- 6/21/2025
In this powerful exposé, Prof. Glenn Diesen uncovers the European Union’s silent complicity in Israeli military actions. Why does Europe continue to support Israel despite clear human rights violations in Gaza and the West Bank? This deep dive reveals the geopolitical interests, media bias, and moral contradictions at the heart of European foreign policy.
👉 Watch till the end for eye-opening insights the mainstream won’t show you.
#FreePalestine #EuropeanComplicity
👉 Watch till the end for eye-opening insights the mainstream won’t show you.
#FreePalestine #EuropeanComplicity
Category
🗞
NewsTranscript
00:00Transcribed by —
00:30Hi, everyone. Judge Andrew Napolitano here for Judging Freedom.
00:36Today is Thursday, June 19, 2025. Professor Glenn Deason joins us now. Professor Deason,
00:42always a pleasure. Thank you for joining us. I'd like to be able to pick your brain and prevail
00:49in your knowledge of European reaction to the events in Iran and Israel and European
00:58complicity, if there is any, in the end stages of the war in Ukraine. We'll start with Israel.
01:07Is there evidence of the involvement of European intelligence agencies in support of the Israeli
01:15attack on Iran last week?
01:19Well, there's been some flights, refueling flights, I think, German, but also British,
01:26which — but again, this hasn't been confirmed as far as I am aware. But it's mostly the political
01:35support which is being provided. That is that the German Chancellor, Mertz, he made the argument
01:40that Israel is doing the dirty work for us, and thereafter also passing a resolution to effectively
01:49give legitimacy for Israel's attack on Iran. You also saw Kaya Callas, which is the EU foreign
01:56policy chief, who argued that she responded by saying that Israel has right to defend itself.
02:04Apparently, Iran does not have the right to defend itself. And she also made the statement that Iran
02:09must return to the negotiation table, which is also an astonishing remark, given that Iran was at the
02:16negotiation table. They were in the middle of the negotiation when they were subjected to a surprise
02:22attack. And it's Israel that doesn't want to stop. And we also had a recent meeting with the G7. Again,
02:30they go through the motions. They say this, you know, the benign words that they want the de-escalation,
02:36but they don't actually want an end to the fighting. They didn't want to call for a ceasefire.
02:41So what exactly is de-escalation here? They certainly do not condemn the attacks on Iran's nuclear
02:47reactors. They don't condemn a surprise attack, a war of aggression. They don't criticize any car
02:54bombing and bombing of TV stations and murdering of journalists in Iran. So it's mostly a display of
03:01support for Israel. But again, they don't have much of a narrative to lean into. So they pretty much
03:07go with the old tested one, which is that Israel has the right to defend itself. But it's not proving
03:13to be very convincing, given that this was, again, a surprise attack by Israel.
03:19MR. Chris, play the CNN montage or have it ready of Prime Minister Netanyahu. Professor
03:28Deason, Prime Minister Netanyahu has been arguing for 30 years that Iran is within days of having
03:36a nuclear weapon. As recently as two months ago, the American Director of National Intelligence
03:41testified before the United States Congress under oath that it is the consensus of the intelligence
03:48community, by which she meant hers, MI6, and Mossad, that Iran does not have a nuclear weapon and
03:57has not been working on one since 2002. Before we play this clip, have the G7 leaders fallen for the
04:08Netanyahu argument, notwithstanding intel evidence, substantial intel evidence to the contrary?
