:00:07. > :00:17.More news for you at the top of the hour at 1pm. Now, time for Dateline
:00:17. > :00:29.
:00:29. > :00:35.A warm welcome to Dateline London. Choosing a future president. Why
:00:35. > :00:45.are Republicans so look -- lukewarm on admit it from me and can
:00:45. > :00:46.
:00:46. > :00:54.violence end in Syria? Our guests are Ashis Ray, mind
:00:54. > :01:00.macro and Janet Daley. Good to see you. -- Mina Al Oraibi.
:01:00. > :01:05.By this summer, they rarely row behind their party's nominee. The
:01:05. > :01:13.presidential campaign. Given President Obama's problems, why
:01:13. > :01:17.have the Republicans are failed to get any real enthusiasm. What is
:01:17. > :01:23.wrong with Mitt Romney? His problem is he doesn't have this natural
:01:23. > :01:28.connection with voters. He has had a lot of experience but he comes
:01:28. > :01:34.across as a bit stiff and artificial. I think his wealth
:01:34. > :01:43.counts against him and voters are put off by him having millions of
:01:43. > :01:52.dollars. In John Kennedy's day, he made it glamorous and carried it
:01:52. > :02:02.well. Mitt Romney's is like John Kerry years ago. He came across as
:02:02. > :02:07.a guy a as a child of privilege and had the wife he was a billionaire.
:02:07. > :02:12.Mitt Romney has been cast that way. He is not connecting. He needs to
:02:12. > :02:20.have a moment where he establishes authenticity. This guy has been
:02:20. > :02:24.running for the presidency for six years. People have a lot of time to
:02:24. > :02:31.look at them and they are not warming to them in sufficient
:02:31. > :02:39.numbers. I think his problem is he thinks he is going to be the
:02:39. > :02:48.candidate. He hasn't put in enough affect. The Hillary Clinton effect?
:02:48. > :02:52.Yes. It is showing in the polls. Newt Gingrich is gaining. Mitt
:02:52. > :02:58.Romney is still ahead. He is still thinking he is going to be the one
:02:58. > :03:03.and will not have to sparkle in front of the voters. That is one of
:03:03. > :03:09.his problems. He has been doing it for six years, waiting for everyone
:03:09. > :03:17.to fall by the way out -- wayside which we have seen happening. He
:03:17. > :03:23.thinks he is a sensible candidate. I don't think he has decided not to
:03:23. > :03:29.sparkle. He is pathologically boring. It is as if they are trying
:03:29. > :03:34.to excite -- inject some in his excitement into the process. I
:03:34. > :03:41.think Newt Gingrich might win the South Carolina tonight. All bets
:03:41. > :03:47.will then be off. Mitt Romney ceases to be the favourite. The
:03:47. > :03:51.rich element of it, John Kennedy did suffer. I remember it. Richard
:03:51. > :04:01.Nixon always used to accuse him of being a millionaire's some, who
:04:01. > :04:04.
:04:04. > :04:13.never have to work for a living. He had to overcome that. Kennedy was
:04:13. > :04:17.famous for it. Kennedy was a war hero. He had done something. There
:04:17. > :04:25.is almost a class warfare but in the Republican Party, saying that
:04:25. > :04:31.he is the kind of guy who hands out the pink slips. In a time of
:04:31. > :04:35.financial crisis, that is not good. I preferred Newt Gingrich. He is
:04:35. > :04:45.brighter and potentially charismatic. You can see him get in
:04:45. > :04:53.and obey it with Obama. He is an intelligent politician. Mitt Romney
:04:53. > :04:58.is so dull. In a charisma contest... Just to pursue at Newt Gingrich who
:04:58. > :05:02.is an interesting character, it would be extraordinary if a
:05:02. > :05:06.Republican party where the insurgency of the tea-party
:05:06. > :05:12.movement end up being the quintessential Washington in Sydow,
:05:12. > :05:17.which he years. That is an accusation that is thrown in every
:05:17. > :05:24.year. He is an experienced politician. Since Lyndon Johnson,
:05:24. > :05:31.people have been accusing them of being Washington insiders. The
:05:31. > :05:37.other side of that is you have no experience of dealing with Congress.
:05:37. > :05:45.He didn't say in a financial crisis, "I am the man to do with Congress
:05:45. > :05:55.and I am the experienced man.". has come back and hit him. Because
:05:55. > :05:56.
:05:56. > :06:01.it was such an issue... It is early days. The contest is open and the
:06:01. > :06:06.Republican Party is divided. I think there is an elegance and
:06:06. > :06:13.polish about Mitt Romney yet he doesn't connect. Bass and a sparkle.
