All Episodes
Previous Next
April 9, 2025 - Judging Freedom - Judge Andrew Napolitano
23:56
Pepe Escobar : Donald and Bibi: Birds of a Feather.
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Hi everyone, Judge Andrew Napolitano here for Judging Freedom.
Today is Wednesday, April 9th, 2025.
Pepe Escobar joins us now from Thailand.
Pepe, always a pleasure, my dear friend.
Thank you for joining us.
Always a pleasure, Judge.
From the best hotel in the world, the Capella.
You're in a beautiful hotel with great reception.
Thank you.
I have a lot of questions to ask you about a lot of topics, all of which were generated by a recent terrific piece that you wrote.
How solid is the Beijing-Moscow alliance?
Yes. Well, very, very important.
Yesterday in Moscow, there was an extremely important meeting between Russia, China and Iran.
Relatively secret, very discreet, ultra-important meeting between the trio in Beijing a few days ago.
And obviously they were discussing their common approach to try to solve the new Iran nuclear deal riddle.
This is immensely important because I call them the new Primakov triangle.
To our audience, very, very important.
The original Primakov Triangle, coined by the late, great Russian foreign minister, Yevgeny Primakov, in the late 90s, was Russia, India, and China.
This was more or less the embryo of BRICS.
Now, after a quarter of a century, the real new Primakov Triangle, very, very important for the future of BRICS.
It's not with India.
It's with Iran.
Why? For many reasons.
First of all, these are arguably the top three BRICS that are coordinating the integration of Eurasia, which is an ongoing process, the most important long-term geopolitical process of the 21st century.
They are BRICS members, three of them, Shanghai Corporation members, three of them, and they have interlocking partnerships.
Strategic partnerships.
And in the case of Russia and Iran, they have a treaty that was signed by Putin and Zeshkin, the presidents, in late January in Moscow, which is not a military alliance, but unlike the other strategic partnerships,
China and Iran, and China and Iran especially, and China and Russia.
They are not military treaties.
And this particular military and comprehensive treaty signed by Russia and Iran, even if it's not a military alliance, they are what President Putin qualifies as military technical provisions,
which apply directly to an attack, a foreign attack, an external attack, an existential threat against one or the other Russia and China, and obviously the other partner
will help the partner
Does this mean that if Tel Aviv and Washington attack Iran, As Prime Minister Netanyahu attempted to talk President Trump into on Monday,
if that attack were to happen, Russia and China would come to Tehran's defense?
Essentially, yes, Judge.
We don't know different levels.
The devil is in the details, of course, but yes.
And the proof already, even before anything happened.
Hopefully not.
It's those two subsequent meetings in Beijing and yesterday in Moscow where the trio, the new Primakov Triangle, Russia, China and Iran, they are organizing by themselves what is essentially a common strategy to fight this,
let's say, the resurrection of the dead JCPOA Iran nuclear deal, which was killed, by the way.
By President Trump during Trump 1.0.
So basically they have a roadmap.
And yesterday in Moscow they were discussing, they are honing this roadmap, which is essentially a rational approach to try to solve the run nuclear so-called problem, which is mutual dialogue,
respect for both positions, no escalation.
No threats of military escalation.
The recognition by the UN Security Council and by the UN General Assembly of something that already exists, that Iran has the right to have a civilian nuclear program.
And of course, start to debate the possibilities of a JCPOA 2.0, which is going to be an uphill task.
And to bring Trump on board of this is going to be very hard.
But now it is a concerted strategy, Russia, China, and Iran.
I guess we can accept as accurate reports in the press, Western press today, much to Prime Minister Netanyahu's chagrin, that the direct, direct negotiations between Tehran and Washington were orchestrated by Moscow.
Is that true?
Well, it's way more complicated than that.
The negotiations Saturday in Oman will be indirect.
We're going to have Steve Witkoff, the new Talleyrand or the new Bismarck, with a degree of salt and pepper, of course, on the American side, and the Iranian foreign minister, Abbas Arakshi, on the Iranian side,
And the mediators will be diplomats from the Sultanate of Oman.
They're not going to sit on the same table.
So the scenario is probably two separate tables in two separate rooms and the Omani diplomats.
Let me ask you about Witkoff.
Some of your colleagues on this show believe that everybody wants to negotiate with him because he has the president's ear.
Others believe that nobody wants to negotiate with him because he's basically a real estate developer and seems to lack an understanding of the history of the interactions, the geopolitical interactions among these countries.
What's your take?
Well, to say the least, Judge, he's not John Kerry.
I remember in 2015, I was in Vienna and I was following the last stretch of the negotiations leading to JCPOA.
Where we had basically on the American side, American side led by John Kerry and the Iranian side led by Javad Zarif.
Kerry and Zarif had a very good relationship.
There was mutual respect.
