Sebastian Gorka

I think Europe writ large has to step back and just assess what it has done to the rights of individual citizens in the free expression of their political or religious beliefs.

that is on the side of the cartel members, on the side of the illegal aliens, on the side of the terrorists. And you have to ask yourself, are they technically aiding and abetting them? Because aiding and abetting criminals and terrorists is a crime in federal statute, Rob.

They're going to give us a little bit of concession so they still look tough. That's completely the standard operating procedure of a former KGB colonel who's now president. At the end of the day, as I said to the BBC recently, name me one other political leader in the world who's going to bring peace to

But he hasn't met his match.

Right, but let's go outside of negotiations. At the beginning of the war three years ago, There's a thing that comes out of the UK from IISS called the military balance. It's an artifact of the Cold War where you have all the militaries of the world listed in terms of their power, how many men, how many ships, how many nuclear weapons, whatever. So it's a ranking of all the world's militaries.

When the war began three and a half years ago, Russia was ranked second in the world in terms of military might. Ukraine was ranked 22nd. 22nd. So who's met their match? I think Moscow's met their match. When somebody who's ranked 20 positions behind you basically fights you to a standstill, which they've done. At the end of the day, look, you know better than anyone else.

Everybody talks about the Brandenburg Gate speech, tear down this wall, Mr. Gorbachev talks about the pressures economically inside the Soviet Union. What was one of the first chinks in the army? Nobody talks about this now. Nobody talks about this now. When was the first sign the Soviet Union was heading towards collapse? When after nine years of war in Afghanistan,

Soviet grandmothers, Soviet mothers publicly protested at their 19-year-old children, their sons, their grandchildren, being shipped home from Afghanistan in cardboard boxes. That's not very long in the memory of the Siloviki nomenklatura of the Soviet system. So there's a point at which the Kremlin has to say, okay, guys, let's sit down.

They're not going to do it fast, but they have to sit down.

Absolutely. There's nothing about what the president is doing that is driven by a sense of haste. What's driving the president, number one, and the left won't believe this and the mainstream won't believe this, but it's fine. I know the man better than they do. He's truly horrified by what he's seeing.

But that's the number one thing. That's the number one thing. And when my boss, the National Security Advisor, who's the first ever Green Beret, Special Forces officer, former Green Beret, to serve in that position, in Jeddah, or was it Riyadh, says, we have to stop the meat grinder of Ukrainian men and Russian men. He means it, because this is a man who's fought the Taliban in Afghanistan.

He knows what a meat grinder looks like. So number one, this isn't about a quick fix and move on. This is about stopping horror. And secondly, and I... Julia, why did you do this? Julia Hartley Brewer just didn't get it last week. She was obsessed, as so many are, with, we need that piece of paper. We need that security guarantee. We need Western nations to, you know, NATO membership or something.

And I'm like, hang on a second. First, read the NATO treaty. The NATO treaty is explicit. It's only 14 paragraphs long. And it states you can only be a member of NATO if you are... a functioning representative democracy who can contribute to the alliance. Just two requirements. You're not a functioning representative democracy when your territory is occupied, right? Just like you're ruled out.

Absolutely incredible.

You've got to be in control of your territory. And then you've got to be able to contribute to the alliance. And then I said to Julia, You know what's much more important than a piece of paper by the NATO alliance or the Budapest memorandum, remember that? What the president offered Zelensky. This is the biggest mistake in terms of analyzing the whole peace process.

I pinch myself every single day, not simply because of my personal reasons that I've been waiting about 25 years for this job, but it feels like we've been here for seven months, not seven weeks, because of the pace, the alacrity of what the president has achieved from sealing the border to new deals to, as we are recording this, he just announced from the Oval Office with Secretary of Defense Hegseth next to him, the new F-47 fighter jet, big secret for the

If you sign a trade deal, a rare earth minerals deal with America, you will have thousands of US citizens on your soil. Now that's a guarantee. Got a piece of paper. Big U.S. companies, U.S. personnel, that's when inimical nations think twice.