:06:13. > :06:23.Last night apparently come at a speech, there was a bit of sparkle.
:06:23. > :06:25.
:06:25. > :06:35.People say he will lose the South Carolina caucus at primary. There
:06:35. > :06:35.
:06:35. > :06:38.is a bit of debate about his role in private equity. Then, eventually
:06:38. > :06:42.called the -- evangelical Christians have concerns about him
:06:42. > :06:46.because he is not a mainstream forward.
:06:46. > :06:50.People say Mormonism is not a religion.
:06:51. > :06:55.The right wing of the party is certainly having concerns about him.
:06:55. > :07:04.He being a moderate, he has had a good track rough-edged -- record as
:07:05. > :07:09.governor. It is not necessarily a good track
:07:09. > :07:12.you could -- record. He obviously is not a conservative
:07:12. > :07:16.in his party and therefore the Conservatives have concerns about
:07:16. > :07:21.him. The fact that he is a Mormon
:07:21. > :07:25.explains why he has not focused too much on his personal life which is
:07:25. > :07:30.part of building the whole candidate, private life, they have
:07:30. > :07:34.tried to not going to eat too much detail on that. One of the great
:07:34. > :07:43.introductory moments for any presidential nominee or candidate
:07:43. > :07:48.is to say who I am. You have to have a compelling personal story.
:07:49. > :07:55.If Mitt Romney's is that he worked for a particular company that they
:07:55. > :07:59.have cut jobs, that is a problem for him. Everything he is doing is
:07:59. > :08:03.geared towards a general election. The things we are talking about
:08:03. > :08:07.would allow him to move to the centre if he gets nominated. This
:08:07. > :08:17.will be one N S centre. He may be well positioned for a general
:08:17. > :08:18.
:08:18. > :08:23.election that he is never going to win over. He has obviously got a
:08:24. > :08:29.career out of politics after his singing episode the other day. The
:08:29. > :08:34.economy is going to define it. There are signs of the economy
:08:34. > :08:39.improving. It is unusual for an incumbent president not to be
:08:39. > :08:44.elected. The odds of the gravitational pull is towards re-
:08:44. > :08:48.electing the present president. He has all that force behind him. If
:08:49. > :08:54.he is up against someone who really challenges his competence economic
:08:54. > :08:58.cake, that will be the weak spot. If these glimmerings of hope don't
:08:58. > :09:04.coming to fruition, that will be bad years. The business about
:09:04. > :09:08.personal history, have this revelation about Newt Gingrich's
:09:09. > :09:12.marriage has played in his favour. There was supposed to be the
:09:12. > :09:18.bombshell under his campaign and he dealt with it so well in the debate
:09:18. > :09:22.that he got enormous support. is very interesting because
:09:22. > :09:27.actually the point at which ferns - - things tend to favour of Clinton
:09:27. > :09:33.was when he had to deal with personal matters. America had
:09:33. > :09:37.changed and Newt Gingrich get that. People want to know how you would
:09:37. > :09:43.deal with their crisis. If you rise to it and look as if you can cope
:09:43. > :09:49.and he was courageous, that works in your favour. The fact that Rick
:09:49. > :09:53.Perry with true and cast his support in favour of Newt Gingrich
:09:53. > :09:59.has consolidated support behind him and therefore he is a serious
:09:59. > :10:04.candidate. If he wins tonight, he is a runner, it is an open contest.
:10:04. > :10:08.A final thought. It is still everything to play for. It will end
:10:08. > :10:12.up being really close and will have as much to do with personality as
:10:12. > :10:19.with the economy. I don't think the economy will be unbelievably bad
:10:19. > :10:22.and I don't think Americans think bringing in a Ronald Reagan or
:10:22. > :10:29.somebody from the past or bringing in a Mitt Romney overnight will
:10:29. > :10:34.bring back a employment of growth. They are in a real doldrums and it
:10:34. > :10:40.is a matter of who they trust. may be a question of how they see
:10:40. > :10:50.the future rather than the past. Are things broadly getting better,
:10:50. > :10:53.