And Kerry was acting like a real diplomat.
And of course, the others were involved.
The Chinese were there.
The Russians were there, as well as the Europeans.
But this was essentially Kerry and Zarif deciding it.
Now we have Araxi, which is a businessman, but with a solid diplomatic background as well.
And Witkoff, absolutely correct.
You have a real estate developer, then the next day is being hailed as the new Metternich or the new Talleyrand.
That's not exactly the case.
But it's much more important that Witkoff will be saying...
From his table to the Iranian table via the Omanis, exactly what President Trump wants, which, by the way, wow, it's extremely hardcore.
I'll give you the summarized version.
Let me just stop you for a moment because of some breaking news, not directly relevant to what we're talking about, but sort of monumental news.
Apparently, Donald Trump has cried, uncle.
And he is pausing the tariffs for 90 days with the exception of those on China, which is increased to 125%.
It's kind of obvious he doesn't know what he's doing, but the pressure on him, particularly from his billionaire buddies, has been extraordinary.
This announcement was just made by the president himself after we came on air.
But back to what we were talking about.
Will President Putin tell President Trump, hands off Iran?
Well, Judge, this is what's going to happen probably when the next phone call happens.
This is something that I put it in my column, my column published earlier this week by The Cradle in Beirut, that the only leader, not only on the planet, on this galaxy, Capable of explaining to President Trump,
in a very Putin-esque, historical-minded way, that if he goes with this Zionist plan, which is a Zionist war against Iran, essentially, and he gets the United States on board, this is going to be suicidal for the United States and for the U.S. empire as a whole.
Putin can explain this to Trump.
In detail, with all the background, with all the background previous to the JCPOA, what happened these past 10 years, the fact of these interlocking alliances between Iran, China,
and russia the fact that he will be basically launching a war against bricks and the shanghai corporation organization and three top leaders of the global south of the global majority so they will have support from the whole global
majority and the empire will be absolutely alone side by side with this wacko genocidal zionists you so the only
You asked a rhetorical question in your wonderful piece, which basically says...
And I don't know how we can answer this because we're talking about what's in the president's head.
Does Donald Trump dream of ending one forever war, Ukraine, in order to start another one, Iran?
How would you answer your own rhetorical question, Pepe?
Well, based on the facts, Judge, the facts are spelling out triangulation.
Looking at the facts with a cold eye.
Trump is trying in his own way to find a solution, of course, an imperfect solution to the war in Ukraine, a proxy war in Ukraine, which was initiated by the U.S. and by the collective West with a prominent place for Germany among members of the collective West against Russia.
Let's say, with a few carrots that could be offered to Russia, like a transportation deal, like the return of the Black Sea grain deal, taking some Russian banks out of swift sanctions,
alleviating sanctions as a whole, etc.
And assuming there is a sort of ceasefire, which will not happen, because Russian diplomats Starting with our friend, top Russian diplomat Sergei Ryabkov, have been saying over and over again,
so far we have not addressed the root causes of the war in Ukraine and the whole Ukraine tragedy.
So we have not even started the real negotiations.
But assuming, Trump, of course, assumes that he's going to find a solution in the next few weeks.
There's even a deadline about it in late April.
And then he will concentrate on the war that the Zionists are pressuring him about, his donors are pressuring him about, the whole Zionist axis from the Beltway to New York to Tel Aviv is pressuring him about,
which is a war that would theoretically turn Israel into the prominent power across West Asia by eliminating their chief rival, Iran.
So this is an enormous wishful thinking scenario, which is something that I try to convey in my column.
But Trump seems to be convinced that this is the way to go.
All of us hope that it's not, and he can listen to reason.
And in this case, the only one who will be able to do it will be President Putin.
On Monday, Prime Minister Netanyahu and President Trump met.
For three hours, a private lunch.
I would imagine their top aides were there at the lunch as well.
The BBC and The Economist magazine report that Prime Minister Netanyahu came into the White House expecting to get a commitment for war against Iran and public denunciations of President Erdogan of Turkey.
Turkey and left to the White House bitterly disappointed that President Trump said, "Forget it, baby, Erdogan is my friend and we're going to negotiate with
That's what the BBC and The Economist have reported.
Some folks in the West, including our mutual friend Gerald Salenti, are of the view that that was a head
intended to lull the Iranians into a false sense of security.
Where are you on this?
What do you think they actually agreed to do?
Was Bibi suppressed?
I like the angle of, and I like the rationale behind the possibility of a fake.
It makes sense in several aspects because The president of the United States cannot admit in public, especially in front of an absolutely obvious psychopathological genocidal character like Netanyahu,
that he is going to be investing in another forever war.
So this could be a diversionist tactic.
The fact that he will be talking about Erdogan, it's true, but they will be talking about the partition of Syria.