You're going to pull them out. So let's be clear. The safety of Ukraine is a function of who's in the White House. And to your hypothetical scenario, let's be clear. When was it invaded? On multiple occasions. Agreed. Under Obama? Yeah, yeah. So I can't give you a foolproof guarantee of no world war on Europe if a Democrat is in this building.

If President Trump, as he is for the next four years, and then maybe J.D. Vance for the next eight years, it changes the geopolitical calculus of the Kremlin.

But neither will a piece of paper help if a Democrat's in the building. That's why Europeans are talking about peacekeepers, because it's the only way to... Can we, again, stick to the real world? Europe has been talking about military forces under the EU since I cut my teeth on NATO issues in 1997. It's cloud cuckoo land, okay?

The idea that we have NATO with target force goals, with commands, and then suddenly you're gonna replicate stuff when you can't afford to actually run your healthcare services, when you're having debates upon retirement benefits,

Let me have a cold shower effect on those who are thinking that Europe will suddenly duplicate NATO and then deploy assets to parts of the continent that aren't members of the EU. I've heard this story for 30 years, and it never amounts to anything. If you want to look it up, look up CFSP. Common foreign security policy from the 1990s. Look up common defense forces.

The EU's been talking about this for decades. As far as I'm concerned, as somebody who's been doing this for a long time, it's all talk. There's America, there's Article 5, and there's NATO. And there's leaders who, unlike Biden, don't say, well, if Putin invades, it depends upon the size of the invasion, which is what he said. You're inviting trouble.

It's about American leadership and the systems at work, which at the moment and for the last 70 years is NATO.

No, look, I'm not going to speak for the president, but I know that any rapprochement between Beijing and Moscow is a tactical one. These are nations that are in dire competition with each other. And we can discuss the demographics and the economics of all that. But no, let's be very honest. When you want somebody to come to the negotiating table, do you call them a murderer?

Do you call them evil? Or do you want to actually get them to the negotiating table? This is the asinine request of the mainstream media during the first Trump administration. Why are you talking to Putin? Why are you talking to Xi? I mean, it's far more important to look at what the president does when he's talking to them.

One of the most important things the president did in the first administration is when we briefed him, and this is now declassified, that there are chemical weapons about to be put on aircraft in Syria to target civilians in Syria. When the president was briefed this, this is under Assad, he said, turn that aircraft base into a sheet of glass. We launched 52 cruise missiles.

So keeping up with him is one of the toughest things in life, but it's just an amazing time to be alive, and it's an amazing time to be an American. And what do you do day to day? So I'm the Senior Director for Counterterrorism in the National Security Council, working for the National Security Advisor, Mike Waltz.

literally just obliterated this facility as what was happening at the same time. Xi Jinping was in Mar-a-Lago having a state banquet, and the president, you can see the footage right now, leans over Xi, and through the interpreter, Xi's eating the best chocolate cake in the world, says, I just thought you should know I just dropped 52 cruise missiles on Syria.

He didn't invade Syria, he didn't do a regime change, but he sent a message to who? not just Assad, who's going to use chemical weapons again against his own citizens because they're from the wrong ethnicity. He sent a message to Xi. He sent a message to Kim in Pyongyang. And he sent a message to Putin. This is not a man to be trifled with. The prior administration talked about red lines.

And then what happened? The red lines were crossed again and again and again. And they said, well, right? We don't talk about red lines. You do bad stuff. And we act, and we act decisively in ways that change the complete geopolitical reality. I mean, look at what happened with the Houthis last weekend.

The president was told that a US ship has not been allowed to traverse that waterway for the last year without being fired upon, and that 147 times US vessels have been shot at by the Houthis. And he said, well, that ends now. Sorted out Secretary Hegseth, CENTCOM turned the Houthis into dust. That's not red lines. That's not empty promises.

That's not, well, it depends what kind of military invasion Putin's going to affect. No, it's taking action to make sure maritime freedom of the sea lanes is affected. That's Donald Trump. And I think most bad men who run countries understand that language.

