3-26-24 *INTERVIEW* Lt. General Richard Y. Newton on the ISIS-K Attack in Moscow

Episode Transcript

(00:00):
One of the things that happened whilewe were away was a really horrendous massive
attack on civilians in Moscow at aconcert hall called Crocus last I saw there
were one hundred and thirty seven reporteddead and a lot more than that injured.
I haven't gone to look for anupdate to that number in the past

(00:20):
twenty four hours or so, butI thought this deserves a little bit more
conversation because obviously a group like that, well I shouldn't say obviously, maybe
it's not obvious, but it occursto me that a group like that wouldn't
mind targeting plenty of other people,not just Russia, not just Moscow,
joining us to talk about it.Lieutenant General Richard Newton. He was born

(00:43):
on an Air Force base. Hewent to the Air Force Academy. Therefore,
perhaps not too surprising that General Newtonspent thirty four years in the Air
Force, including as the Air Force'sAssistant Vice Chief of Staff. Dick Newton,
thanks so much for joining us onKAOA. It's really good to have
you here for the first time.Hey Ross, good morning and delighted to

(01:03):
be here. I hope there'll bemore of our conversation, but delighted to
be with you this morning. Yes, thank you very much. I should
also add, folks that that GeneralNewton has recently begun as a national security
contributor to News Nation, and listenersto this show know that I'm a big
News Nation fan. So General,we are told, because they took credit

(01:27):
for it, or blame or whateveryou want to call it, that the
group that carried this out is calledisis K. What is the K?
Who are these people? What dothey want? Is the KA is part
of the broader landscape of the IslamicState. Prinsley based out of Afghanistan,
and after what I would term thedebacle of the US withdrawal from there back

(01:49):
in August of twenty twenty one,really have now we've seen a re emergence
of isis K not only in Afghanistanbut in Pakistan, but also recently in
Iran. But there's some discussion rightnow in the intelligence community certain a long
my sources, that isis that isnow attributed to that Friday Moscow attack on

(02:10):
March twenty seconds, just a coupleof days or so ago, could actually
be attributed to a Russian based ISISorganization or terrorist group. Still more on
that, but nonetheless it's still partof ISIS, and ISIS writ large,
be it isis k emanating out ofAfghanistan, or ISIS out of the concasses

(02:30):
which are the southern part of Russiaor to the south of Russia, or
maybe there's now a new group ofISIS that's formed inside of Russia itself.
They are engaging in an ongoing waragainst nations such as now certainly the United
States, but now Russia and others, fighting those nations that are seen fighting
against the principles and the objectives ofISIS and fighting against Islam. And so

(02:53):
now Putin finds himself in the crosshairsof ISIS, and we can talk about
that some more. But nonetheless,there you go. Okay, And I
read somewhere and I wasn't surprised afterseeing the names of these guys, which
look like, you know, ablend of Muslim names and Russian names,
that they were from Tajikistan, iswhat I've read about them, which makes

(03:15):
sense. I was figuring when Iheard about it, you know, Dagastan,
Tajikistan, Chechnya, something like that, Yeah, exactly. And because
ISIS has been prevalent in the caucasses, as I mentioned to the southern part
of the South of Russian actually usedto be part of the Soviet Union back
in the day. But Armenia,Iserbaijan, Georgia, Chetze and so forth.

(03:38):
But more to follow on this,But rather than the last twelve hours
or so, there could be aRussian based ISIS character forming, which would
then again I'm not making sure thatthat's a fact yet, right, But
it's an interesting conundrum that food andfinds himself in. You mentioned a moment

(03:59):
ago that there may be a presenceof some arm of ISIS in Iran,
and I want to just ask oneclarifying question on that. Are you saying
that they might be present there orthat they might be supported by Iran?
Because I always had a feeling thatISIS was a little too far even for

(04:20):
Iran. Yeah, ISIS is reallyan enemy of Iran in this case,
in fact, it was the UnitedStates. Much like we gave warning to
Russia just several days before this eventon Friday, we also gave warning to
Iran that they could have an imminentattack in Iran, and they did.

(04:43):
There were twin attacks that killed anumber of people inside of Iran, as
well. So Iran finds itself asan enemy of ISIS as well as does
Russia, the United States and soforth, because that attack back in January
unfolded inside of Iran, much likethe attack here unfolded inside of Russia.

