30/06/2012 Dateline London

torrential rain. There is ongoing disruption to the East Coast main

line. A full news bulletin at 1 o'clock, but now it is time for

Dateline London live with Gavin Welcome to Dateline London. There

is a big international conference on Syria and as the budget's you

President comes to office, what can the international community do

about Syria and does Russia's policy of non- intervention prevent

bloodshed? I guess today are Dmitry Shishkin of the BBC World Service.

Marc Roche of Le Monde, Abdel Bari Atwan or Al-Quds al-Arabi, and John

Fisher Burns of the New York Times. How will the future of Syria be

determined by fighting on the ground or well-meaning diplomats?

After the shooting down of a Turkish aircraft by the Syrian

military, how far can foreign powers keep out of this? What is

your assessment of the situation on the ground now in Syria? Yes, there

are so oppressions, brutality, there is a dictatorship, but the

whole thing is concentrated on a oil and gas again. If you are to

understand the conflicts in the Middle East, you have to look at

this. Now we are having a cold war hotting up. The problems started

when the West was supporting pipelines to go through Syria to

Turkey and to the West. The Russians said to the Syrian

Government, no you should not allow this pipeline to go these -- to go

through these territories, or are you will get no support at all.

That is why the Russians are very involved. They are using their

vetoes to prevent any kind of sanctions against Assyria, any kind

of economic blockade. That is the reason. Now, White had a meeting in

Geneva? You have to understand there are contacts between the

United States and Russia and the Russians believe if these oil

pipelines pass through Syria to Europe, it will deprive them from a

very strategic part. They are controlling most of Europe by their

reserves and supply of gas. It is a veto again on this. How will a sort

this out? The Geneva conference is very important. The Russians and

Americans are talking about how to sort out the problems of gas. There

is a Russian permanent naval base north of Syria. Once the

superpowers are agreed on a formula, we will have peace in Syria. If

they still continue to differ about that, in this case the bloodshed

will continue. Yesterday 200 people were massacred in Syria by the

regime because the regime is escalating their security solutions,

hoping to sort out the problems before the superpowers intervene.

How is this seen in Moscow? The Gas card is a very important political

card, although many people in Europe are worried about it. A lot

of people in Russia in the political elite do not have a

strong position on Syria oppose saved. What I mean is that in Syria

the Russian stance is influenced by it what has been happening in the

Arab world since Tunisia in 2010. But if you take the situation

further into the past, what happened in 1999 when NATO started

bombing Yugoslavia, based on a regime change and they saw the

revolution enjoy Jack and then the Ukraine. I do not think the

economic reasoning is what is behind Russia's. Is it a sense of

we are losing our friends and we want to hang on to them? That could

be counter-productive because you are not going to make many friends

in the Arab world if you hang on to them. I made the point that Russia

does not have a robust policy towards the Middle East in the

first place. Vladimir Putin tried to counterbalance his stance on

Syria by visiting Israel last week, but it was a half-day visit and

they were concentrating on opening a memorial to soldiers and they had

nothing to discuss in Jerusalem. Russia sees the events in the

Middle East and North Africa probably in the light of that thing,

the intervention, the international community dealing with internal

affairs and the same situation might happen in Russia. Whatever

Western powers say, is it convenient to blame the Russians in

a way because nobody wants to get involved? Barack Obama does not

want American soldiers in an election year involved. I think it

is quite instructive to read some of the speeches and articles

written by the Russian Prime Minister, Sergei Lavrov. Having

learnt for many years during the Cold War in Moscow I need no

instruction on the mystery which governments in Moscow before and

after the fall of communism were capable of. If you read what he

says, no matter what mistreat they may be up to in terms of protecting

their naval base or their principal ally in the Middle East, all of

which is true, he talks about the black and white propaganda of

Western media in picking our favourites. A lot of our media are

attached to the rebel forces in effect, which is a self-inflicted

wound by President Assad because he does not allow them to operate

properly. We are beginning to discover that some of the rebel

forces in Syria are fairly unpalatable people. There are up

Islamic militants there, there is some suggestion of Al-Qaeda

influence and vino the rebels have committed atrocities, perhaps not

as voluminous in numbers of deaths or perhaps as widespread, but there

is no doubt they are doing that. The other thing Sergei Lavrov

pointed out that if you establish a precondition, you may plunge the

whole country and the Regent in to still greater chaos, you may end up

with unmanageable instability. Another Lebanon of the 1980s and

1990s? Having spent years in Iraq and having come back to a posting

here, I'm more and more have the sense that there is a seismic event

of huge proportions occurring in the Middle East and we in the West,

our diplomats and journalists, are like an exploratory party on the

edge of a volcano in pit helmets thinking, maybe we can manage this.

