Judging Freedom - Judge Andrew Napolitano - Alastair Crooke : What's Next in Trump's War?

All Episodes

Previous Next

July 7, 2025 - Judging Freedom - Judge Andrew Napolitano

29:35

Alastair Crooke : What's Next in Trump's War?

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Hi, everyone.
	Judge Andrew Napolitano here for Judging Freedom.
	Today is Monday, July 7th, 2025.
	Aleister Crook will be here with us in just a moment on what's next in Trump's wars.
	But first, this.
	We all know how devastating war is.
	Lives lost, communities destroyed.
	But war can also threaten your financial freedom.
	That's where America's heading.
	Our growing involvement in global conflicts.
	It means more spending, more debt, and a weaker dollar.
	That's a direct hit to your wallet.
	So here are three things to keep your eyes on.
	Exploding debt, declining dollar, rising prices of gold and silver.
	These things are already happening.
	Golden Stacks predicts gold could hit $4,500 an ounce by 2026.
	Why?
	Because central banks and smart investors are buying gold hand over fist.
	They know what's coming and they're hedging against it.
	Currency collapse, inflation, and market volatility.
	Gold has been a trusted store of value for thousands of years and today we need that protection more than ever.
	Call Lear Capital Now at 800-511-4620 or visit LearjudsNap.com.
	No one is going to protect your wealth for you.
	You need to do it yourself.
	And now is the time.
	Alistair, welcome here, my dear friend.
	I guess we're back to Trump's bombing of Iran, Iran nuclear facilities.
	Was it a smashing success?
	Was it a PR stunt?
	Or was it the prelude to war?
	It was supposed to be the perfect little war.
	Trump described it as that.
	There was Michael Wolf, who was talking to a lot of people.
	He's written four books on Trump.
	And his technique is he goes and talks to people whom Trump talks to.
	And you don't get information from that.
	And Trump isn't really getting wanting a conversation.
	He just says something like, I mean, Israel's winning, aren't they?
	They're really good, aren't they?
	And you're supposed to say, hmm, hmm, hmm, yes, Mr. President.
	And then click and it's off.
	And then he talks to someone else.
	But as Michael Wolf says, it's always the same thing.
	He's asking the same question to every interlocutor.
	So you get a feel of what he was looking for.
	And what he was looking for in the attack on Iran, and he said this, I mean, first of all, with the Israeli attack, because this is important, the Israeli attack, it was quite clear from all of these conversations that Michael Wolf was having that he, you know, this was a joint operation with America, effectively.
	This was to be the surprise attack on Iran, and it was supposed to collapse a house of cards, which is the Iranian state.
	While the U.S. was negotiating with Iran, correct?
	While the U.S. was planning on the following Sunday to have a further meeting and a negotiation with Iran.
	And during that period, I mean, he kept saying to on all of these calls, he said, they're going to win, aren't they?
	They're going to win.
	It's going to be a triumph.
	It's going to be game over.
	Isn't that right?
	And it's very clear from this that he thought it was going to be game over.
	In other words, the House of Cards would collapse in Iran and it would be like Syria.
	There would be no government.
	Everything would be immobilized.
	If you like, the decapitation of the military, the assassination of scientists.
	And it was a very well planned, I have to say.
	It was obviously took a lot of planning because in a sense, that attack on Iran was deceptive because it was not an air attack on Iran, as it's been presented.
	We had freedom of the skies.
	We flew wherever we want.
	It was not true at all.
	What really happened in the attack on Iran, as far as one can get all of the details, was that it was basically a combination of standoff weapons, drones, and covert sabotage, mounted initially from the Kurdish part.
	I mean, pre-positioned anti-tank missiles, all prepared.
	Then Israeli special forces came in to use, if you like, the American software, their spatial mapping, which allows targeting of these missiles, the Israeli special forces.
	But it wasn't air deliver.
	And then the only way in which the aircraft actually came in to Iran was through the north, from Syria right up north, which is all mountainous in Iran, very mountainous territory, very hard to pick it up and radar, into Azerbaijan airspace.