:10:53. > :10:57.they may give him, Obama, some credit. If he can push this
:10:57. > :11:01.argument that Obama is heading towards a social democracy and
:11:01. > :11:05.going away from the traditional values of America, that will be
:11:05. > :11:10.serious. The Arab League is figuring out
:11:10. > :11:15.what next to do about Syria. With the text continuing in Iraq -- with
:11:15. > :11:22.attacks continuing, how optimistic should we be in those three
:11:22. > :11:26.countries? Syria first. The Arab League were seen as something that
:11:26. > :11:35.many people on the street wanted to talk to. They wanted to voice their
:11:35. > :11:39.concerns. They are the real people on the ground. You have to get your
:11:39. > :11:44.voice and say this is what is happening. You have seen people who
:11:44. > :11:49.have flooded and the major organisation going in. Reporters
:11:49. > :11:53.wanting to get their stories out. The Arab League has never done this
:11:53. > :11:57.before. The fact that they have got together and send in military is
:11:57. > :12:03.saying they have played a role is insignificant. If his goal is to
:12:03. > :12:06.stop the killing, that has succeeded. If his goal is to get to
:12:06. > :12:08.a political solution, they are not in political discussions on the
:12:08. > :12:15.surface with the Syrian regime so I don't know how that will solve
:12:15. > :12:19.anything. How much of it is about buying time? The Arab League is not
:12:19. > :12:24.united on this. What is the position towards the regime? You
:12:24. > :12:30.have a lot of divisions. Because you are from Iraq, the fact that
:12:30. > :12:35.they have been more sectarian killings in Iraq is very sad.
:12:35. > :12:39.is that a difficult position. The political process is about to break.
:12:39. > :12:43.You have the vice-president who is sitting because he has terrorism
:12:43. > :12:49.charges against him and you don't know when I will be pushed forward.
:12:49. > :12:54.You have the Deputy Prime Minister and the head of it is circular.
:12:54. > :12:59.Inside there is the position that the majority are Sunni's. There is
:12:59. > :13:01.a feeling that the Sunni politicians are being targeted. The
:13:01. > :13:06.Prime Minister still has full control of the security forces
:13:06. > :13:12.because we still don't have a minister of defence. We have an
:13:12. > :13:16.acting minister. That is the detail. The bigger picture is Iraq
:13:16. > :13:22.politically it is about to get to breaking point and that is when the
:13:22. > :13:32.security situation gets worse. We are having an attack every day.
:13:32. > :13:33.
:13:33. > :13:36.To outsiders have any washing or Well, I think it is quite
:13:36. > :13:40.explicitly clear to the USA that their input is not welcome and I
:13:40. > :13:45.think there is some resentment and his appointment in Washington that
:13:45. > :13:48.they don't have a role. -- disappointment. The Americans are
:13:48. > :13:53.pretty much acting that they did what they could, pretty much
:13:53. > :13:57.accomplishing something, and it is a mess and nobody wants us around.
:13:57. > :14:02.So they are glad to get out? Yes. The focus now is on returning
:14:02. > :14:09.veterans and their lives of now. The press is writing about that to
:14:09. > :14:13.a degree. I don't agree. I know that for the election they are
:14:13. > :14:19.talking about the done deal and Barack Obama sticking to his
:14:19. > :14:23.campaign promise. But Iraq still matters a lot to the USA. When we
:14:23. > :14:26.look at what Iran is doing, how the Gulf is doing, Iraq is still
:14:26. > :14:31.strategically important for the USA. I think this administration just
:14:31. > :14:34.did not know how to deal with it. It is not a lack of influence, they
:14:34. > :14:42.just don't know how to use it. Syria is important because the
:14:43. > :14:49.relations between Syria and Iran are important. Iran is there be? --
:14:49. > :14:53.Iran is the big lingering question. I don't think they can just right
:14:53. > :14:57.of that area and forget about it and say it is up to someone else to
:14:57. > :15:01.sort it out. This is probably a turning point for the Arab world.
:15:01. > :15:04.Can the Arab League actually exercise any mature political
:15:04. > :15:08.responsibility? Can they get anything under its control and find
:15:08. > :15:11.solutions? Everyone would like to think that the Arab world is that
:15:11. > :15:16.the point where they can govern themselves and sort out their own
:15:16. > :15:18.problems but there doesn't seem to be much likelihood of that. I think
:15:18. > :15:22.there needs to be some reconciliation between the three
:15:22. > :15:26.points of view. One is the Western point of view, leaning towards
:15:26. > :15:30.condemnation and perhaps intervention as well. Then there is
:15:30. > :15:34.the Arab League, which is important because it is a regional body. It
:15:34. > :15:38.is divided on whether there should be intervention or not. We will see
:15:38. > :15:42.tomorrow what the outcome is. For me, the monitors were there to
:15:42. > :15:52.really absurd and find out what is going on and report back and then
:15:52. > :15:52.