We should start from the understanding that it is not

manageable. Certainly not by outsiders. Not by outsiders and we

should be more modest in our ambitions. It is sad because so

many more people will die. There you go again. Who is pushing for a

sanction? It is Europe, the European Union, France and Britain,

who have put the sanctions on the Syrian regime. The sanctions do not

work very well because the Syrian leader is not dropping a lot and

there are ways to get around the sanctions with the help of Iran. On

the whole, the only positive thing that has been done these imposing

sanctions, also putting diplomatic pressure on allies like Turkey to

put all says sanctions on. On the whole put into action the framework

that the UN is putting for a new regime change and a civil war,

which is to get rid of President Assad and then have a election and

all that process that we have seen in Somalia and a Afghanistan and

Iraq. It is only Europe that has done anything. Europe would be a

much better in to look good tour with Russia and the Americans would

be a -- enter locker. When it comes to Syria, which the West does not

understand, it has a lot of friends. It has Russia, Iran, Iraq, and

Hezbollah and China. Syria is not alone. The second thing is we have

two models of solutions. Either we have the Yemeni model which is a

regime change by peaceful means, or the Algerian model which we can

have a civil war, maybe 10 or 20 years, 200,000 people were killed.

It seems and will now have that the Yemeni model is not working in

Syria because in the end it is a regime change and Russia does not

want a regime changed and they do not want to be checked again. We

are heading towards the Algerian model it seems. It seems President

Bashar al-Assad is determined to go ahead with his solutions and to

massacre hundreds, maybe thousands of people in Syria, in order to

keep his regime intact. It seemed as the Russians are backing him

until the end. He is trying to move from defence to attack and shooting

down the Turkish warplane is a very clear cut indication. It is a

message to the West, I am not Colonel Gaddafi, I am going to

fight until the end. You will suffer a lot of losses. It is very

interesting about Russia's supporting them no matter what they

do on the ground. Russia has had two really bloody wars in Chechnya

where the same number of people were killed. It was always billed

as an internal, a Russian affair and at that time nobody were -- was

trying to change the regime in Russia. When you do the parallel

about the volcano, I think a lot of diplomats both on the Western side

and the Russian side found themselves on this volcano by

surprise. The whole situation took them by surprise. All the Arab

experts in Russia were brought during the Sixties, 70s and 80s,

and their policies towards the Arab world was very clear. But that gets

us back to Mohammed Morsi and Egypt. Again, there has always been,

whether you think it is right or not, on the one hand you could have

a national, strong man, or you are going to be faced with the Muslim

Brotherhood or something similar. The election has produced a

President who has been inaugurated from the Muslim Brotherhood. Should

anybody be worried about that or should be congratulate the people

of Egypt? There is a certain kind of predictability to this. Anybody

who had spent some time in Egypt in the last 20 years knew how powerful

the Muslim Brotherhood was, even though the civilians were repressed.

They have now found an elected candidate and the first thing he

does his demand the release from the federal prison in the United

States of the man who was convicted and has been sentenced to life

imprisonment for involvement behind the First World Trade Centre

bombing. That is from a Western point of view pretty regrettable.

We have to look beyond that and see what happened in Egypt's relations

to Israel. Can we manage this? We cannot. The United States put $60

billion into Egypt over the last 30 years. Again if you visit Egypt you

can see how little impact for the good of the people of Egypt that

money had. Are we entirely surprised when the Egyptian people

have a choice to make that they choose somebody who is likely to be,

if not severely constrained by the military... We cannot say, you have

to have an election and if that I America invested millions in Egypt.

What return of the Americans got? They got a piece from Israel for 40

years. Israel is only 64 years old. 40 years of this, is rare was safe.