	Airspace from Azerbaijan and went down to the Caspian, directly opposite to Tehran, and where they were firing a new mini-cruise missiles, again from a standoff position.
	Not the aircraft going in, but from a standoff position.
	Now, it obviously took a lot of arranging, a lot of preparation, maybe years of preparation, coordination with the Americans to do all this.
	But what's the point?
	The point is, once done, you can't repeat it.
	It wasn't that it showed that Iran was open territory, you could fly in and bomb it to hell.
	They didn't prove that at all.
	It was all done from standoff operations and sabotage internally.
	People coming in, MEK coming in with little suitcases with drones in it that they assembled and fired off.
	And Trump was really excited during this period.
	As Michael Wolfe said, he kept saying to people, it's going to be a great victory, isn't it?
	It's going to be.
	It's going to be a game changer.
	It's going to be a showstopper.
	I mean, the Israelis are so great, aren't they?
	So he clearly was expecting it to collapse.
	And that's the second fundamental point about this whole process was not only did it not collapse, it's actually had the counterproductive effect.
	It is farred up the Iranian public.
	The Iranian public are now, it was Ashura yesterday.
	And the Iranian public are full of a sort of new fervor and patriotism and support for the supreme lever.
	They are stronger.
	The country, the state is now more unified and more, if you like, robust and hard-nosed than it's ever been in this process.
	So it didn't work.
	So yes, you know, this plan that obviously so gripped President Trump, he said, that's so good, it's terrific, it's going to be a game change, it's going to be wonderful.
	Actually, it was good tactically.
	I mean, it was professionally done.
	Pieces were pre-positioned, but it failed strategically.
	It did not collapse the House of Cards.
	And it's not likely that it's going to now, even less likely.
	How significant.
	I know the president has his views in this, and they don't seem to be connected to the evidence, but how significant a setback to the Iran nuclear facilities, whether it's enrichment or movement toward a bomb, was the American attack?
	Well, we can't give you an answer to that categorically, but I think all the indications are that some damage was sustained, but it hasn't pushed back.
	And the Iranians say they're pushing ahead with the enrichment program.
	So why are they saying this?
	One of the reasons I think they're being very coy.
	I mean, they could come out and say, well, actually, Ford was pretty well untouched, the hall.
	And it probably was, because there's no, I mean, I think there are five entrances to Ford.
	So they weren't all damaged or blocked off.
	And they're busily clearing them.
	There's been a lot of work.
	Why they're saying this, I think they're saying this for this reason, is because they anticipate, and it's already happening, that, you know, Macron and all of the Europeans and the Americans too will be pressing to say, no, the IAEA must go back.
	They have to verify it under the non-proliferation treaty.
	They are required to adjudicate and to monitor this.
	And this is what the West is likely to press Iran for that.
	And the answer is at the moment, there is such anger at the IEA and their betrayal of Iran and their passing of information to the Israelis to target all those scientists sitting in their home with their families, killing them overnight.
	There's such anger that if the IEA did step foot in Iran, they'd need a bodyguard of about 10 people to survive there, if they survived at all.
	I mean, it's over.
	They're not going to agree to that.
	The public is dead against it.
	But that pressure is coming.
	So it's quite an advantage that Trump says, look, there's no nuclear program.
	We destroyed it all, obliterate it.
	So Iran can say, well, okay, if that's your position and that's what you assert, then the IEA are irrelevant.
	What are they coming for?
	There's no program for them to monitor.
	So you don't need to talk about it.
	But these are the two things that I think that are going to define the next period.
	One is the pressure for some form of monitoring through the IEA, which I think Iran already says it will not have the IEA.
	And Russia is backing them because Russia had its own bad experience from the IEA in terms of Ukraine and the Zaporizhia nuclear power plant.
	And it also believes that all of these Western organizations, like the Organization for the Protection Against Chemical Warfare, the OPCW, was totally an intelligence operation, British intelligence operation.