04:16MR. Well, I don't think it really matters anymore. I think the pursuit of truth is not the main
04:23objective. I think there's a desperate effort to push a narrative, because usually ahead of wars,
04:31governments have some time to spend, well, significant time to develop a narrative to justify war. Indeed,
04:38we saw this with Bush and the weapons of mass destruction. You build up consent and support for a
04:45war. You didn't really have it this time. Indeed, this is part of the problem with a surprise attack,
04:50when Trump one day says, you know, we close the deal and then the next day, striking Iran. So I think for
04:57this reason, the narratives they're leaning into are very weak. So they're not really commenting much on
05:06these reports, which kind of contradicts the whole argument. But if I can just add, I don't think they
05:12really believe that this has anything to do with Iran's nuclear program anyways. Because as Trump has said,
05:21he doesn't even want Iran to have a civilian nuclear program, which is Iran's right under a signatory of
05:29the Non-Proliferation Treaty. Also, in the negotiations, they link this to Iran's ballistic missiles, its
05:37partnership with foreign partners, be it Yemen, Hezbollah, Hamas. So they linked the nuclear issue to
05:44everything, effectively demanding a capitulation of Iran as a regional power. So I don't think they
05:51really believe that this is about the nuclear program to begin with. It's probably about dislodging
05:59the Ayatollah from power. I mean, Netanyahu, for all of his deceptions and lies, has actually been pretty
06:07candid about that. Israel does not want another power in its neighborhood. It wants to be able to
06:15be the bully with impunity. And Iran simply won't allow that. At least, that's my view. Watch this
06:22clip of Netanyahu. It goes back to the 1990s. Tell me if there's any truth in all these utterances.
06:30The deadline for attaining this goal is getting extremely close. And Iran, by the way,
06:37is also outpacing Iraq in the development of ballistic missile systems that they hope will
06:43reach the eastern seaboard of the United States within 15 years. By next spring, at most, by next
06:49summer, at current enrichment rates, they will have finished the medium enrichment and move on to the
06:57final stage. From there, it's only a few months, possibly a few weeks before they get enough enriched
07:05uranium for the first bomb. The foremost sponsor of global terrorism could be weeks away from having
07:14enough enriched uranium for an entire arsenal of nuclear weapons. That would place a militant
07:20Islamic terror regime, weeks away from having the fissile material for an entire arsenal of nuclear
07:29bombs. If not stopped, Iran could produce a nuclear weapon in a very short time. It could be a year,
07:35it could be within a few months, less than a year. Any truth to any of that, Professor Deason?
07:43No, and I think you're quite correct with your comment that this is motivated by the desire for
07:50regime change. Besides Netanyahu, you also have more honesty coming from the likes of Lindsey Graham,
07:56Ted Cruz. They're quite open that they want the government to be removed. And I think this is the
08:02objective. Now, the reference to weapons of mass destruction, you know, you see this used not just in
08:09Iraq, but Syria as well. It's a very convincing argument to legitimize war. But it has to be
08:18pointed out again that Iran, if it was really about a nuclear weapon, Iran has said it doesn't want a
08:25nuclear weapon. And it's also been willing to sign agreements for intrusive inspections. And this was
08:32the JCPOA. But this is what the first Trump administration pulled out of unilaterally, while
08:39the Iranians were fulfilling their obligations. So if we wanted simply to ensure that they don't
08:45acquire nuclear weapons, and if that's what they want, I think that's a good cause. I think it will
08:49be very destabilizing. Indeed, Iran also recognized it will be destabilizing. If they acquired a nuclear
08:54weapon, so would Saudi Arabia. So you would spark a security competition, which no one would actually
09:01gain from. So I think that they have the reason and the rationality not to develop a nuclear weapon.
09:07And they will not discuss why and how Israel has a nuclear weapon without signing the
09:15non-proliferation treaty. How can this be? The American government doesn't want to talk about it.