(05:04):
Uh. So they are they arenot at all lined up with with Iran
or Russia or even the United Statesand so forth. They are a very
brutal Uh, Islamic state of whatyou know, what I would call radical
Islamis. They are again they pumason October seventh, Actually you know that

(05:26):
abhorrent brutal attack against innocent Israeli civilians. Uh. They took a page out
of the Islamic playbook. Uh interms of the brutality of their attack.
And so that's what we're seeing.Innocent Moscow residents were killed. Latest number
I have is one hundred and thirtyseven and then hundreds wounded in that attack
on Friday night. And saying therewere still innocent Iranian citizens killed in Iran

(05:50):
just back in January. Wow,So are these how much of a threat
do these orris pose to America?And I'm asking very specifically right now about
to konus to the continental United States, not to American targets overseas. And

(06:12):
and maybe as you discuss this,maybe you can work into your answer if
you think our currently poorest southern borderis a factor. Well, bottom line,
up front, I'm very concerned froma national security standpoint of the poorest
nature of our southern border, beit potentially an ISIS threat or a Mexican

(06:33):
drug cartel or others who want todo America harm. And by the way,
that's on the current that's on theBiden administration that's created that forest nature
of that border. It is anational security threat. However, I'm more
concerned about Americans abroad as well asAmerican national security interests from the current ISIS
threat. And if you even wantto dive into what would be the ISIS

(06:57):
case threat in this case, uhApril Hangs our director of National Intelligence,
a highly capable leader in the USnational intelligence community. UH. She says
that ISIS remains a significant conrism,terrorism, naturism concerned abroad. UH.
But also I believe that if atsome point ISS could rise again and be

(07:20):
a a threat to the United Statesin the continental United States. As you
you know, alluding your question,perhaps not now but that doesn't necessarily we
need to take our eye off ofof the rising capabilities, of rising threat
and potentially I'm using the word potentiallyof a threat of a reach into the
United States. My point though,that's backed up also in the military side,

(07:44):
most recently in testimony recently last weekof our US Central Command UH commander
who says that they obviously have thecapability. This is isis they have the
capability, ross they have the willto attack US and Western interests, not
necessarily yet in the United States,but you know they could be. My
last point is that attack on thatconcert on Friday night in Moscow, in

(08:07):
the suburbs of Moscow. That wasa very complex, very sophisticated attack,
and therefore it created, you know, a requirement for a greater level of
planning and sophistication. As I mentioned, that should be close watching not only
to US interests abroad, but USinterests here in the United States. So

(08:31):
I have no idea whether you havea current security clearance that would be relevant
to these questions. So obviously youcan feel free to say I can't talk
about that or whatever. But Ifind it very interesting that Iran and Russia
both have very very large intelligence apparatusesor eparati or whatever the plural is.

(08:56):
Plenty of counter terrorism stuff in therein their own countries, and yet they
needed to be warned by us.How do you think that happened, that
we out intelled them? And doyou have a guess as to whether we
were using signals intelligence or human intelligenceor what. Well, my experience would

(09:20):
tell me that we would use allresources at at our disposal in terms of
capabilities, and that's a wide rateof intelligence capabilities, as you allude to
h and therefore that it would beIt did not surprise me that we attempted
to warn Iran, even though they'rean adversary. We attempted to warn Russia,

(09:43):
specifically the Federal Security Service presonably orto the embassy they're in Moscow.
It does not surprise me that wewould again because it is in our interest
to thwart and or defeat Isis whereverthey may be. And in this case,
I believe we did the right thing. We've been very public about the

(10:03):
fact that we had the capabilities andthe measures to warn Iran ahead of time.
We did with Russian and so forth, whether or not they acknowledge those
they use those. That's a wholeother different discussion, and I believe that
we will do so in the future. We're not compelled to Roston. But
it's not only the right thing todo, it's a smart thing to do

(10:24):
because ISIS is an enemy of notonly the United States, our allies and
our friends and allies throughout the world, but also our adversaries. And so
if we can find an avenue approachto continue to try to destroy ISIS,
even though it's with Iran and Russia, I mean, that's a good thing
and we should be using all ourcapabilities to do so. We're talking with

(10:46):
Lieutenant General Richard Newton, US AirForce, retired, former Assistant Vice Chief
of Staff for the Air Force.It seems to me that ISIS doesn't really
have a I want to put thiscarefully, doesn't have a goal that can
actually be satisfied. Right. Itseems to me that these guys will just

(11:07):
keep killing everybody who is not sufficientlyMuslim for their taste until somebody shoots them
in the head. They have,if I may rot not to interrupt you,
but they have an insatiable appetite ofkilling and destroying all things that go

(11:28):
against their their creed. It's alldone in the name of religion and so
forth. So you're exactly right inthe tent of your question or your comment.
Uh, therefore, they want todo harm to not only US or
Western interest, but now against Iran, against Russia, and so forth.
And so I believe that years ago, by the way, when I was

(11:48):
on active duty, it was apoint when when the second term of President
Bush forty three and Obama won andif you will, back in two thousand
and nine ten era, they actuallycalled the moomb administration decided to terminate the
term of the global warm terror Well, how's that working out for us?