	So they're deeply skeptical too.
	So there won't be any push from Russia, despite Trump having asked for help to get the IEA back.
	The Russians are deeply skeptical.
	But what's going to come for, and this is the key point, just let me make this key point, is that clearly there's pressure mounting in the United States to put a squeeze onto Iran.
	And the way to do that is they're going to get to the Europeans to do snapback sanctions on Iran under the JCPOA.
	They have until October to do it.
	And they said in June they would go, the EU three, who are part of the JCPOA, said they would definitely do that.
	And that was what that resolution was.
	That, if you like, pretext for the sneak Israeli attack on Iran on the 13th, the day before the IEA had managed to get a resolution passed saying that Iran was in breach of its undertakings and the JCPOA.
	So when that happens, and they'll say, well, you have to, under the MPT, have the accept snapback and you have to accept that, I think that's when, I think it's almost certain.
	That's when Iran leaves the MPT.
	Can't do it overnight.
	It takes about three months, but that's when they'll leave the NPT.
	But then, who knows?
	None of this will please the man with whom President Trump is having lunch today in the White House, Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu.
	He wants Iran to be rendered like Syria or Libya, as you mentioned earlier.
	Yeah, his message is going to be clear to America, and it'll be said loudly and with symbols clashing and everything.
	Oh, America, you now have to finish the job.
	You've got to go in and you've got to finish the job.
	Well, actually, you know, because we did it, they're going to say, you know, we were so successful.
	It was such a successful operation.
	Well, I've just indicated it wasn't.
	It probably didn't destroy the nuclear program.
	It didn't destroy Fordo.
	It didn't even destroy the enriched uranium, which probably there's very good circumstantial evidence that actually the Iranians removed it.
	They say they did before the, if you like, either the 13th or the 22nd of June attacks.
	So it's still there.
	And so Israel wants it gone because the program will probably be now, the Iranians are very clear.
	Supreme Leader is clear.
	We are going to pursue enrichment, full stop.
	And we're not having the IEA come back.
	And if you push it to us, push us to it, we'll leave the NPT.
	Now, where that takes us, we will see.
	But my guess, and this was what was sort of indicated from those discussions that Trump was having with his interlocutors on the telephone, I don't think, you know, the whole idea of the attack on those three nuclear programs that Trump was planning and thinking about, he was very clear.
	You know, I want this to be a perfect war.
	I want this to be in, boom, out.
	He kept saying this to people on the phone.
	It's going to be in, boom, out.
	Finished, finished, all done.
	It will be the perfect war.
	It will be beautiful.
	And it will be a showstopper headline.
	It wanted to be the headline.
	We won.
	We finished off the nuclear program.
	But doesn't sound as if he wants a long war.
	Yeah, it sounds to me a couple of observations, Alistair.
	One, he's not very settled in his own views, and he's looking for reinforcement from these dozens of people to whom he speaks and he presents the rhetorical questions, the people to whom Michael Wolf, whom I know and whom I've interviewed many times, is speaking.
	Two, it also sounds as though he's not prepared for what could very well come next.
	Which is pressure from Israel and internally for him to finish those off, finish off the job in Iran.
	But what does finish off mean?
	And this is the key point because, you know, people use that term rather loosely.
	But in the Israeli understanding of it, the only way that definitively finishes the nuclear program or the threat from Iran is to change the regime and to install a Western puppet government in Tehran.
	And I don't think, I mean, first of all, and this was a point that Michael Wolf made repeatedly, you know, apart from how Iran responds, the key thing is how does the MA respond to him?
	Because already, you know, there's pushback from the MAGA.
	You know, the two key issues in the elections was immigration and forever wars.
	And the MAGA don't want more wars, particularly Middle Eastern wars.
	And you hear that all the time, Tucker Carlson and Steve Bannon and others are pretty clear.
	But MAGA doesn't want it.
	And the point is that, you know, as things stand, you know, Trump is pretty weak in terms of his hold on the Senate and the House.
