11/09/2014 Newsnight

By this time just one week from now the polls in Scotland will be closed

and many of the record 97% of those eligible who registered to vote will

have marked their X for independence or the union. Now Scotland is place

where every politician wants to be. Today a trainload of Labour MPs

turned up in Glasgow to preach the goes elf Better Together by every

argument possible. We will be talking to one of the yes campaign's

biggest donors. I am of the view that the accused acted too hastily

and used excessive force. In the second sense it is clear his conduct

was negligent. Negligent but not guilty of premeditated murder. Oscar

Pistorius learns his fate tomorrow. How will South Africa respond.

I made it clear we will hunt down terrorists that threaten our

country, wherever they are. That means I will not hesitate to take

action against ISIS in Syria and Iraq. A new campaign of bombing

against the Islamic State wherever they may be. We will ask the Syrian

Government what they think of that, and hear from the world's most

famous diplomat, Henry Kissinger. This man beat terrifying odds to

beat the Ebola virus, thousands didn't, how did he do it and why is

he going back? Good evening, the day began with

claims and counter claims over the importance of two banks RBS and

Lloyd's considering moving their legal homes to London in the event

of a yes vote. RBS themselves said it would mean neither job cuts nor

move operations away or affect the day-to-day business. Lloyd's already

has its physical headquarters in England. The real excitement was the

concept of a political day trip to Scotland. Not normally a highlight

for MPs of all stripes and types in September. Our political editor

boarded the Hogwarts Express, not from platform nine and

three-quarters at kings correction but at Euston. One week left and it

is the flying Labour Party, the Shadow Cabinet boards the 7. 30 to

Glasgow. Not the 100 MPs touted before, but a sizeable number. These

Labour politicians know they need to get out the pro-union vote. Andy

Burnham does Labour understand Scotland? We are Scotland, that is

our roots, that is where we are from in terms of my own background in the

North West. The SNP has beaten you back recently? Of course, that is

our heritage, our roots it is DNA, so that's, we have been coming up

and down and giving our all in this campaign. And today the Labour

family comes together from all over Britain to say stay with us. Labour

is in trouble from union supporters for allowing the no camp's lead in

the polls to shrink. They know they are not as popular as they once

were. Why no balloons on the train?

Haven't we got any, I'm disappointing. We have eggs, we are

anticipating getting eggs, we have a few to launch back.

They are also getting flack for staying party political. Even though

the Prime Minister fronted up Tory unpopularity in Scotland yesterday,

those aboard the Labour locomotive still refuse to stand

shoulder-to-shoulder with him. Cameron's thing about the "effing

Tories" we willing returning to that.

What do you mean about that? That is what a lot of people think about

them. Cameron has hugged hoodies and huskies, he has never hugged anyone

from north of the border, they are the opposite of "one-nation".

Scotland says no! Labour's luminaries arrived into a tense

Scotland. Overnight the BBC reported that the Royal Bank of Scotland

would relocate its registered headquarters to London in event of

the yes vote. It was confirmed by RBS this morning, but Alex Salmond

was furious and he wrote to Cabinet Secretary demanding an inquiry. This

evening this appeal was rejected. I know that the BBC will want to

co-operate with the inevitable investigation by the Cabinet

Secretary into the briefing of this information. Given the briefing of

information, even if we weren't in a referendum campaign, even if there

weren't rules that are meant to apply to Government. The leaking of

market information is as serious a matter as you can possibly get. RBS

said later no jobs would be lost, but other companies made similar

noise, Lloyd's, Clydesdale, TSB and Tesco Bank. John Lewis, Waitrose and

Asda today said prices might go up in the event of a yes vote. But the

SNP believes the Westminster coalition pressured these groups to

back the Better Together. Aberdeen Asset Manager said today an

independent Scotland would be a success.

Better Together think they have their act to go for three reasons,

more powers to be handed over to Scotland, secondly to protect the

NHS in Scotland, the third is the decision of companies to leave

Scotland. Neither camp is resting on their laurels. The will of the

people one week from today, I believe will be the to restored this

rich ancient nation the opportunity once again to take its responsible

place in the community of nations. This is it. The moment to believe.