Um... The first thing I'd say with regards to the PRC and to the capabilities of the People's Liberation Army, ironically named as it is, is that a lot of what China says about its military capabilities is very good propaganda. Yes, they are the number one strategic adversary for the United States.

Yes, for the 100th anniversary of the revolution in 2048, they wish to be the only hegemonic power in the world, with every other nation a satrapy or a tributary state. Nevertheless, don't believe the hype when it comes to all the things they say about their capabilities. For things like that to occur, you have to have very large-scale expeditionary forces.

You need to be more active partners, whether you're Arab nations in the Middle East or whether you're Western nations that have terrorism occurring on your streets.

And so my job is to coordinate all counterterrorism policies and activities for the President, for Mike Waltz, to make sure that we are... Well, as my colleagues tell me, they ask me as I bump into them in the West Wing, have you killed more jihadis today? So we have a lot of work to keep Americans and our allies and our friends safe from the scourge of global jihadism.

Not just a lot of guys in uniform, but the capacity to project them like America can. Nobody can touch us when it comes to projection of forces. However, I'm not diminishing the level of threat.

Literally two days ago, I was with a very high-level Australian delegation here in the White House, and they understand that the threat to their part of the world, the influence China is exerting and buying amongst smaller, weaker nations of the region is very disturbing. The president gets it, but again, I would say, the bad men understand who the commander-in-chief is.

I cannot guarantee in the future how they will look at this building, but for the next four years and maybe the next 12 years under J.D. Vance, they will understand this is not a building to be trifled with.

No, and we're fully aware of that. I mean, as I said, I'm a counterterrorism guy, but I'm fully cognizant of the fact that the only peer-level threat we face is China. A China that is, let's be honest, acting in a neo-colonialist fashion, not just in Venezuela... not just in our hemisphere, but Africa.

Talk to the leaders of the African states where, you know, communist China goes in, promises infrastructure investments, but at what cost? Oh, we'll build that port for you, but we're going to own it for 50 years and we're going to put a military base next to it. We are fully aware of this fact.

As a man and as a father, let me ask you a question. Do you judge a man by what he says or what he does?

So there's what is said... And then there's the reality of what is done, right? And I would say, it's like, who was it? It was that great journalist who wrote the best description of Trump derangement syndrome. I think it was eight years ago, Selena Zito, who you should have on your show if you haven't. Selena said, President Trump's supporters don't take him literally, but take him seriously.

And everybody says, oh my gosh, he said what? They take him literally, but they don't take him seriously. Look at Gaza. Let's talk about, you know, Gaza. When the President Trump said, we're taking over Gaza. What did he mean? People say, oh my gosh, is it going to be, you know, Gaza Lago? Is it going to be gold-plated hotel towers coming out of, you know, the Middle East? No.

But analyze what happened. He makes a comment. Certain nations of the region have a fit. Oh my gosh, how dare he say that for 24 hours. And then the self-same nations, three days later, who've done nothing for the Gazans for 50 years, say, huh, maybe we should invest in the future of the Gazan people. Thank you. Thank you.

Well, look, it's not a univalent situation. There's not one threat. So I'll be completely open here. When I came into this building eight years ago for the first Trump administration, my background was counterterrorism, was teaching the military, the intelligence community how to deal with al-Qaeda and ISIS. And I thought I'd be doing that.

Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.

And once you get the clearances and once you read the president's daily intelligence briefing, You realize there's only one real strategic level threat to America, and that's China. And the president understands that. And with people like Peter Nabarro back on board, people like Scott Besson to the Treasury, we are dealing with that strategic level nation state threat.

Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.

But when it comes to counterterrorism, look, the last four years have been absolutely catastrophic. Let's start with Biden's surrender of Afghanistan. Afghanistan is the nation that gave aid and succor to al-Qaeda, to bin Laden, prior to 9-11.

And then he gets $77 million. It's pretty impressive.

The last administration, in ways that made the Saigon withdrawal look like a walk in the park, deserted Afghanistan, deserted the people who had fought with us against the Taliban, against Al Qaeda. Now the organization that helped the Al Qaeda terrorists is back in control of that nation. We've withdrawn all of our capabilities from that region to do counterterrorism as we did previously.

