflation in the united

states in an election year so as i understand it the uh ukrainian grain uh is shipped to turkey where it's ground into flour and that flour, which is high quality and in copious amounts, is sold all over Europe. And yet Vladimir Putin, in response to the attack on the Russian ship that we just showed, flattened the Ukrainian grain storage facilities at the ports. Correct. And he did that because he wanted, he's been saying all the time, and the message never

gets through, Europe is not keeping the other part of the deal, which was if we allow Ukrainian grain to be exported, then Russian grain has to be allowed to be exported and Russian fertilizer too. Otherwise, this won't hold. And the European haven't kept their end of this bargain. And he's had enough of it, especially as he feels it's also been abused for the purposes of smuggling in weapons into Ukraine. So he said, I'm finished. And just so that you understand it, he collapsed the grain silos in one port on the Danube, and then subsequently the second one, Izium, which was a bigger port. Just to switch gears for a moment, Niger, what's going on there and what is the Russian behavior and the Russian goals in Africa? careful to stay aloof from this. Don't forget they condemned it. I mean, they don't support

the coup that has taken place there, and they are trying to act in through diplomacy to stop it. Now, the Western view is that they want to turn this into a victory in the Cold War and say, well, Russia's getting involved, Russia's arriving, and that therefore, you know, this is another front in the Cold War. Look, there are 1,500 French troops there. There are 1,000 American troops in Niger. There are no Russians. There are no Russian Wagner forces. There was a big story made out by the West that a Lucian transport plane arriving was carrying Wagner troops to Niger.

And it turns out the video was from 2006. It was fake. So, I mean, there's no sign of that at all. But I do think that there's a great desire because we keep hearing Wagner, Wagner, Wagner, as if they're taking part in it and there's no nothing yet. But it may explode soon and it will be very difficult because the West African states are divided really down the middle and it might be a struggle. And who knows what will happen in Paris if it really erupts with France as Sikorsky, maybe the Italian public, since you are in Italy

at the moment, for NATO support for Ukraine? Is it waning or is it just something going on in the distance that they don't want to think about? No, it's suddenly, I mean, many things are suddenly touching the European consciousness. I'm not saying that there's a transformation, and I think it's deeper in the United States in many ways than it is in Europe, because our press paradoxically is more controlled than you have in the US. But no, it is. The Ukraine is affecting it, but above all, you know, prices, inflation, the way of living is collapsing for many. I mean, many Italians are on the poverty line.

I think 7 million Italians are now on the poverty line because they can't afford the food any longer. I mean, in the shops, the prices, whatever the statistics, forget it. The prices are really, really high. And they're looking at the United States and they see, you know, the United States in a certain sense, you know, in this sort of unraveling, in political unraveling, where it's facing an impasse in some respects between all of the parties. I'm wondering and fearing how this is going to impact on Europe, both politically and in terms of the wider changes that are taking place. But at the same time, and I just want to say that to you,

is I don't see the means to bring about a change so much in Europe. I think people are looking to America, to some trends in America, actually to help bring Europe out of the hole that it's dug for itself. Last question or last subject matter. Do you see an off-ramp for Joe Biden? Would it be something as extreme as nuclear weapons or some other way to get out of this? I should be able to use this question. You're such an astute observer, Alistair. It's a way to get out of this mess before November of 2024. I think, you know, I think it's of shift it and say well we're going to weaken russia by you know these periodic attacks on its shipping and and the airplanes you know flying um

cruise missiles on on bridges that the french are about to have given them the uh which struck a bridge near crimea again this sort of, if you like, remote Cold War. First of all, I don't think it's going to work. The Russians will retaliate and the Russians will escalate if they do this. And I think this is the big thing we have to watch, both in terms of on the ground in Ukraine and in terms of what's happening with these cruise missiles and in the Black Sea. All of this poses a question to Russia. and in terms of what's happening with these cruise missiles and in the Black Sea. All of this poses a question to Russia.

Is this time we stop being cautious and incrementalist and we move to something much more direct and send a message to the West? If you go any further, it's real war. Alistair Crook, always a pleasure, my dear friend. Thank you for your great work. Thank you for the time that you share with us. You're quickly becoming a fan favorite for the Judging Freedom audience. All my best to you. Thank you very much. Thanks. More as we get it. Judge Napolitano. Oh, Jack Devine. A lot of you want to know where Jack is. Jack Devine this afternoon. Let me just check the time here. Come on, calendar. Yeah, Scott Horton at 11 Eastern and Jack Devine at 3 o'clock Eastern. We're going to play for Jack what some of his former CIA colleagues have said about him, like their minds exploding when they hear what he has to say. More as we get it, Justin Napolitano for Judging Freedom. Thanks for watching!