The moment to win. Thank you very much. Tomorrow UKIP arrived to

campaign for the union. The SNP hit Scotland's seven cities and we have

reached the seven-day countdown. In Dundee is coat founder and

chairman of the Stagecoach group Sir Bryan Souter. Good evening. First of

all we have heard that John Lewis partnership, including Waitrose,

also Asda, following on from the Kingfisher Group have all said

prices will rise if there is a yes vote. You can't say to people they

won't be worse off? Well, I think you have to look at why they are

coming out and saying this. They are not saying prices are going to rise,

they are pointing out that if there is not certainty about currency

union and if costs were to rise in Scotland, these costs would have to

be passed on to their customers. Of course I don't see any reason why

any of these things should happen. The most interesting revelation

today was Robert Peston who is telling us that basically Number Ten

are coraling and co-ordinating this campaign at the moment. And I just

think in Scotland it is seen as more bullying for the big boys. When you

have somebody who has credibility to keep hold of, like John Lewis

Partnership, they wouldn't say that likely, it is hardly likely they

will be bullied into something that is not the correct thing to say as a

business. At the moment any way they say in way they subsidise products

in Scotland by the rest of the UK operation. You don't really think

that serious people would really stretch the credibility of their

shareholders by saying something that is not true. They said prices

might rise in the event of independence. Again I say the

trouble is you cannot tell people in Scotland they won't be worse off?

No. And I think the emphasis is here on what they said. They said prices

"might" rise. They didn't say on what they said. They said prices

might drop and they could have? No, but of course the prices could drop

if the Government in Scotland creates the right environment and I

look at the tax incentives that we have already suggested with

corporation tax. The other incentives for companies, financial

services we could reinstate the tax credit which undermined all our

pension funds and attract more pension funds to locate in

Edinburgh. We could introduce tax regimes for the oil companies to

encourage them to do more exploration. You could do all these

things, you are absolutely right, but we don't know whether or not in

the event of independence all these things will happen. Instead the

situation might be under independence that you have at least

18 months, perhaps two years or more in which as an unstable environment,

so therefore it would be most unlikely that companies would come

to invest in Scotland, set up businesses without knowing what

regime. You could not expect companies to do it in the dark and

therefore Scotland would lose investment? I don't accept that,

because I think companies look at all of the uncertainties and they

have to make assessments and as I understand it people are actually

more concerned about an exit from Europe than what they are about

independence. I think companies have to have these conversations and they

have to look at the risks for shareholders and that is fair enough

that they should do THACHLT think when you read the -- when you read

the statements clearly, they are reasonable statements. And during

the 18-month period it would be in everyone's interest to settle the

currency union issue quickly, that is the main issue people are

unsettled about. In that case, Bryan Souter, can you tell me the name of

a single company who now, with the uncertainty is saying in the event

of an independent country they would move to Scotland for the first time.

The problem is there are no companies saying that? We found that

most of our growth comes from small and medium-sized companies, that is

where most of the support for independence comes from. We have had

a very good record in Scotland over the last few years of attracting

inward investment. In the last few months there has been no sign of

that tailing off. I don't have access to the exact numbers in this,

but the Scottish Government have the numbers on this, and I have heard

that quoted recently. There is no sign at the moment. If there is a

period of 18-months negotiation, I think the biggest issue that comes

out of that is this issue about the currency. And the reason why

sterling is so unsettled at the moment is because the unionist

position is creating a situation where international investors are

very concerned that the oil and gas and whiskey exports would drop from

the balance of payments. There is nothing to do about that uncertainty

because you are in a position to deliver anything, it would be a

process of negotiation. Where there is some certainty is both RBS and

Lloyd's have said their legal headquarters and Lloyd's is already,

would be in England. Therefore people know the share price has gone

up on the basis of that today because people know where they

stand, and they know deposits legally in England would be

guaranteed. That is a certainty you can't offer? Once the negotiations

are through we can offer that certainty. But the union also has

great deal of uncertainty for people. We have no idea whether the

Barnet formula will continue, we have no idea whether we will be in

Europe with an in-out referendum. These uncertainties have to be

balanced up, and actually I believe that during that negotiation period,

if we get the yes vote, and we get the mandate that we need, we could

settle most of these issues very, very quickly and it would be in

everyone's interest to do so. It affects both Scotland and the UK. It

would also perhaps be in your interest because you run one of the

United Kingdom's largest transport groups for bus travel particularly.