09:20Netanyahu won't talk about it. Well, I agree. Imagine if there was a deal in which Iran would
09:27subject itself to very intrusive inspections, commit itself to no nuclear weapon. But then
09:32you have to get something in return as well, which would be Israel not getting nuclear weapons. Because
09:37at the moment, this whole thing is very hypocritical. That is, Israel is not a signatory to the non-proliferation
09:43treaty. It has nuclear weapons. It allows no inspections. Meanwhile, it demands that Iran should
09:51have all these inspections, even though Iran is a signatory to the non-proliferation treaty. And
09:56by the way, therefore also has the right to develop a civilian nuclear program. The way
10:00usually international law works and arms treaties would be you accept mutual constraints. But we don't
10:08do this with Iran or anyone else for that sake. It's always you have to submit yourself to our demands,
10:15or we'll bomb you. I think it would be much more helpful if we could actually meet the Iranian
10:19security concerns and we can meet halfway. I think they would be willing to go a long way. Instead,
10:25there's very reasonable accusations that their willingness to accept this arms control and the
10:31inspections by the IAEA has resulted in them essentially handing over a lot of intelligence to
10:38Israel, which is why a lot of nuclear scientists are being assassinated and the Israelis have to know
10:44what to target. You mentioned weapons of mass destruction. See if any of this brings back
10:53memories. Chris, cut number 26. Neither the United States of America nor the world community of nations
10:59can tolerate deliberate deception and offensive threats on the part of any nation, large or small.
11:08Every statement I make today is backed up by sources, solid sources. These are not assertions.
11:14What we're giving you are facts and conclusions based on solid intelligence. Saddam Hussein and his regime
11:21have made no effort, no effort to disarm as required by the international community. Saddam Hussein and his
11:28regime are concealing their efforts to produce more weapons of mass destruction. At this hour,
11:35American and coalition forces are in the early stages of military operations to disarm Iraq to
11:41free its people and to defend the world from grave danger. They have ballistic missiles that can now
11:46reach deep into Europe and soon could reach the United States. Do you want these people to have nuclear
11:52weapons and the means to deliver them to your cities? Today it's Tel Aviv, tomorrow it's New York.
11:58The same old discredited domino theory argument going back to President Lyndon Johnson and the Vietnam War.
12:11Today Tel Aviv, tomorrow New York. History repeats itself, Professor.
12:19This is a good way of framing wars and legitimizing them. Again, when you want to legitimize a war,
12:25you want to strip the situation of all complexity and you want to create a very simple binary solution.
12:32That is, you know, either you accept this war bombing Iran, otherwise you risk an attack by Iran,
12:40even though there's other options. You're supporting the government and everything is done or the regime,
12:45as we say. And you essentially are forced to choose. So do you choose our side or Iran's side? And now you
12:51divide the population into, effectively, patriots versus traitors. So it's a very sneaky way of
13:00creating consent for war. But it's something we do in every single war. So it's quite interesting to
13:05watch this clip because, yeah, it's essentially the same playbook every time.
13:10Yes, yes. Are you able to have your finger on the pulse of how Europeans feel? I don't mean Mertz and
13:18Starmer and Macron and von der Leyen, but average Europeans. I mean, do they want their governments
13:27aiding the US and Israel to invade Iran any more than they want their governments to aid Ukraine to fight Russia?
13:39Well, I haven't seen polls from Europe. I've seen polls from the United States, where you see the
13:46majority do not want a war with Iran. From my impressions, this is what I get a sense of here
13:53as well, that in Europe, they do not want a war. Of course, there's very many different European
13:58countries with different sentiments. But overall, I don't think they want this. And this is interesting,
14:02because we're being always fed a very heavy dose of propaganda. That is, the only thing we know about
14:09Iran is that they're evil, they hate the West, and they want a nuclear weapon. I don't think any of this
14:14has to be true. But again, the way that Iran is framed in the media, you would never get anything
14:20positive. And nonetheless, you see a huge skepticism. And I do think that people who are somewhat aware,
14:28they know that this is not simply just another dangerous military opportunistic path in the
14:38Middle East, I think most people recognize that Iran is something very, very different. This is not
14:44Iraq. Their population is much larger, almost twice the size. Their territories is many times larger.
