Skip to content
Home » Transcript: How Foolish to Attack The Houthis – Scott Ritter

Transcript: How Foolish to Attack The Houthis – Scott Ritter

Read the full transcript of a conversation between Judge Andrew Napolitano and former UN weapons inspector Scott Ritter on Judging Freedom Podcast titled “How Foolish to Attack The Houthis” premiered March 17, 2025.

TRANSCRIPT:

Introduction

ANDREW NAPOLITANO: Hi everyone. Judge Andrew Napolitano here for Judging Freedom. Today is Monday, March 17, 2025, St. Patrick’s Day here in the West. Scott Ritter will be with us in just a moment on just how foolish is it, how unwise is it for the Trump administration to be attacking Houthis and civilians in Yemen?

[Advertisement removed]

Trump Administration’s Diplomatic Efforts with Russia

ANDREW NAPOLITANO: Scott Ritter, welcome here, my dear friend. Before we talk about the attack on the Houthis and Yemen civilians over the weekend perpetrated by the Trump administration, I’d like your take on the back and forth between Witkoff, Rubio, Trump, and Putin. That’s been going on, as I understand it from Alistair Crook, Secretary Rubio actually had Steve Witkoff deliver to President Putin a signed copy of the so-called ceasefire agreement signed by Marco Rubio and by Volodymyr Zelensky. That does not strike me as appropriate or standard diplomacy, but this is something relatively new. What’s your take on it?

SCOTT RITTER: Well, I of course, can’t confirm this reporting, so I don’t know. You’re right to point out that that would be a departure from diplomatic norms because the implication is that they’re trying to strong arm Russia into accepting something that would be unacceptable for Russia. And I don’t believe if that tactic was used that it would work.

President Trump’s trying to play a very weak hand right now and the Russians have been, I think, extraordinarily gracious in not holding the president to account for the failures of diplomatic norm, for the failures of common sense, for the failures of decency. The president, on the one hand, will articulate repeatedly how he understands that Russia didn’t start this conflict. He understands how this conflict came about. It’s about the expansion of NATO, which Russia took umbrage to, and the President said that Russia had every right.

Then Marco Rubio turns around and says, rightly so, that this is a proxy war between the United States and Russia. I’ll say that one more time. A proxy war between the United States and Russia. Ukraine is simply the tool for this. If you have that kind of comprehension, then why are you playing the game as if Ukraine has a say in anything that’s going on here? Why are you paying attention to the Ukrainian positions that they must return the borders to 2014, 2022, that Russia must pay reparations?

There’s just an absolute inconsistency in the president’s approach here. And while I don’t want to predict the future, I will say that it will fail because this is an existential issue for Russia. And this is amateur hour in the extreme. To think that presenting a document signed by Marco Rubio and Volodymyr Zelensky is going to somehow twist the arm of a Russian president who’s been at war for three years, who has taken the personal responsibility of the deaths of tens of thousands of his soldiers, who is the leader of his nation, is somehow going to throw that all away because Marco Rubio signed a damn piece of paper along with Zelensky. This is insanity. I’m surprised Witkoff went along with it.

ANDREW NAPOLITANO: Because how can the Russians, as astute as Foreign Minister Lavrov and as astute and patient as President Putin is, how can the Russians look upon Rubio, Waltz and Witkoff as honest brokers? We’re not honest brokers.

We’re co-belligerents. We’re the principal belligerents. By instigating and provoking the war and paying for it.

SCOTT RITTER: Well, I think the difference, again, this is me speaking. I can’t speak on behalf of the Russians, no matter how much the FBI thinks I do. When you look at the words of the senior Russians, they acknowledge that the Trump administration is seeking to move the relationship in a direction that the relationship should be in, that is one where diplomacy is re-established, where diplomatic norms are recognized, and therefore, the Russians are able and willing to differentiate between the sins of the past and the actions of the present.

And I think this is an accurate point. And no matter what we think of the Trump administration, good, bad, ugly, pretty whatever. We do need to acknowledge that this is a distinct departure from past practice, that this is a different administration, that this administration wasn’t in power in February of 2022, that this administration did not make the proxy conflict that’s ongoing since February 2022, that this administration is not responsible for targeting, for directing the assaults undertaken by Ukraine against Russian territory.

So the Russians are willing to overlook a lot of hiccups, stumbles, foibles, mistakes, because they think that this is the better direction to be headed in. But there’s going to be only so much tolerance for incompetence. And at some point in time, if this incompetence seeks to strong arm Russia into doing something that’s against Russian national interests, the Russians are going to say, nyet.

Netanyahu and Israeli Politics

ANDREW NAPOLITANO: Very, very interesting and astute observation, Scott. Jumping to Israel. Netanyahu announced yesterday Sunday that on Wednesday he’s going to fire the head of Shin Bet. Is there more here than meets the eye? Under Israeli law, according to the Israeli Attorney General, he can only be fired for cause. And Netanyahu has not articulated any cause. This is like firing the head of the FBI.

SCOTT RITTER: Yeah. The Shin Bet has several investigations underway against Netanyahu. There is, of course, the years old corruption investigation that Netanyahu has been working very hard to shape the judicial system so that he would never stand trial. And then there are a series of ongoing investigations related to October 7 and Netanyahu’s actions in the aftermath of the initiation of this conflict by Hamas, the failures of leadership that took place.

But I think more critically is the one that hardly anybody’s talking about.