A lot of your employees and business is in England. David Cameron was

very misty-eyed at the thought of losing Scotland, surely you have a

huge loyalty and affection for your business in England. It wouldn't

feel the same, would it? Well, I have enormous affection for any

country where I'm making a good living, and I'm invested in many

different countries. Of course we're not going to be separated at all,

we're going to be as in the European Union, most of the customers of the

companies in Holland are in other parts of the European Union. So this

really is not really an argument in my view. Most of our customers are

in other countries, we are a very small country any way and we have

got customers in America, and just be clear that I'm on this programme

in my role as Souter Investments Chairman, not the Chairman of

Stagecoach, but I make the point that most of the companies in

Scotland and internationally have wide bases of customers. I don't

think these arguments really make much difference. In the past few

minutes a new poll has been published and our chief

correspondent is in Edinburgh tonight with the news. What is the

poll saying? Of course you can't judge this whole complicated

volatile situation based on one poll, but there is new significant

numbers tonight. In part because the YouGov poll out tonight, which puts

"no" back ahead at 52% to 48 from the yes campaign has been conducted

by the same company that at the weekend produced the same poll that

stunned Westminster into action by putting yes in the lead for the

first time. There are a couple of interesting things happening

underneath the top layer. The female votes, which the yes campaign still

has to persuade, in fact support for their arguments appears to be on the

slide. And secondly, the number of undecided voters appears to have

gone down to just 4%, really on the way down. Now, for Better Together,

perhaps for them this will feel that their economic arguments about risks

that they suggest appear to be finding more and more resonance. Of

course that has been echoed by the interventions of company bosses in

the last couple of days. At the same time though it has emerged that some

of those bosses met David Cameron in the last 24 hours to discuss this

issue. And for the nationalist side, well that gives fuel to the argument

that Westminster is pulling the strings. By the same token two of

the chief executives who have spoken out in the last couple of days have

expressed to me in the last year exactly that view but privately. It

is only now with seven days they are now willing to go public. As we said

the cavalry rode to Scotland on the rails, but the general is already in

the country. You spoke to him today? Everywhere you go now, everyone you

speak to, this is intense, it is very, very fluid and things have

been difficult for both campaign, apart from anything else it has been

going on for two years. But a hardened political campaigner said

this was like nothing they had seen before, it feels like a war. For the

man who has been leading the campaign for better by-election the

former Chancellor, Alistair Darling, it has been long, it has been tense

and time is running out. There are seven days to go now, the

advantage was yours for more than two years, it appears to have been

squadered, how did you allow that to happen? I always said the polls

would narrow, a year or two people said it was a foregone conclusion, I

said no it won't be. The reason for that is this decision is so

momentous for Scotland. If we decide to leave the UK it is not like a

general election where you can kick the Government of the day out or

kick them in the teeth if that is what you want to do. If we decide to

leave it is forever. There is no going back. It is not surprising

given the magnitude of that decision that you are getting people, even at

this stage of the week to go who are still agonising between the

arguments of the heart and head. But I think we will win. I'm confident

we will win. But your former colleague, Gordon Brown, clearly

felt that the situation was so perilous for your side of the

argument that he had no choice but to step in. Almost unilaterally it

seems? Gordon has been speaking for us for over a year now. But in

relation to the more powers for the Scottish Parliament which the party

has set out their actual proposals some time ago, I have been asking on

numerous occasions how do you bring things together to make sure you

have a precise single set of proposals, what is the timetable,

and yet we have announced that. What I would say to you is this, for most

people in Scotland and if you look at the poll published today, what

they are more interested in is what would this mean, rather than the

process. In terms of the campaign, the lead was yours to hold on to,

and it was slipping away, and your former colleague, Gordon Brown,

clearly felt he had no choice but to step in, even David Cameron and the

Westminster leaders feel they have had to step in? Both Both Gordon

Brown and the leaders of the parties have been campaigning for several

months now actually. It doesn't look like it to many people, these

interventions in the last ten days of the campaign, doesn't it look

rather desperate and panicked? In any election campaign and

referendums are pretty rare, it is not surprising that activity gets

ramped up as you get towards the actual polling day. I know from you

know meeting people, being out on the streets the level of interest in

Scotland and in this campaign is immense. The tension, the arguments

I have never seen anything like it in the last 30 years. Do you see the

strategy in the last few days from David Cameron, Nick Clegg and Ed

Miliband as having been patronising? No I don't. I think there is nothing

wrong with people outside the UK expressing their views. Come on, the

other side have got American actors, or actors living in America

expressing their views. There is nothing wrong with people not living

in Scotland expressing a view. The most important thing to remember is

those in Scotland have the vote. And people are focussing on what this

means to them rather than on particular politician Is think. But