Is it not safe now? Actually Israel is safe. If that revolution

succeeded in Syria, or Syria turned to a failed state, Israel will

suffer because a guerrilla war would be started to liberate the

Golan Heights. Also Israel, because they enjoyed 40 years of peace and

stability, they did nothing for the Palestinian cause. They never

actually completed this agreement by implementing the two state

solution. The other big story having a lot of impact in Britain

this week has been the rottenness in some of our backs. This story

about some people in Barclays fiddling LIBOR. We have become used

to a certain culture in banks. I do not think any of us expected this

degree of corruption? It is not just Barclays. Interbank lending is

essential for everyone. It is the basis of the financial system. The

banks have not learnt anything. Regulation, the Government were

weak. The banking lobby is so strong that whenever the Government

tries to limit proprietary trading, hedge fund Private Equity, their

back four or because the banking lobby says, we will go to

Switzerland. It is not like the American system, for instance, were

politicians may have a bit of influence. It is blackmail. The

Government are weak. The banking lobby, despite the crisis, have

managed to amass great any attempts at regulation. -- emasculate. It is

also American banks. The source of this appears to have come from the

United States. I am not an expert on the banking system but I am a

retail customer. Listening to what Mervyn King had to say yesterday

about the shoddy and I think it's seat full practice of the banks, he

was pretty angry. I thought listening to him your anger only

response or echoes the Ankara if old -- her for so long for retail

customers. Once upon a time the bank manager was your friend. The

banks have long since lost interest in retail customers. They have gone

into the casino business. I know the situation is much more

difficult than that. Would do my mind the question is why as the

Government of this country and other countries as well in Europe,

which is imperilled by this... The Cameron Government is imperilled by

this. There are such strong feelings. Look at Question Time.

People are outraged. It surprises made that the Government has not

moved more quickly. Where does Tony Blair work? Where does Peter

Mandelson work? Former politicians going to banking. I can give you a

list at the end of the programme. Senior Government officials will

say they have to tread very carefully because, particularly in

the 13 years of Labour Government, so much of the economy came to

depend on the City of London and the financial sector. The Cameroon

Government has said we need to be, manufacturing nation again,

producing Weale things. -- real things. On Question Time the other

day, we heard people say, let them go. I do not believe they will go.

There are too many attractions in the City of London. We are almost

to a time machine. You have derivative skins. In two years you

will have something else. The Government is either too weak or

incapable of dealing with it. 2008, we are flooded with scandals

in the banking system. The bonuses, the inefficiency. Why the

Government, which put billions into bailing out these banks, did not

look at the root of the problem and try to reform the system? The

customers are paying a heavy price. I never check my bank statements.

But nowadays I am thoroughly checking them. If you lose trust in

banks, there is a serious existential problem? Yes, another

problem is that banks are to break. Look at Barclays. It does

absolutely everything. The only solution that the banking lobby is

resisting and the Government is afraid of, is... Protecting retail

is warm where at least. In effect, make Pang Qing a bit boring and

therefore safe? I cannot read a balance sheet. But I am perfectly

sure that for Mr Diamond and his counterparts, it is Casino banking

that matters for more than retail banking. Retail banking is the

basis for the business in the first place. That separation, which beat

Cameron, is moving towards, cannot, grow soon enough. -- cannot come.

Whether bankers or not move does not matter so much, it is whether

the people who invest the money do not want anything to do with the

City of London? It is a bit like the terminal at Heathrow. The Civic

aviation question in Britain. The parallels are there. I think

becoming a manufacturing country again is really vital. The over-

dependence see on financial services is not Barnet -- is not

healthy. We have baled out, only the banks but we do not see and a

good things happening. I want Marc Roche to Cal us there is no crisis

in the European Union! The deal in Brussels? Fantastic. The markets

are happy. We're in the process of refinancing or banks. Government

and the process of getting their act together. Look at the

difference in the economy in Europe at the moment, and the Anglo Saxon

one. Europe is a great success. Portugal is bankrupt, Greece, Spain,

Italy all bankrupt. Britain is bankrupt! Only Russia is not

bankrupt. Are you surprised Harwell Francois Hollande has handled this?

-- Halliwell. I thought, this idiot is coming, he is a socialist, he

wants to spend. He is a very sensible, pragmatic man. The French,

who said they believed to come to Britain, they have been gone for a

long time. Is it going to last? Were the mark its wake up and

revise this on one good morning? am not an economic expert put one

despairs. There have been many false dawns. It is striking that

since Mr Hollande became president of France there has been a sea-

change in the way these things are viewed. They raised more emphasis

on improving growth. They are a little more careful about the

austerity measures. He has changed quite a bit. And he has given us

insights into a novel family life. The French family life! This

emphasis is a victory for the French voters, isn't it? Yes,

because his policies are human policies, actually. Incurring

growth means facing -- finding a solution to unemployment.