14:50Their country is effectively a fortress of mountains, which prevents land forces from coming in. They can
14:57shut down the global economy. They can hide, you know, thousands of missiles underground. You can't
15:03really defeat Iran, which begs then the question, if Iraq was a failure, Libya was a failure, Afghanistan,
15:09Syria, yeah, we can go on. This is going to be the worst. This is going to be, you know, there's been
15:15military games, war games, in which you find out that it's not easy at all to defeat Iran. On the
15:23contrary. So I think people who are somewhat informed, they can see that this is going to be
15:28an unmitigated disaster. And now that Trump says, well, we only accept the complete surrender of Iran,
15:35this will never happen. So the only option now is endless war without an exit strategy, which is a good
15:42summary of everything we've done in that region for the past 30 years, except now we're facing a very
15:47powerful adversary at the time when the collective West is severely weakened. So it's, yeah, I remember
15:56I was in your program the day before they, or the evening before they began bombing, and I saw all the
16:02movements taking place, and I still refuse to believe that they could be this crazy. But yes, we all refuse to
16:09believe they could be this crazy. Now can the President of the United States be this crazy? Back when the
16:16Tony Blair government asked the British House of Commons to endorse the George W. Bush-inspired
16:27invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq, the late, great Anthony Wedgwood Ben, a fierce fighter against war, gave a
16:38remarkable speech on the floor of the House of Commons. Here is the two-minute, Chris,
16:45the longer version, here is the two-minute essence of what the great Anthony Wedgwood Ben said.
16:54I'll finish just by saying this. War is an easy thing to talk about. There are not many people of the generation that
17:00remember it. The right Honourable Gentleman served with the Six in the Last of War. I never killed anyone, but I wore
17:05uniform. But I was in London in the Blitz in 1940, living in the Millbank Tower where I was born. Some different
17:12ideas have come in since. And every night I went down to the shelter in Thames House. Every morning I saw
17:21Dockland burning, five hundred people were killed in Westminster one night by a land mine. It was
17:26terrifying. Aren't Arabs terrified? Aren't Iraqis terrified? Don't Arab and Iraqi women weep when
17:32their children die? Doesn't bombing strengthen their determination? What fools we are to live in a
17:39generation for which war is a computer game for our children and just an interesting little Channel 4
17:44news item. Every member of parliament tonight who votes for the government motion will be consciously
17:51and deliberately accepting the responsibility for the deaths of innocent people if the war begins,
17:58as I fear it will. Now that's for their decision to take. But this is a quite unique debate in my
18:04parliamentary experience where we ask to share responsibility for a decision we won't really
18:09be taking with consequences for people who have no part to play in the brutality of the regime
18:17which we are dealing with. And I finish with this. On October 24, 1945, and the former prime minister
18:23from Bexley and Old Sutcutt will remember it, the United Nations Charter was passed. And the words of
18:30that charter etched into my mind and moved me even as I think of them. We, the people of the United
18:37Nations determined to save future generations, succeeding generations, from the scourge of war
18:47which twice in our lifetime has caused untold suffering to mankind. That was the pledge of that
18:55generation to this generation and it would be the greatest betrayal of all if we voted to abandon
19:01the charter and take unilateral action and pretend we were doing it in the name of the international
19:06community. And I shall vote against the motion for the reasons that I've given them.
19:12There is no great debate in the House of Representatives or the Senate of the United
19:17States of America on this. For all of the wrongful decisions that were made by the House
19:23of Commons, at least they had a debate. At least there was an Anthony Wedgwood. There's nothing here.