many voters we have spoken to have felt it is patronising for people to

jump on a plane from London and come up at the very last minute. Is it a

problem you don't see that? You will find people, especially people who

take the opposite view to me, nationalist who will say that, you

will also find if they hadn't come up the same nationalists would have

said actually isn't it terrible they are not coming up. Frankly though, I

think most people in Scotland will look at that sort of political

squabbling and say, come on, it is more important than that. But you

have staked this campaign on economic potential, potential

economic risks, was it wrong to gamble that voters wouldn't believe

Alex Salmond on the economy. Because clearly people do believe him, and

frankly some people have had enough of the economic arguments against

that you put forward? My argument has been based, yes on the brass

tacks, if you like. And that matters because it matters our ability to

generate jobs, to generate employment, wealth, to pay for the

health service. It is also an emotional argument as well. In the

last few days you have seen Alex Salmond, you know, it is really

unpleasant stuff that some how he represents Scotland and the rest of

us and those of us who oppose him, some how we are not entitled to have

our say. I'm proud to be Scottish, I'm also proud to be British as

well. I don't see why he should force me to choose between the two.

The emotional argument is just as strong as the economic argument, but

bread and butter, brass tacks, they matter to people as well. But that

is not the perception that many voters have had, and that suggests,

surely, that there have been mistakes in this campaign, and what

has come across is the issue of what is on the balance sheet not what is

in people's guts? If you take a decision to live with someone or get

married or where you live, if you had done the sums on the emotional

side you wouldn't do that, no thanks to that. What we have heard time and

again in the last few days is people want something different, they want

something else, and many voters in Scotland have come to see the yes

campaign as the one who is hold out the offer of a fairer country of

social justice. Labour, traditionally started in this

country, and began that argument? The SNP Government in Edinburgh has

cut 130,000 college place, 90,000 of them would have gone to young women,

most of these people going to the college, young students come from

backgrounds where they don't have the qualification, they need the

skills to get on. They have taken a billion pounds out of their

antipoverty programme, don't tell me that is progressive socialism or

anything like it. It is a completely different thing. There are

significant swathes of voters in Scotland who believe the other side

offers more social justice. They are beating you at your own game? But

they are not. And again if you look at what they do, rather than what

they say, the picture is rather different. There is a lot of Labour

voters who are looking and asking themselves what is best, most every

type of voter won't change, but I think we can deliver change within

months. You say there could be change within months, why did it

take so long for your side to offer a timetable for extra powers for

Scotland? Look, we have offered a timetable, and frankly, most people

are less concerned about process and all that, but rather... This calm

mains been going for two years, more than that, and it wasn't until ten

days before the vote, suddenly there is a timetable? There is a timetable

that shows how we can implement the legislation to strengthen the

Scottish Parliament. We are now seven days before polling day and I

don't know what money we will be using, what currency we will be

using, I don't know who will pay pensions in Scotland. I don't know

how well fare will work. Would it have been better if this timetable

for extra powers, that change you are now promising, had been coming

up much earlier in the campaign? I think actually if you look, the

thing that we need to explain is the extra powers that will come, which

we have been doing, and the timetable actually has helped us do

that. Regardless what happens, do you believe that we are heading for

some kind of constitutional crisis, or breakdown? If Scotland votes to

go next week that's it. There is no question it will become independent.

There is no question of it, there is no second chance if you like. And of

course that will have profound implications for the rest of the UK

as well. If the vote is no, ought England to get the extra powers

Scotland will get? There is a big issue in England if you look at

particularly cities like Birmingham, Manchester, Leeds, Newcastle, they

in my view need more powers to try to shift some of the economic

balance to the northern part of England way from the south-east. You

do believe then that other parts of the UK should get the same kind of

extra powers too? Well, look up to a point in the sense that the law in

Scotland is different. The education system is different, and you know

health has always been organised differently, that is not the case in

different parts of England. Next Friday morning f yes win, would you

be willing to be part of Alex Salmond's negotiating team? He keeps

going on about this, Alex Salmond and team work, come on. But would

you be willing to do it? I'm Scottish, I'm staying here, I'm

democrat, I will abide by the result. But, you know, if you look

at his prospectus, some of the stuff he's arguing in the White Paper,

some of it just doesn't stack up. You must have considered how would

you feel about living in an independent Scotland with Alex

Salmond as the leader of the country? You know if Scotland became

independent presumably we would have elections like everybody else and

decide which party was going to do that. What I'm more worried about

now in a way I wasn't six months ago is how to bring together the

divisions in Scotland at the moment. When I hear Alex Salmond saying

yesterday, he was going on about Team Scotland, what he's saying in

an undertone that those of you not with me are doing something wrong.