	He's got a majority of three in each, I think, something like that.
	And that, you know, in the midterms, could start many of those.
	I mean, it's not just the MAGA, because the latest polls are showing also that many of the young people, former Democratic voters, if you like, Biden voters, also voted for Trump because he promised peace and no wars.
	And they're starting to drift away.
	So, I mean, this is hugely dangerous for the midterms.
	I mean, because it opens all sorts of things, losing the House and losing it.
	You know this better than me, but we could be back to impeachment and other things like that if we go, if they lose that.
	So he must be worried.
	So when I think people say, oh, no, come in, now do finish off.
	We've got to finish off Iran.
	Iran emerged from that much stronger than people were.
	They didn't touch their most advanced weapons.
	Most of this was.
	And it completely, Israel was attacked as it's never been attacked before.
	We know now from satellite visions that many military bases were attacked, as well as others like the headquarters.
	I mean, and also that the air defenses of Israel did not work.
	93 SADs were fired, which cost a total of about 1.2 billion during those 11 days of the American missiles trying to defend Israel from it.
	Not very successful.
	Not at all successfully.
	So difficult decision facing him.
	Aside from the PR benefits back home of a meeting with President Trump in the Oval Office and maybe even taking questions from the press, what do you think Netanyahu is really trying to accomplish today?
	What does he want?
	What is he saying behind closed doors?
	You have to attack again.
	You've got to bring regime change.
	He's not going to be patient enough to expect and wait for European sanctions to kick in.
	They won't come.
	The sanctions are a dead letter now in Europe.
	But I think what he's saying apart from, I think the most important thing that we're going to see today, apart from him saying finish the job in Iran, will be about the new Middle East.
	And I think this refers to Trump's vision.
	What Trump sees, and he imagines maybe, but this is how he sees the world, that there is a chastened Iran that now is forced just to watch what happens in the Middle East from the sidelines as a new Middle East is created.
	A new Middle East centered on Jerusalem and Tel Aviv, not on Iran, Tehran or Riyadh, but on Tel Aviv and on Jerusalem.
	And now it will be a region that is forced to reckon that the whole playing field of the Middle East is centered on Tel Aviv, with Israel relegating the Palestinians to an afterthought.
	And all of this is supposed to incentivize Arab states to join the Abraham, of course.
	But the purpose behind all this, why it matters so much to Trump, we have to get back to the economic things, because ultimately what that does, in his view, Trump's view, it opens a vista of resource and trade deals across the whole Middle East and from the Middle East stretching into Southeast Asia, resources, trade deals, business, big money.
	That's what it's really, I think, his vision.
	And that's what he wants to talk to Netanyahu about, how to bring this about.
	The thing is, I think it's going to be more troublesome and more difficult than people, commentators expect, because in all of those areas, I mean, it is problematic.
	In Syria, which they've, Witkoff is touted as likely to join the Ibram Accord.
	I mean, the Syrians are very divided and they're saying, oh, no, but we've got to have at least a third, or if not two-thirds, of the Golan return to Syria.
	We can't sell it to Syrians unless we get part of the Golan before.
	And what's more, we want to annex north of Lebanon up to Tripoli.
	We want the northern, which is a very hard line Sunni area.
	We want that as part of Syria because we want access to the Mediterranean.
	I don't think that's doable.
	And then in Lebanon, the Hezbollah has just announced, no, we refuse the American plan for the disarming of Hezbollah.
	It's refused.
	Point blank, it was announced yesterday.
	And so it's likely there's going to be a resumption of war.
	Israel will probably try and occupy South Lebanon again.
	So, and I don't think that Saudi is going to be attracted or any other Arab state because the problem is Gaza is not resolved even now.
	For all the sort of narrative about we're on the verge, it's very simple, because Netanyahu will not shift off a 60-day ceasefire and a piecemeal approach and the army is staying.
	And Hamas is sticking on their position that they've always had, which is this has got to be an end to war and a withdrawal of all Israeli forces from Gaza and the reconstruction of Gaza, the strip.
