Why Is the West So Clueless About Russia?

Judge Andrew Napolitano sits down with Larry Johnson to discuss the West’s apparent lack of understanding regarding Russia. They also touch on the ongoing conflict in the Middle East and the complexities of international relations, questioning the narratives often presented in Western media.

Key Takeaways

• The West seems to misunderstand Russia’s economic strength and technological advancements.
• Western media often presents a biased view of conflicts, particularly concerning Russia and the Middle East.
• There’s a disconnect between Western political rhetoric and the on-the-ground realities of global conflicts.

The West’s Blind Spot on Russia

Larry Johnson points out a significant gap in the West’s understanding of Russia. He highlights that Russia is now the fourth-largest economy globally, based on purchasing power parity, trailing only the US, India, and China. This economic standing is part of the BRICS group, which now includes three of the world’s four largest economies. Johnson emphasizes that Russia is also a leader in various technological fields, even surpassing the US in some areas. For instance, while the US struggles to produce a functional hypersonic missile, Russia has multiple variants and is actively stockpiling them.

Furthermore, Russia possesses vast natural resources, which Johnson suggests is a primary reason for the West’s focus on removing Putin and gaining control over Russia’s wealth. He criticizes the Western approach, particularly the "Victoria Nuland era" attitude, which he believes has failed to achieve its goals in Ukraine. Johnson likens the West’s current stance to delusion and denial, similar to the final days of Adolf Hitler depicted in the movie "Downfall."

He notes that leaders in France, Germany, and the UK seem out of touch with their own citizens. A prime example is the EU’s decision to stop importing Russian oil and gas, despite it being the most inexpensive fuel source for these countries. This move, Johnson argues, will only increase inflation and worsen the economic struggles in these nations. He also points out the West’s inability to keep pace with Russia in producing ammunition, tanks, and armored vehicles, while Russia has these capabilities readily available.

The Middle East Conflict and Western Ignorance

The conversation also touches on the situation in the Middle East. Johnson reacts to a report about Israeli intelligence spying on US troops in Israel, stating it’s "business as usual" and not surprising. He suggests such leaks are a way for the West to put pressure on Israel. He recalls the USS Liberty incident, where Israeli forces attacked a US Navy intelligence vessel, as an example of past actions that went unaddressed.

Johnson questions whether aid is truly reaching Palestinians or if US troops are just a facade. He mentions that even historically, there was little trust between the CIA and Israeli intelligence. He laments the continued killing of Palestinians, including children, and criticizes the perceived charade of peace efforts, suggesting they are merely excuses for prisoner exchanges and hostage returns, with no real political solution in sight.

He also highlights the perceived incompetence of the Israeli military, which has struggled to defeat Hamas, an insurgent group, despite a significant troop presence. Johnson compares Hamas’s resistance to the Warsaw Ghetto uprising, noting that Hamas has held out for much longer against a modern military than the Jewish fighters did against the Nazi army.

Geopolitical Shifts and US Strategy

The discussion shifts to US national security strategy, with Johnson interpreting Donald Trump’s approach as a rejection of 80 years of Cold War liberalism. He likens it to a long-term couple deciding to see other people, suggesting a potential "divorce" from the established international order. However, he cautions that words on paper don’t always translate into policy.

Johnson also brings up the Bureau of Intelligence and Research (INR) and its analysts who reportedly protested a CIA brief suggesting Russia would make concessions. He notes that these analysts were later fired, despite being correct in their assessment. This highlights a potential disconnect within US intelligence agencies regarding Russia.

Venezuela and the Limits of Military Intervention

Finally, the conversation turns to the situation in Venezuela. Johnson expresses skepticism about a potential US invasion, arguing that the objectives are unclear and the aftermath would be unstable. He points out that even if Maduro were removed, a successor like Maria Corina Machado lacks popular support, and a prolonged guerrilla war could ensue. He estimates that the US would need at least 400,000 to 500,000 troops to effectively control Venezuela, a number they don’t have.

He also critiques Donald Trump’s statements about a land invasion, pointing out the geographical realities and the difficulty of such an operation, comparing it to the Vietnam War. Johnson believes that any US ground invasion would lead to significant casualties and a political backlash for Trump. He concludes that the West’s ignorance of Russia and its geopolitical realities is a major stumbling block in understanding and navigating current global affairs.