That is offensive stuff. Both sides of the argument hold passionate

views on the country, all of us are as Scottish as it is desperately

keen to sort out our country. I have not seen tensions like this in 30

years of campaigning. When I find people who are frightened to speak

out and put posters up, we don't want to live in a country like that.

On the 19th there is a lot of healing to be done. This has been

fierce and deeply personal, probably for every single Scott. But what

kind of toll has it taken on you? I volunteered to do this. Are you

still glad you did? Yes, I am. I would never have forgiven myself to

sit on the sidelines and hope somebody else would do it. This is

an argument we need to settle in Scotland, and we will in just over

six days time. Oscar Pistorius has been cleared of the murder of his

girlfriend, Reeva Steenkamp, however, he still faces the

possibility of a number of years in prison for cupable homicide, the

South African equivalent of manslaughter, with a maximum 15-year

sentence on the table. The trial has been noted for black woman judging a

white man without a jury, in front of the glare of the entire South

Africa nation. How much is the trial a mirror of South African society,

and how far has it come since apartheid.

Oscar Pistorius was a star, one of South Africa's biggest and most

severed athletes. He changed the image of the Paralympics, and

becamen the first amputee runner to compete in an Olympic Games. I train

harder than any of the other guys do, I put in more hours, I eat

better, sleep better and rest better, I'm more diligent and train

better than other guys. The image was completed with his glamorous

model girlfriend, Reeva Steenkamp. But on Valentine's Day last year he

killed her, firing four shots through a bathroom door at his home

in Pretoria. There is no way you can convince a court that she stood

there saying nothing, why, why would she not say a thing? Oscar Pistorius

has always maintained he thought there was an intruder. It was the

first trial to be televised in South Africa, and was watched around the

world. Casting a spotlight on the country's justice system. Where one

judge and no jury presided in court. A legacy of apartheid. It has been a

trial with drama, as a darker side to Pistorius came out, including his

liking for guns. Screams of delight, but listen to the voice of man who

sounds very much like Oscar Pistorius.

The prosecution said it was premeditated murder, a charge which

the judge rejected. It follows that the accused's erroneous belief that

his life was in danger, the accused cannot be found guilty of murder.

That, however, is not the end of the matter. As culpable homicide is a

competent verdict. But she still suggested he was guilty of

negligence, and that is an accusation which tomorrow could

still see Oscar Pistorius end his career in jail. With me in the

studio to discuss all this is The Orange Prize nominated South

African-born author, Gillian Slovo, and from Johannesburg, author and

broadcaster, Eric Miyeni. What did you make of this part of the

verdict, not guilty of murder, do you think he benefitted from a lack

of a jury? I don't think it is a lack of a jury, I think it is a very

difficult thing to prove what is in a man's mind. He's the only living

witness to tell you what's there, how do you prove that what he's

saying and in his mind is wrong. I don't think it has anything to do

with the jury. It was a very difficult thing for the state to

prove. Tell me, Gillian Slovo, what does this say about South Africa,

how does it play out in South Africa the idea that there was somebody

else in the room and chances are Oscar Pistorius thought it was black

man invading his house? I think it is an extraordinary thought for him.

Afterall Oscar Pistorius lived in a port trees. -- for -- fortress. He

had security guards, that fear is not founded on reality, but on a

fear, I think, of the privileged that there will be the mass of the

impoverished to come and try to get their money and actually come and

get their guns. Do you think that this speaks to a chasam between

black and white in South Africa? I'm not even sure it is between black

and white, it is a chasam of class. It is about the fact that there are

a small number of very rich and entitled people in that country.

Many of them are white, but increasingly more of them are black

and a huge bulk of impoverished people. Eric what do you think of

that? I do not think the way it has gone proves any chasam in the

society, it proves no matter how privileged, no matter how famous, if

you do something wrong you will be held to account. And secondly I

think we should correct this. Oscar never, ever said there was a black

intruder, not once did he say that, not once was it mentioned in court.