:15:52. > :15:57.decide. -- it to really observe. In this day and age, we have to take
:15:57. > :16:00.into account what Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa are
:16:01. > :16:07.also saying. Their point of view is that there should be an
:16:07. > :16:11.encouragement of dialogue. Ideally, a situation led by a Syria. This
:16:12. > :16:17.may be Utopian, but at the moment I think that military intervention
:16:17. > :16:21.seems to be a non- starter. Talking about the Arab League, based in
:16:21. > :16:26.Egypt, we have to say that this is the anniversary of the revolution
:16:26. > :16:36.in Egypt picking off. How Egypt end up is going to be crucial for the
:16:36. > :16:38.
:16:38. > :16:43.Arab world. Many of the previous leaders are now in dire straits and
:16:43. > :16:46.that will impact on the Arab world hugely. Let's move on. The
:16:46. > :16:50.Government has been talking about a fairer, better kind of capitalism,
:16:50. > :16:55.and this sort of talk is common ground in British politics. Does it
:16:55. > :16:59.have any real meaning? Surely the whole point of capitalism is that
:16:59. > :17:02.fairness is not its guiding principle. Everyone knows the way
:17:02. > :17:10.the electorate feels about bankers and that sort of thing. People are
:17:10. > :17:13.grumpy. But does fair capitalism get us anywhere? Obviously not! The
:17:13. > :17:16.capitalist market cannot impose fairness because the capitalist
:17:16. > :17:20.market by definition does not impose values, that is not what
:17:20. > :17:23.they are about. It has been very interesting when all three
:17:23. > :17:28.political leaders have come out effectively finding ways to make
:17:28. > :17:33.capitalism humane, acceptable, whatever, so now there is no
:17:33. > :17:36.alternative. It is the only global economic solution. China is still a
:17:36. > :17:40.totalitarian country but they have a capitalist economy. Everybody
:17:40. > :17:44.agrees that capitalism is the only way to create wealth, and that is
:17:44. > :17:52.where we start. What we do with the bath afterwards is the political
:17:52. > :17:55.question. It is not for the capitalist market itself to impose
:17:55. > :17:59.that, because nobody elected them, so it is up to the Government to
:17:59. > :18:03.decide what to do with the wealth that the capitalism creates. You
:18:03. > :18:07.don't want to kill the goose that laid the golden egg so you do not
:18:07. > :18:13.get any wealth to do anything with. That is the dilemma to resolve.
:18:13. > :18:17.India has inequalities, so do you have this similar debate? India has
:18:17. > :18:21.always lent in the direction of a mixed economy. Of course it is a
:18:21. > :18:26.capitalist economy but the state plays an important role. The public
:18:26. > :18:30.sector has a very important role to play, even today. Therefore, while
:18:30. > :18:36.India has opened up considerably over the last 20 years, and free
:18:37. > :18:44.enterprise has flourished, it is still cautious. That said, I think
:18:44. > :18:49.it is generally argued that capitalism being profit-driven is
:18:49. > :18:54.uncaring by definition. On the other hand there is a difference
:18:54. > :18:58.between profiteering and making prophet. I think it is the latter
:18:58. > :19:02.that can be described as caring capitalism. Therefore that is
:19:02. > :19:07.really what people are talking about. It is a theory that emerges
:19:07. > :19:14.from the middle ground, rather than the right of the Conservative Party.
:19:14. > :19:18.When things again of JF Kennedy. You raised that earlier, and people
:19:18. > :19:23.broadly seem to agree with that. What they really hate is when
:19:23. > :19:29.catalysts in particular lose magnate and personally make money
:19:29. > :19:34.and get rewarded for it. -- lose money. In our industry we see lots
:19:34. > :19:37.of newspaper publishers that take the country to the ground and then
:19:37. > :19:41.leave with $30 million and that annoys people and that has become
:19:41. > :19:45.very common. This was billed by Downing Street as a big moment, a
:19:45. > :19:49.major speech, part of the Big Society, and then when we saw him
:19:49. > :19:53.on television talking it was not having much impact. You could feel
:19:53. > :19:57.the air going out of the speech. I don't think it was terribly well
:19:57. > :20:01.planned or well-positioned to have much impact. Talking about
:20:01. > :20:05.capitalism in the UK now when there is so much fear of whether it is a
:20:05. > :20:10.second dip in a recession, whatever, the atmosphere is so negative that
:20:10. > :20:15.I think that speech really went unheard. They think it is a
:20:15. > :20:18.theoretical debate about what capitalism is. This has been going
:20:18. > :20:22.on since the economic crisis, people discussing what systems work.
