27/04/2013 Dateline London

serious burns. I'll be back with the full bulletin of news at the top of

the hour but now, it is time for Welcome to Dateline London. Chemical

weapons, Syria and what should be done. Britain avoids a triple dip

recession, but with even Germany feeling the pinch, does austerity

actually work? And 20 years after the crime that shocked Britain, the

murder of Stephen Lawrence. My guests today are Bernard Borrell,

the Jamaican journalist, Abu Yahya al-Libi, -- Agnes Poirier, Abdel

Bari Atwan and Dame Anne Leslie from the Daily Mail. Western intelligence

agencies suggested this week that chemical weapons have been used in

Syria by the Assad regime. Given the past history in Iraq remains a

degree of caution but it's such weapons have been used, how does

that change what outside powers should do? Do you believe, Bernard,

that there is a case for these weapons being used? I do not have

faith in Western intelligence any more. I do not believe their

reports. Reminding you of what happened in preparation for the

Iraqi war, with the weapons of mass destruction, which was fabricated

consciously. I'm suspicious. I want to see concrete evidence from

independent sources, not British intelligence or American FBI. We

know what happened in Iraq. After ten years we discovered it was

fabricated. Somebody from Iraq said they were working to plant weapons

of mass disruption, and we discovered that it was a huge life.

-- mass destruction. If there is a proper investigation, maybe it will

be a different story but I believe that this kind of propaganda,

talking about Assad using chemical weapons, I think we have to be

honestly restrained. But personally, I have a feeling that this talk

about weapons of mass destruction and chemical weapons, sarin gas,

nerve gas, believe it is in preparation for something concocted

by Britain and other countries. I am not wrong. I will tell you, the Emir

of Qatar and the Saudi Foreign Minister was there. King Abdullah of

Jordan was there. They were all there in Washington. What they are

cooking for the Middle East is another war. The difference now, I

was fooled first time around. used to fight on a about this. I was

fooled by the fact that it was not just the CIA and the British, who

were saying that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction, it was

French and German intelligence services, as we understood it.

Difference between then and now is that I'd do not think that President

Obama wants to go to war. He cannot afford to go to war. It is his

second term, and he does not want to go down in history as having brought

the American people once again, because they are constantly going

into war, the American people are now fed up with it. They want the

economy to be curate, the American people, they do not want another

war. Bush wanted another war, George W Bush, simply because he felt that

there was unfinished business with his father, who had gone into

quake, but did not pursue Saddam Hussein. -- Kuwait. Given that

caution, when many people were fooled previously, do you think

there is a case that chemical weapons have been used? I have no

idea and have not been there. talking about independent

investigation. There is a team of weapon inspectors sitting around in

the sunshine in Cyprus. But the regime will not let the men so they

cannot independently examine it. -- not let them in. Some people are

going to refugee -- going to refugee camps to see if they can take your

samples. But you remember when they started the same thing against

Saddam Hussein. They knew that there were no weapons of mass destruction

and despite that, they sent teams in. And they work investigated by

the CIA. But I think the difference... Coming back to you, I

think Bernard Howell has a point. There is evidence that Syria has the

capability to have these weapons and use them. In this case, in the case

of Iraq, there was speculation based on lies and fabrication of evidence.

Returning to Gavin's question, it is independently proven by the United

Nations inspectors who are sitting in Cyprus trip in wine, if it is

woven that they have actually use these weapons, then the question

is, what is the western government, America and the others, going to be

doing about it? And that is the key question. As you said, can President

Obama afford to do anything? He talked about it being a game

changing position. He also talked about a red line, warning Syria. But

it is one thing to talk about that, but I do not think he can afford to

actually do anything on his own. The question is, most of these

governments who are saying that this is unthinkable, they have not got an

answer. I'd agree. It seems that President Obama is pushing the red

line. Because he does not want to go to war. Then he should shut up.

he does not want to go to war, he should shut up. You know how hard it

is to shut up, Barry! I know. leave President Obama outside. In

Britain, we cannot afford to go to war. There has been Libya, and with

defence cuts, we cannot even consider it. You cannot afford to go

to war. France has been in force in an African conflict. That is easy.