He said he thought there was an intruder, and everybody else who

says black is putting that into the picture, Oscar didn't. Yeah, Oscar

never said it was a black intruder, but I think the assumption that it

would be black intruder is a valid one to make. In the past during the

years of party there was something they called the "black peril". I

think that still runs in the consciousness of people in that

country. That there is something very scary and something out to get

them. And certainly Oscar Pistorius talked about how in his childhood

this was something he and his mother often did discuss. Eric? Yeah, but I

think we should take Judge Masipa's lead, it is important to do that. We

can't put words in someone's mouth. The fact people used prejudice to

assume things is incorrect, that is not how to run a justice system

either. If we use these volatile terms that were not mentioned at

all, we would not get justice. This judge would havered in erred in what

she was doing and we should do the same. It is interesting to see after

all these years after apartheid that Judge Masipa is one of two female

judge, this is progress, and the racist assumption is she would have

been tough on Oscar Pistorius, where as she took her legal training very

seriously indeed, and delivered a very long verdict on part of it.

What will be the impact if he's found guilty of culpable homicide?

It will be an incredible impact. I mean either way as a nation we will

have to look at everything she says to justify her judgment, whether we

agree with it or not, we will have to stay with the facts. Right now I

think she's incredibly correct in saying that the state just couldn't,

it is almost an impossible thing to prove that this is what the man

intended when he's the only witness. Whatever she comes up with, all we

are left with is how she gets to the conclusion. And so far I think she's

doing an incredible job. And precisely because everyone is

pudding the raciadivide -- putting the racial divide and she's a black

woman and she should do this and the fact that she is not is an

incredible sign of our justice system. It is a sign of the justice

system working, the South African justice system doesn't always work

like this, but she is taking it incredibly serious. It is the first

televised trial with an affect on everyone. One place there is a

divide is relations between men and women in South African, the Women's

League was there as well. There is a real worry about sexism in South

Africa? Not only sexism but violence against women. That was never

proved? The situation has improved in South Africa in the sense that

since 2009 less women are getting killed by their partners. I think it

is now rate of one every eight hours rather than 2009 when it was one

every six hours. There is a real problem within South Africa, not

only about violence in general, but yes, violence again women. Thank you

very much indeed. If we are now clear that President

Obama will begin open-ended air strikes against IS in Syria, the

British Government sent confusing signals over British involvement.

First Alex Hammond insisted Britain would not take part in any air

strike, only to be corrected by Downing Street which said in terms

of air power the Prime Minister has not ruled anything out. For one

former US Secretary of State, Henry Kissinger, the US President's moment

of clarity has not come too soon. He had accused the US of being

bystanders and encouraged an all-out attack on IS. In his book, World

Order has just come out. President Obama has said he wants to

destroy the Islamic State and there will be US air strikes against them

in Syria, can he achieve his goal? We should be very careful in stating

objectives that are related to what the American political process will

support. In this case we are dealing with 20,000 fanatics that started

Anwar offshoot of Al Qaeda. I think it is an objective that can be

reached and defined in that manner. I do not believe that will bring

piece to the Middle East. It means that the challenges will change and

that's important for America to understand.

You have always been an advocate of realisim in foreign policy rather

than idealism. This is a standard argument, I believe that you have to

begin argument, I believe that you have to begin I think you have to

begin with a realistic assessment of the forces at work, they include

values and ideals. So in that sense you are a realist, should the US be

co-operating with President Assad in Syria, the sworn enemy of a year ago

in order to combat the Islamic State? I think we should settle our

disagreement with Assad aside for the moment. Not co-operate with him

in any formal way. But then when we succeed in destroying ISIS we could

then reconsider our views of our relationship with Assad, or we could

address the situation, which I think is more important, even more

important, what kind of structure should emerge there. Because the

notion that Syria is a coherent state is a figment of the 1920s. And

so that it would have to be reconstructed in some fashion. It is

in that context that we should then look at the Assad question again.