	And the two sides are still far apart.
	I just want to play for you.
	You probably know this gentleman, Professor Paolo Nobieira, who is the former executive director of the International Monetary Fund.
	Very interesting clip over the weekend of the very important role Iran plays in BRICS to something that's troubling the President of the United States.
	Chris Cutt, number six.
	Iran is not only a very important country by itself in all respects, but it is a link between Russia and India.
	It is a link, possible link between Middle East oil and China, bypassing the Strait of Hormuz.
	So Iran is strategically very important.
	And that perhaps is in the minds of Americans and Israelis when they are permanently hostile to Iran.
	Now, Iran should have had an atomic bomb a long time ago, in my opinion.
	Because this is deterrence acting, you know.
	Iran failed to do that, tried to cooperate, and now it has learned a lesson, I presume.
	And we'll go for a full-scale nuclear program, in my opinion.
	Let's see.
	Go for a full-scale nuclear program, in my opinion.
	What do you think?
	Well, I think that most of what he said, I mean, the nuclear program, we have to wait and see.
	They've got to leave the MPT first.
	But he's left out something very important.
	It's not just the corridors.
	It's not just bricks.
	Iran provides the security to the underbelly of Russia, the Caucasus, Azerbaijan, Armenia, all of the Caucasus.
	Iran is a vital component to the security.
	And so Russia is Very much concerned that nothing should happen to Iran and it shouldn't fall into the Western camp and then be part of the sort of firing up of problems which are already happening in the Caucasus and in places like Azerbaijan.
	I think it'll be managed.
	Russia will sit on Aliyah very shortly if the Iranians haven't already done it.
	But I mean, this is something that is as important to them as also the North-South Corridor, the East-West Corridor, and Iran as a huge resource country, second largest gas resources in the world, third largest oil company.
	I mean, this is what Trump's after, obviously.
	This bigger thing, the revenues from sort of being able to, if you like, making trade deals across the Middle East, in Asia, because, you know, Iran has come into the Western fold.
	All of that will, you know, because all of this will bring in the dollars, he hopes, but it's so fragile.
	And as I say, I mean, first of all, on the Iran thing, I think it's highly unlikely that he will actually go down the route of an attrition against a long war against Iran.
	I think, as Michael Wolf said, and he has it exactly right, I don't think Trump has the attention span for that.
	We've seen it already with Ukraine.
	He's getting tired of that.
	And I don't think he's got the attention span for that.
	But then I don't think that Nanyaku can deliver what Trump wants, of a new Middle East where everyone is aligned, everyone is joining the IBRAM, the courts.
	In fact, you know, what we hear, and of course, there's exceptions to this.
	I'm not saying that it's across the board, but I think many Gulf states are actually very unsettled.
	They see Israel is out of control.
	It's not an advantage to the Gulf states now.
	It's not a security element in their thinking, which it was at one stage.
	10 years ago, it was thinking that, you know, Israel there and America was a sort of security.
	Now they see this as a wild card that could go anywhere, that Israel, too, is out of control.
	And Trump, they don't know what is going to happen with that.
	So, I mean, I think they, I mean, you know, in this sense, you know, for them, Iran is becoming a security component for them, becoming something that's important.
	They've got good relations with Iran, and I think they will keep them through this.
	And they will say to Trump very clearly, we think it's a very bad idea, not least because if something happens to the Hormo Strait, that we have also Iran restricting the traffic through the Hormo Strait.
	I mean, we're in deep trouble.
	So don't go and worsen the war with Iran and don't let Israel do it either.
	Aleister Crook, thank you very much, my dear friend.
	Much appreciated.
	Thank you for your thoughts.
	We'll look forward to seeing you next week.
	Thank you.
	Thank you, Judge.
	Of course.
	Thank you.
	And coming up later today, Monday, at 10 o'clock this morning, Ray McGovern from Germany at 11.30 this morning.
	Larry Johnson at 1 this afternoon.
	Scott Ritter at 2 this afternoon.

▲