19:28It's a decision of one man made in a subterranean room surrounded by people telling
19:33him what he wants to hear. No, I agree. But I also think it's worth noting where this message came
19:40from. Again, an elderly statesman now who has passed away. And this is a real problem because
19:47it's said that every generation has to learn to fear war. And we've had many decades of relative peace
19:54and stability. And that former generation who experienced also the Second World War and all the
20:00horrors of war, they're all passing away now. And the lessons of war is also gone. So there's not any
20:07healthy fear of war anymore. And to make matters much worse, we had now over three decades of a unipolar
20:12order in which war is something that doesn't happen here. It happens far away in other places. And
20:18again, we can sit and justify whatever we're doing. Usually, we do it by referencing democracy
20:25and freedom and ideals that we hold there. But there's also what he suggested. There's always
20:31the need, if you're going to go and bomb other people, the need to dehumanize the opponent. Again,
20:36they do have... These are the same fellow human beings. And all we have to do now is make references
20:43to terrorism. And it's enough to begin to support a genocide. And it's not just that the people we
20:49are, you know, slaughtering in other places, you know, which is a disaster, but it's also,
20:55you know, it's hollowing out our, you know, the soul of our countries as well. Well, when we have to
21:02legitimize what shouldn't be legitimized just on a daily basis, it's, yeah, it's quite heartbreaking.
21:09It's... We need... I wish we had these kind of diplomats and politicians today, because
21:16I don't see them among our own political class. No, no, and the American Congress, there's just a few,
21:23and the leadership does the best it can to shut them down. The House of Representatives doesn't
21:29permit debate. They give you one or two minutes. The Senate, you can talk as long as you want, but
21:33you're talking to an empty chamber. Just to switch gears for a minute before we finish. And I thank
21:39you for your eloquent analysis of all this, Professor. It's such a joy to be able to do this Q&A
21:49with you. Are the... I'm switching to Ukraine. Are the European governments prepared to pick up the slack
21:57if Donald Trump terminates the volume, the level of American aid to Ukraine?
22:07Well, I think he already is, for two reasons. One, they want to walk away from this,
22:12because, well, they have new wars in the Middle East, but also they want to shift focus to Asia.
22:17But now, with the war against Iran, air defenses and other weaponry has to be
22:23redirected, because Israel is a higher priority than Ukraine. So the U.S. its absence now in Ukraine
22:32is being felt. And I think that the Europeans are now desperate to fill the shoes of America,
22:38but they don't have the money, they don't have the weapons, so it's simply not going to happen.
22:42They don't have the industrial capability to ramp up production either. So there's nothing they can
22:48really do. But still, they don't want to even talk to the Russians, so much for calling for
22:55de-escalation and diplomacy. They don't even want to pick up the phone. But again, I think all the
23:00war propaganda has something to do with this, because anything that's in our interest now can
23:07be demonized as being pro-Russians. That is, we can't recognize the security concerns of Russia,
23:13because then you will be pro-Russian. The Germans are not even allowed to buy
23:18oil from Russia, because that's pro-Russian. So they have to buy Russian oil from India,
23:23which makes no sense at all. And the problem is, if you want security, you have to consider
23:28Russian security. If you want prosperity, you do have to reopen some trade with Russia. But
23:34everything that's in our interest is effectively labeled pro-Russian. So we've more or less been banned
23:40from acting in our own national interest. And the problems are starting to pile up. So
23:44the idea that us, the Europeans, can fill the shoes of America and go and fight Russia is ludicrous.
23:53America and Europe together for three years couldn't defeat Russia. And now the Ukrainian
23:58military is falling apart. It has a manpower shortage. It has a shortage of weaponry. And at this point
24:04in time when the Russians are stronger than ever, the Europeans are filling up what the Americans
24:10aren't doing anymore. It's absurd. This is only making the war drag out and resulting in more deaths.
24:18And this is something that the Ukrainians are waking up to as well.
24:21Professor Deason, thank you very much. Great analysis, as always, on both of these hot spots.
24:27Deeply appreciated. Thank you for accommodating my schedule. We look forward to seeing you next week.
24:32Oh, thank you, Judge. Of course. And coming up at two o'clock today, who's very hot under the collar
24:38about all of us, Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson, Judge Napolitano for Judging Freedom.
Recommended
0:32
5:48
21:34