You say the US failed in Iraq because it was trying to implement

American values in the part of a world where there were no historical

roots. Is the US doom today fail again as it tries to take on the

Islamic state in Iraq and Syria? We have to understand that it is not in

our capability to bring about western-style democracy in these

societies in the process of a military conflict. And it is

probably not sustainable in American domestic opinion to engage in such

an enterprise. When you look at the chaos in Iraq today, do you regret

your support for the US-led invasion? If I had known then what I

know now, and if I had been as aware of the schisms between the Shia and

the Sunni, as I was not then, as most briefings suggested was not

relevant to the Iraqi case. Had I known all of this I would not

recommend it today. This is what I think today. In your book you argue

that because the world is so volatile it is more important than

ever for America to remain engaged. Is Barack Obama as engaged as he

should be? There are two levels of engagment, there are things you

proclaim you will do and the commitment you indicate behind the

things that you will do. And it seems to me that the first part of

that has been met more fully than the second part. Meaning? Meaning

that the personal belief in what is being done and the ability to

inspire your people to go on an as yet unchartered road, that part of

needs another speed. You talk about the breakdown of legit my macy and

trust in Government. Could that theory explain the rise in support

for Scottish independence? Yes. A lot of faith in established

institutions. If Scotland voted for independence would the United

Kingdom without Scotland be diminished as a world power? That

would depend in part on how it conducts itself. I don't think

necessarily. Because not everybody will fully understand what has

happened. And then for some it might still be thought of as the United

Kingdom. For you who has, in your academic life, seen the nation state

and the peace fail. Would it sadden you to see an independent Scotland?

It wouldn't sadden me. But if it happens, America can live it with

it, Britain will find way to get through it but it will be an

emotional drama for Britain. It must have some impact. Thank you very

much for joining us. A little earlier I spoke to Bouthaina

Shaaban, political and media adviser for President Assad from Damascus.

President Obama says there will be air strikes in Syria against IS, do

you welcome that? I think what President Obama said is quite

confusing because the Security Council resolution 217 spoke about

fighting terrorism, and they spoke about the world community standing

against terrorism, while the speech of President Obama dropped the

co-ordination with Russia and China, invented some opposition that he

wanted to support. I think it has many problems what President Obama

has announced and I think the west again is making mistakes in our

region. They should we view their strategy before taking any action in

that region if they truly want to stop terrorism. We know there are

ten Arab states rallying to the United States, surely that is your

best chance of defeating IS? Terrorism did not start with I SFOR

a start. In Syria we have been facing the same kind of terrorism

for the last four years. The same kind of killing, slaughtering, you

know displacing Christians and other people, and therefore I think what

President Obama is talking about is not going to solve any problem

anywhere because's not taking the right decision now. If he is going

to stand by what he said today. What he said today needs a lot of

clarification. Let's clarify something now. If President Obama

mounts air strikes near Raqa, will Syria attack American airplanes? Our

Foreign Minister has announced if there is an inter-National Coalition

against terrorism, Syria will be ready to be part of it. We have been

fighting terrorism for the last 30 years, but certainly nobody will be

able to fight terrorism on our land without our co-ordination and

without our role in fighting terrorism. If President Obama

launches air strikes backed by ten Arab states in Syria, will there be

a counter-attack by Syria, or will you see it as President Obama doing

your job for you and combatting IS? You see now I think there is a lot

of talk that is going on, I think Russia and China are not accepting

what President Obama is saying. He is not abiding by Security Council

resolution, even though the statement he did today, speaking

about hunting terrorists is easier said than done, speaking about not

allowing Christians and minorities to be removed from their original

land. I would like to tell you... What does President Assad want, what

are you doing to combat IS? What are you doing to take on IS? We have

been fighting terrorism, IS and other kinds of terrorism, there are

over 1,000 branches of terrorism here, for the last four years. They

have been slaughtering our people, they have been killing our army, the

west unfortunately only noticed when a western person was slaughtered and

we condemn killing anybody, but our people have been killed for the last

four years, and nobody even condemned the killing of our people

and the people of our army. If President Obama strikes near Raqa,

not all over Syria, but in the east, along a line, will the Syrians

welcome that help to defeat IS? Syria would welcome to be part of

the discussion and the decision, because fighting terrorism is not an

easy thing, and we are the people who have been facing terrorism in

the region. Will you talk to President Obama? I said to President

Obama that he should truly get the opinion and the help of all people

in the region, not only the countries who have been very handy

in helping terrorists, who have been financing terrorism. Raqa is an

ungoverned space and the American commandos went in to try to get

James Foley, there is a British hostage among other hostages, surely

we must make every effort in that area to combat IS? You know why the

west now suddenly started to talk only about IS, talk about terrorism,

what did they do since 9/11, since 2001, what are the achievements in

Pakistan, in upper Afghanistan and in Libya. They have to believe that

they have to listen to consult with people who have been truly victims

of terrorism, not to meet with countries who have been financing

arming and facilitating terrorism. But the problem is that President

Assad is not in control of the whole of his country. President Assad is

not control of the situation, therefore it is impossible for those

standing by in other countries not to do anything. Other people have to

take on IS if President Assad can't do it? At least the army of Syria is

fighting terrorism everywhere, and if there areas that are taken by the

terrorists, it is thanks to the people who have been financing and

arming and facilitating terrorism, therefore the least thing that Obama

could do is stand with Syria, with the Government of Syria against

terrorism and with the Government of the region who truly are against

terrorism. You know that IS represents a very particular threat,

this is not like the opposition that stood up to President Assad four

years ago, this is quite different. You know it is a different kettle of

fish and they have to be taken on separately. You know that?