Lawfare. We're witnessing it right now with judges who think they control the executive, who say the president cannot use enacted powers as the commander-in-chief, as the chief executive, to ship literal terrorists out of America, rapists and murderers, judges who say you have to order the plane to turn around and not go to Venezuela. Lawfare, in my opinion.

And I say this as a great sinner myself when it comes to this sin. put your stinking phone down and switch it off and read a bloody book. And preferably by a white guy who died over 400 years ago.

Not in my library. You know, just knowledge... Knowledge, knowledge, and AI again. It's like I was talking to a friend of mine earlier today, Alex Marlow, the editor of Breitbart, and he says, you know, you can write books without researchers now. You put it in the grok and you'll get something that would have taken you a week to do. Who's going to learn?

Who's going to actually learn how to read books and do research in the future?

So switch your phone off, read a book. Perfect. By Den White Guy.

What are the biggest differences that you as an actual insider observe in the culture and functioning of the present White House staff as compared to the previous Trump White House?

So when I came into the building, I was told that we have an increased threat of global jihadism on the Sunni side. Iran is now stronger than ever because Biden released tens of billions of dollars. So the president is very serious about the threat of jihadi terrorism. And that's why you've seen one of the first actions, second week of the administration, is the strikes against ISIS in Somalia.

The Houthis, President Trump took action just last weekend. So yeah, the president takes this threat very seriously. And if you look at the events in Europe, the Christmas market attacks, you look at the events in the UK, the stabbings and so forth, those three little beautiful girls. Yeah, he gets it and we are taking action and it is my honor to be part of that.

Yeah.

So you're absolutely right. The president is not a neoconservative interventionist. He's not an isolationist. There are people who say, oh, he's an isolationist. Garbage. America first does not mean America alone.

The fact that he strengthened NATO by getting two-thirds of the NATO members to actually pay their dues, which was not the case when we came into the White House the first time around, demonstrates that. But when it comes to Iran... He's not interested in regime change in terms of the 82nd Airborne going in and changing nations. His first question is, whenever we brief him, why are we there?

We have a lot of work to keep Americans and our allies and our friends safe from the scourge of global jihadism. His demand, even more than eight years ago, is that if you share the threat assessment that jihadism is bad, then you need to step up.

He's truly horrified by what he's seeing. This isn't about a quick fix and move on. This is about stopping horror.

Why do we have boots on the ground anywhere? And his demand, even more than eight years ago, is that if you share the threat assessment that jihadism is bad, if your citizens are being killed on your streets, then you need to step up.

You need to be more active partners, whether you're Arab nations in the Middle East who are threatened by the Muslim Brotherhood, by Al-Qaeda, by ISIS, by al-Nusra, or whether you're Western nations that have terrorism occurring on your streets. So it's not up to us. to change regimes. We have to suppress the terrorist threat.

And as far as I'm concerned, I would love to see the nation of Persia, with all the ethnicities that are inside Iran today, take back their country. And the saddest, the most cripplingly tragic thing is by the end of the first Trump administration, the Islamofascist regime of Tehran was on the brink of collapse.

I mean, the Iranian stock exchange, thanks to our sanctions, had lost more than 50% of its value in just over a year. And now, for the last four years, it's been pumped full of cash by the Biden administration. Now the collapse of the regime in Syria has hurt them. The reapplication of sanctions has also undermined them.

What Israel has done, God bless Israel, since the horrific loss of Jewish life on October the 7th, has put Iran back on that teetering level. But yeah, we're not going to invade Iran, but we would like Iran to be free.

Absolutely. It's happening right now. And what else? Is it just that? There's certain things I can't discuss, but when it comes to economic pressure, political pressure, working with our allies, we are following right now what's called the maximum pressure campaign. So they use every element of national power, which is not kinetic.

in terms of finance, intelligence, economics, sanctions, to just squeeze that regime until it just loses control of this fascist system it's put in place since 1979.