Which is different.
Syria is being partitioned essentially between Turkey, Israel, and the United States.
So this will be the conversation between Trump and Erdogan.
It's a completely different matter.
In terms of the possibility of a war, Bibi made his case basically advertising that the solution for the whole Iranian tragedy would be a Libyan scenario.
That is, Iran has to dismantle Completely.
His civilian nuclear program.
Iran has to demilitarize completely, including the elimination of its very, very powerful missile arsenal.
And Iran has to stop supporting, at various levels, the axis of resistance.
Everybody who knows West Asia, minimally, minimalistically, knows that this is never going to happen.
But this is what Bibi and his cabinet in Tel Aviv want to happen.
It's a completely different story.
So Trump could not, I would say, in your face, admit that this is also what he wants.
But this is what he wants, and this is what he told Witkoff to discuss in Oman this Saturday.
Here's what Netanyahu said about that in the presence of Donald Trump.
On Monday.
Cut number two, Chris.
We agree that Iran will not have nuclear weapons.
This can be done by agreement.
But only if this agreement is Libyan style.
They go in, blow up the installations, dismantle all of the equipment under American supervision and carried out by America.
This would be good.
The second possibility that will not be is that they drag out the talks and then there is the military option.
Everyone understands this.
We spoke about it at length.
So that was from the United States, but not from the Oval Office.
It was in Hebrew.
It was obviously directed at the people of Israel, but it was made following his meeting in the Oval Office.
We all know what happened to Libya before Mrs. Kennedy arrived.
It was the most prosperous country in Africa.
And then, of course, Colonel Gaddafi was publicly butchered.
No need to go into the details on that.
And the country is at the bottom of the barrel now.
Why on earth would the United States acquiesce to this?
And under what conceivable circumstances would Iran accept this?
First of all, Iran will never accept this.
Second, this is Bibi selling the Libyan scenario as something that he knows.
Even he knows that it's absolutely impossible.
Meaning, okay, Iran is not going to accept it, so there's going to be a military attack.
This is seen clearly by not only the leadership in Iran, but also by Russia and China.
And this is taken into consideration, was taken into consideration yesterday in their meeting in Moscow, and will be on the table when they start this indirect discussion in Oman on Saturday.
So, Russia...
China and Iran know perfectly well that this is, first of all, an Israeli war with Israel trying to drag the United States towards their own war against Iran.
But at the same time, if there is a US-Israeli attack against Iran, this is something that is absolutely out of the question for Tel Aviv to understand.
Great sectors and vast sections and silos of the Beltway to understand.
You will be attacking the leadership of the global majority, the Global South, BRICS, and the Shanghai Corporation Organization.
So, a war against BRICS, which is what many of us were expecting with the arrival of the Trump 2.0 administration.
Now, this is flesh and bones.
The possibility, the hot possibility of a hot war against not only one of the BRICS, but in fact the alliance, the three, the new Primakov Triangle.
And that's what makes it, the whole thing even more incandescent than it was a few weeks ago.
And obviously the way nonchalantly that BP can announce, okay, it's the Libyan scenario or it's a military operation.
And he gets away with it.
And he's not confronted by anybody.
Especially inside the United States.
You alluded in your piece, before we go, I was fascinated by this, to your understanding of a quiet beltway, meaning inside and around Washington, D.C., resistance to the idea of attacking Iran.
Who are The Resisters, do we know?
Well, Judge, I would say that many Resisters are former deep state officials and operatives and very important actors that became, lately and especially these past few years, leakers and,
I would say, a very well-informed opposition.
And behaving like true American patriots.
We know many of them.
But according to echoes that I have with some of my old school connections across the deep state from my early years in the US, in New Washington, and traveling back and forth, there is opposition, but not vocal.
Very, very important people, especially older generations in different agencies, even inside what would be the new tattooed Fox News anchor,
Kafir Hexet Pentagon, that know that this is absolutely absurd in every sense, and especially many of them who...
are aware of all the gaming that the Pentagon did in case of a U.S. attack on Iran, where the U.S. loses in absolutely every possibility.
So they are very well-informed, rational actors across the deep state in the U.S. But unfortunately, they do not set policy.
Right. Pepe, thank you, my dear man.
I know it's the middle of the night where you are, but thank you very much for joining us.
This has been a fascinating conversation.
Thank you, George.
Safe travels.
We'll see you again next week, my man.
I'm going to China, George.
Next week is going to be from China.
Good. Maybe President Xi will join you on the show.
All the best, my friend.
Cheers, George.
All the best.
Thank you.
And a fascinating conversation.
Of course, there is the breaking news about the tariffs going away except for China.
We'll see how long that lasts.
But coming up later today at 3 o'clock, Phil Giraldi.
At 4 o'clock, Max Blumenthal.
▲
Export Selection