Unfortunately you know things that are not real. IS is like the

terrorist like other organisation, I can count 100 organisations that

have been slaughtering people, killing women and have been

criminals all over the country. I'm not underestimating the horrid

presence of IS, but I'm saying to the west you have to get real. You

have to see what's happening on the ground. What President Obama is

saying he's going to support and finance and arm, they are the same

people like IS, they have the same ideology, extremist, terrorist

ideology. Thank you very much. To survive the deadly Ebola virus is

one thing, but to return to the centre of the epidemic to play a

part again to control the outbreak is quite near. William Pooley, the

British nurse who was the first Britain to contract the virus in

Sierra Leone, was desperately ill when the RAF evacuated him from a

Government base in Kenema three weeks ago. The odds of him surviving

were poor, with expert demand in the Royal Free Hospital, under Stephen

Mepham in a microbiology consultant who flew to Sierra Leone to

accompany him home. Charities such as medicines sans front tears

turning patients away, he's going back. Only worked in the hospital

six weeks when he became infected, he believes he has work to do in

Sierra Leone. It is good to see you looking well. You went to work in

that hospital, you were already working for a charity in the area.

Then you went to hospital because of Ebola, did you know what you were

facing? Not before I went. After a few weeks there it became apparent

that people were, nursing were getting infected, there were

certainly a risky place to work that did become apparent after a few

weeks, but there was also improvement happening all the time.

It felt like things were becoming safer. And indeed you lost friends

you had made there? In the time I was there eight or so colleagues

died that I was working with. And then when you became ill, did you

realise quickly just how ill you were? It was overnight really, I

started to feel sick and then the next day he was tested. I had the

feeling it was going to be bad news. And the test to prove that I had

Ebola, it happened very quickly. I always wondered it did you tell your

parents at that point? I wanted to hold off until the evacuation was

confirmed. Once all of that was put into place I was able to tell my

parents. It must have been extraordinary, but you understand

infectious diseases and you work with them, to be in the isolation

tent and to be treated at the Royal Free, what did you make of it, it

must have been extraordinary? It was extraordinary, and the contrast

between the care that I was providing in Sierra Leone with the

care that I received, I was outnumbered by healthcare work

erstwhile the patients were outnumbing me. A Third World disease

treated in a first world country, as compared what happens in the third

world company? That changes outcomes, I had that treatment and

care. What do you think about that f this was a disease that broadly

affected a white western population we would have found a vaccine

quicker? Money has to be made out of these things, it was easy to ignore

the problem while there were small pockets of disease in place, I don't

think it can be ignored any longer. Medicines sans frontier in like

beeria are saying it is out of control what -- in Liberia are

saying it is out of control what are you saying about that? They said

they needed an 800 bed hospital and it is getting out of control in

Liberia and Sierra Leone as well, you can see the rate of new

infections going up exponentially. And that means more deaths? We are

moving away from the time when we can contain this towards a point

where it is a lost cause. What do you want David Cameron to do? I

would love to see him take global leadership on this and dedicate a

good amount of resources for establishing treatment centres and a

number of treatment services for Sierra Leone and Liberia, where they

can give decent care for international staff, well resourced,

they will be safe for staff to work in. And better outcomes. You have

had the disease and treated, can you ever get it again, there is some

dispute about this? Almost all of the evidence points towards

immunity, we don't know for how long, whether it is lifelong. But it

seems very likely that I would be protected against this strain of

Ebola at least. How quickly are you going back? It will be a few weeks.

You don't have your passport yet because it was incinerated? That is

in the post. Your family are OK with you going back? They support me all

the way. The front papers tomorrow:

Nothing unusual about a holiday and nothing unusual about recording

every single event, adventure, meal, drinking marathon, with some

impressive Photoshop skills a Dutch student found she could do it all

without moving a muscle. She faked a trip from her home in Amsterdam to

satire the media management. The quiet settled spell of weather

conditions. No sign of rain in the near future.