Yeah. Look, with regards to Gaza... The people of Israel, the prime minister, the IDF, I think have finally come to the realization that when a population has a majority upwards of 80% that agrees with the horrific attacks of October the 7th, you don't solve that overnight.

I mean, this is the shocking reality of Gaza, that you have a population that thinks, and I've watched the unedited versions of what happened over the seventh. I was allowed to see young girls being slaughtered, children being blown up. When you have a population that says, that's good, and we agree with that,

That's not going to be fixed with a piece of paper saying, you know, we have peace and things are normalized. Right now, Israel, quite rightly, is making sure that that certain piece of territory cannot be used to affect mass casualty attacks against the peoples of its nation. And I think that is a very reasonable approach. You're not going to fix it overnight.

I mean, and I'm not making excuses. Yeah. If you come from where you come from, if you come from the former Soviet Union, if your family comes from Venezuela, if like my father, you literally escaped a political prison, We understand that there are things in life more important than the wifi signal strength at Starbucks. This is what I always say.

What's the biggest problem somebody who grew up in the West has? Well, I've only got two bars on my wifi when I'm at Starbucks and I'm not being facetious. Really, what is the biggest problem? Is it the fact that you may be slaughtered this weekend like the Alawites were just a few days ago in Syria?

Literally a thousand unarmed civilians, families, you can watch the videos, mowed down because they belong to the wrong ethnic religious group. The West has had it very, very good for about 70 years. And as such, can you relate to a man who you just heard me have a conversation with who's been in a Taliban prison for more than two years?

How do you even compute that when your biggest problem is, I've run out of things to binge watch on Netflix tonight, right? It's hard to, what do they say? Easy times breed soft men. That's where we are today.

So first, and this isn't because my first degree was philosophy and theology. I really do believe this. Words matter. You called me a pragmatist and not an ideologue. I could take umbrage at that and consider that an insult because pragmatism has been used as a slur, as a pejorative.

And I came to this through an amazing friend of mine, Bob Riley, who wrote the book, The Closing of the Muslim Mind. I don't have an ideology and neither does President Trump. This is really incredibly important to understanding who this man is. Because I came to realize, thanks to Bob, that what an ideology is is a distortion of reality.

An ideology is a lens through which you interpret objective truth I don't have a lens through which I interpret objective truth. I have the truth. And for me, that's what a conservative is, right? Because you can say, okay, conserve, conserve what? Conserve that which has been demonstrated to function over millennia, like families. Like, you know, man is a man, a woman is a woman.

It's good to have a father when you're a young child. These aren't ideological statements. They're not permutations of a reality. They are a reality. And the way to understand President Trump is he looks at the world as it is. He doesn't put an overlay, neoliberal, neoconservative. No. What's the reality? I...

There's a moment in the first Trump administration where he was being briefed at the cabinet level. And the then National Security Advisor, who was a former tank commander, had this whole massive set of PowerPoint slides. as you do in the U.S. military. And each slide started with the same sentence. The Islamic government of the Republic of Afghanistan will.

The Islamic government of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan will. Every page. And the president, before we start the briefing, he just looks at this and he says, what government of Afghanistan? And he's absolutely right. There was no functioning government in a Westphalian sense. They didn't exercise sovereignty over a nation with 36 languages and 24 disparate tribes.

That doesn't fit into the elite way of looking at the world because you've got to have labor. You've got to have IR theory, international relations theory. You've got to have an ideological bent, a stamp on your forehead. He doesn't have this. You can't be one of the most successful men in business for 50 years if you have an ideological filter through which you see the world.

So that's important to understand about the president. If you want to know him, read the book. I tell people, you don't have to love my boss, but read The Art of the Deal if you want to understand how he functions and how reality is his metric, not some kind of predefined ideological lens. With regards to Ukraine, look, I'll be completely honest here.

There's nobody else in the world who's going to fix this. It's only going to be President Trump. And I look at the current deal from Moscow. You know, as well as anyone else, what the ceasefire on energy targets really means. It's a face-saving gesture. The Kremlin cannot say, yes, we agree to your terms and we're going to have a 30-day ceasefire as the Ukrainians agreed to.