(12:11):
Right now? We are in aglobal war and terra ross. And the
fact that in the nature of yourcomment and perhaps your question is those terrorists,
those brutal terrorists and their tactics wantto do harm to innocent civilians,
want to do harm to nation statesthat even the monicum of freedom loving people.

(12:33):
And that's why you get the resultsof let's go to October seventh of
Hamas, which is a brutal terroristorganization. The means that they went to
brutalize Italian citizens and killing twelve hundred. I'm sorry Israeli citizens and Israelis even
through the use of things such assexual violence and so forth. My point
is they go back to the basisof the Isis playbook. They are evil.

(12:58):
They want to do evil things twoinnocent people to have their gains,
you know, their eye on makinggains of the world, of doing things
in the name of Islam. There'snothing more radical than that in my playbook.
All right, last question for you, General. So I am not
of the mind that we should bethe world's policeman. I am also not

(13:20):
of the mind that we should justpull everything back and be isolationists. So
you know, for example, Ididn't mind when we went into Afghanistan after
the nine to eleven attacks and killedpeople and broke things, which is really
what our military is for. ButI minded a lot when we stayed there
because history told us that that wasalways going to be a failure. And

(13:43):
so bringing this to the thing thatwe're talking about right now, you will
recall, and listeners will probably recall, not very long ago, there was
a drone attack on this very smallbase that I guess is what northeastern Jordan,
near Syria. Very tiny base anda lot of people argued at the
time when that happens, when thathappened, that we have these small outposts

(14:05):
of American forces in that part ofthe world that are nothing but targets for
bad guys, and we should shutall that stuff down and bring those guys
home and not have a presence thereanymore. What's your take on that.
Well, I've been in that regionup in Jordan, and I can having
some boots on the ground there,and I won't go into specific details in

(14:26):
that regard. First point is rossfreedom isn't free. Freedom isn't free,
not only back in World War Two, but certainly through there when my dad
served on active duty in Vietnam andso forth, and when I was on
activeduty through Post nine to eleven andso forth. Freedom isn't free. The
second aspect of that comment, though, is the enemy gets a vote,

(14:46):
and right now the enemy getting avote in terms of having impact on US
national security interests and aims, whicharen't necessarily just based in the United States,
but we now have a much moreinterconnected world. The global aspect of
our national security is not only froma military standpoint, but finance and information
and diplomatic and so forth. Avery quick case in point. You know,

(15:09):
with Thehuti's launching, you know,a number of drone attacks and biblistic
missile attacks against world shipping where twelvepercent of the commerce goes through the Red
Sea, has practically brought the RedSea to a stand still in terms of
the flow of global commerce. Andnow you're adding not only weeks but also
human amount of dollars to get goodsto the American consumer that should be of

(15:31):
national interest in the United States fromthat standpoint, from a financial standpoint.
So there are consequences to the UnitedStates being not only weak in terms of
our position abroad, both militarily andcertainly diplomatically, but there are implications to
that in terms of going back tothat with what I called a debucle of
withdrawal in Afghanistan. There are implicationstherefore, you know, in February twenty

(15:56):
two where Russia create has the largestland invasion against Ukraine, which is one
of the largest grain suppliers and soforth bread basket of the world, and
so the much more interconnected world wehave, I believe we need to be
less isolationists, but keep an eyeon yes first and foremost, protecting the
homeland protecting the United States, especiallyto that forest border as you I talked

(16:18):
at the top of the conversation,but also staying true to our alliance is
because alliances in my worldview are becomingmore and more important and certainly more critical
in terms of how we're going tokeep the enemy off our shores and to
protect the US national security. It'sjust not only at home but abroad.
Lieutenant General Richard Newton served thirty fouryears in the Air Force, including as

(16:42):
assistant Vice chief of Staff. He'snow a national security contributor to News Nation.
Actually, I guess I said youjust started. That was a year
ago. Wasn't it great to haveyou on the show for the first time.
We will definitely do this again,and most importantly, thank you for
your service to our country. Thankyou Ross. I know you're what we
call a Navy brat, so youserved alongside your family members as a family

(17:06):
member of the United States Navy.So God bless you for that. Appreciate
it. General, Talk with yousoon.