The weapons were talking about do not exist in that country. The key

difference is that Syria has the capability to cause massive

destruction. And this is the reason full stop it is not about being

unable to afford to go to war, it is about being unable to take the

chance to go into a country with such capability, not knowing the

consequences. But how do you go about doing that? It is the UN.

Everything rests with the UN, except we have China and Russia so we are

not as strong. Let me turn it, Barry, using your expertise. It is

something that President Assad said a couple of weeks ago, echoed by

some others, saying that you have not got a clue, the West, as do what

you might do in the region, because you are arming people who may end up

using the guns against you. The Israelis have said that they may end

up using the guns against them. There are a number of concerns here.

How do you see Al-Qaeda's role, or they are fellow travellers role in

Syria? First, thank God you are not interfering, because when you

interfere, you break it and you do not know how to fix it. You could

not fix it in Libya or Iraq or Afghanistan. So thank God you are

staying away. It is better this way. Secondly, all of this fuss about

weapons of mass destruction, about Assad using these chemical weapons,

the West are scared. Israel is scared. It is shivering that these

weapons could fall into the hands of Al-Qaeda. There are basis set up in

Syria, in the north and west, Libyan -- is really bases. Whenever there

is a failed state in Libya or Syria, they say it is not Al-Qaeda. Now

they are worried that Al-Qaeda could use it against Israel. And Al-Qaeda

is very strong. And now it is deeply rooted in the Syrian society because

they are recruiting young people at the age of 20. Do you accept that

argument? I am not going to quarrel with that. Please do! You can!It is

a tradition but I'm going to break it. We have this loose talk about

arming the rebels. Which rebels? Exactly. Are we going to end up

telling the FSA, the Free Syrian Army, which contains some of the

rebels that we like, that they must keep these arms away from the most

ruthless section of the insurgency? No, because their falling out with

them already. What will happen is that one Free Syrian Army man said

after you get rid of Saddam, I'm getting my dictators confused,

President Assad, will be another war between the FSA and other fringe

Islamic groups, which will be bloody. So we will be helping the

insurgents, we think, but we will be helping the jihad tests. Is the

consequence of that that even if chemical weapons have been used and

there is this rhetoric about red lines and so on, actually, outside

is really can do very little? It is also a question of timing. The

rebellion is totally different today from the one it was 18 month ago.

And we could have armed that rebellion 18 months ago and perhaps

it would have done something. But today... 18 months of the

Islamification of some of them. Things change very quick league. --

quickly. We're not very good at being reactive. We intervene too

late. One of the dangerous things when politicians make bold

statements, backed by the threat of force, is that they cannot follow

through and we reached deadlock. Iran is sitting there watching what

Obama is going to do. He has made bold statements. Politically driven,

and must admit, but the situation on the ground is this. As you as, no

country can afford to go in and do anything. -- as you say. We can come

up with options, safe zones... in a safe sown in Bosnia. Safe sown

in? And was in a firefight. I asked King Abdullah of Jordan, I said, do

you know that al-Nosra is rooted in Syria? Do you know that Al-Qaeda is

established in Afghanistan. What can you do? And he said, our American

friends told us that after their successful removal of the Assad

regime, it would take two years to root out Al-Qaeda from Syria. It is

ten years in Afghanistan and Iraq, 13 years in Afghanistan. It will

take more than 30 years. On that happy note, let's move onto cheerful

news about the economy. The good news about the British economy is

that the patient has some kind of pulse, but the bad news is that the

sickness continues and growth is miniscule. The American economy is

growing in the German economy is in some degree of trouble. In Spain and

southern Europe, unemployment is at levels which many people fear

threaten social stability. So, has austerity failed? That is certainly

the view from within the French Socialist party. Austerity is a

waste of time? Strangely, in France you have people in government saying

that we should stop austerity. But austerity has not started in France.