:20:22. > :20:26.There are so many different types of capitalism now that you have to
:20:27. > :20:30.have new definitions, whether it is profiteering or others. The
:20:30. > :20:35.socialism and capitalism of Norway is very different to the capitalism
:20:35. > :20:41.or socialism of Egypt, for example. There are all these new ideas and
:20:41. > :20:45.concepts. I don't believe the idea that you can't have too much
:20:45. > :20:48.regulation in capitalism, because the markets are regulated but what
:20:48. > :20:51.are the benchmark? Whether they are regulated properly and carefully?
:20:52. > :20:55.Exactly. They have had that discussion at the G20. We're
:20:56. > :21:00.talking about Britain's Pacific late but they think it is a much
:21:00. > :21:03.bigger issue. It is important to remember that in the last few years,
:21:03. > :21:08.a generation of catalysts have behaved very badly. That does not
:21:08. > :21:12.necessarily mean that we have a crisis of capitalism. We have a
:21:12. > :21:16.generation of people behaving badly. It is like saying democracy has
:21:16. > :21:21.been discredited because Adolf Hitler was elected to office. You
:21:21. > :21:28.have to say how do we come to terms and deal with people that discredit
:21:28. > :21:31.their own system? This is nothing new. But when you listen to that
:21:31. > :21:36.speech and other people talking about it in political parties
:21:36. > :21:40.across the country, don't you think what do they actually mean? Yes,
:21:40. > :21:46.but there is a reason for that, the reason why none of them can suggest
:21:46. > :21:50.practical policies. It is very dangerous for Government to start
:21:50. > :21:54.intervening in the private remuneration of individual people
:21:54. > :21:58.employed in private industry, that is effectively totalitarian and you
:21:58. > :22:01.can't do it. You also can't have a general rule about what constitutes
:22:01. > :22:06.a responsible behaviour. It is impossible to define so there is
:22:06. > :22:10.precious little that Government can do. It has to be a cultural thing,
:22:10. > :22:14.like the 19th century social reforms. The Factory Acts and so on
:22:14. > :22:19.began as cultural movements. I don't think that Government can
:22:20. > :22:23.dictate how a generation of people behave. There are still laws.
:22:23. > :22:28.is just it, you can't make laws so nobody can earn above a certain
:22:28. > :22:33.level. And if people go bankrupt, the people cannot walk away with
:22:33. > :22:36.$30 million. But can you make a law to dictate that? One of the things
:22:36. > :22:40.we are suggesting is somehow lone parent shareholders, but the simple
:22:40. > :22:48.truth has been for years that shareholders have shut up and taken
:22:48. > :22:52.the money. -- and powering shareholders. Now they are grumpy.
:22:53. > :22:58.You can't make effective rules that have a positive impact. People are
:22:58. > :23:00.afraid of the City being replaced by Frankfurt, Dubai, whatever. And
:23:00. > :23:08.suddenly London becomes a place where bonuses are strictly
:23:08. > :23:12.regulated and then companies may leave, which terrifies people.
:23:12. > :23:18.the globalisation of capital and markets, effectively the danger is
:23:18. > :23:21.that economics has gone beyond the control of politics. Any political
:23:21. > :23:28.Government, any national Government, cannot control the movements of
:23:28. > :23:34.capitalism. Is this like a pantomime? Booing and hissing if
:23:34. > :23:39.you attack the bankers? Will it not go anywhere? So will it take
:23:39. > :23:43.cultural reasons to make something emerge? The public mood has been
:23:43. > :23:48.foul ever since the crisis hit the world and that has not changed
:23:48. > :23:51.because nothing radical has happened since. What David Cameron
:23:51. > :23:57.proposed was what he called co- operative capitalism. In other
:23:57. > :24:03.words, co-operatives deriving benefits from free enterprise. Now
:24:03. > :24:08.that is easier said than done. What has happened is that the obscenity
:24:08. > :24:12.of capitalism as we have seen it in the last three years is nothing
:24:13. > :24:19.other than the cascading effects of Thatcherism and Regan is him, which
:24:19. > :24:23.needed rectification at a certain point. This is the stage when
:24:23. > :24:29.people have to address this problem in a serious manner. You obviously
:24:30. > :24:34.don't agree with any of that! deregulation of the City that
:24:34. > :24:36.Thatcher brought in, and the things Ronald Reagan brought in, they have
:24:37. > :24:43.their effect but it is interesting that the real crisis has occurred
:24:43. > :24:47.since communism collapsed, oddly enough. I wonder if losing the
:24:47. > :24:52.alter ego of communism as a system didn't cause capitalism to become