It has not even kicked in. Does it translate into French? It is a tale

of so many different stories. And of course there is the Euro, and

sterling. And we see what Britain has been doing with the sterling. We

only hoped on the continent that we could do the same with the Euro,

which is far too high. The Germans do not want to have a monetary

policy, and let it drop. exporter suffering. Absolutely.It

is a piece of political genius to allow the pound to continue to

devalue. Perhaps that is the secret. That is one of the reasons we did

not want to join the euro. Because then you are in an iron cage, and

you cannot manipulate it. You could. If the Germans only allowed it!

Germans are getting very fed up, bailing out feckless countries.

Well, they may leave the euro and that would solve problems. They

will. As you know, there is a new party, a small party which is saying

that they should leave the euro and then they would not have too. It is

unconstitutional, apparently, according to the German

constitution, for them to bail out feckless foreigners. It is not quite

described as that but there is a point there. That is why it goes to

the court so often. But... We blame the Germans, so the Germans have

been shelling money out to feckless Southerners. We should not blame

them, we should thank them! Honestly! You're saying it is

because of them... Sterling has been used as a yo-yo. But it is too

strong, the euro, and also inflation. Bring it back to what

Gavin said, I would support what many more experienced professionals

are saying, even Jose Manuel Barroso has said that it is time to call

austerity to a halt. The British Chancellor is actually to have a

second plan, because if you look at the figures which came out, with

Britain avoiding a triple dip recession, just avoiding it, the key

factor is the service industry. We know that the service industry is

fickle. But the key area where we should be focusing is manufacturing,

construction, and those are doing very badly. Gavin talks about

America but America are not doing that wonderfully. But better than we

are. The Germans, they are now actually having questions about the

economics ability will stop exports There has been an attempt to reduce

debt with a certain degrees of success, but is the biggest threat

unemployment? The problem is that the European governments, including

Britain, are concentrating on reducing the deficit, the Budget

deficit, and how to apply the austerity measures, which are

killing... Social justice is completely ruined. Unemployment is

high. Britain is the worst, the second worst economic performer

indeed she 20 club. It doesn't work! -- in the G20 club. We are

spending a whole way -- spending our way out after an incredible

mess has been shown not to work. More money does not always improve

things. We spend more money on schools and hospitals and various

other things, and it doesn't work. It does work in the United States.

The American economy is growing. And your economy year, 0.3% growth!

In Spain and Greece, if they bail out Greece in particular, if Greece

does everything it has been dulled so he by 2020, it will still be in

MS. Yes, it will, and a austerity has become an ideology. De Cardy to

work in the margins. -- you Cardy to work in the margins. What about

the social cost? The European Commission and the central bank are

now recognising that austerity does not work in the long-run, and they

did in the way to Portugal and Spain to take more time. We have to

change course. You can't just keep on throwing money, but you have to

have a Plan B. There is a plan B, it is already operates in. This

whole business of Bill Allen -- bill of allowing exchange rates to

shift, you are not allowed to do it. We don't agree on did it. Thank God

you are fighting together and not with me!

20 years ago this week, a black teenager standing at a. Was

murdered in London by a gang of white youths. -- standing at a..

How has Britain changed in the past 20 years? Racism never changes. It

still manifests itself in all its facets. But Stephen Lawrence's

tragic murder 20 years ago has made a significant difference even their

many people say it is not as forward, not as revolutionary in

terms of changes. But he has made a difference. There have been changes

in the judicial system, in terms of the double jeopardy rule. We have

had changes in the police force, especially in London, one of the

major cities, where murders, particularly among ethnic minority

communities, don't just go unchallenged or investigated --

uninvestigated in the normal ways. Some things still need to be done.

The police represent members of the ordinary community. The police are

coming from communities where racism is still a fact of life. It

does not mean they would change their attitudes overnight. Stephen

Lawrence's death has led us to rethink how we treat minority

groups. In London, 40% of the population is from different ethnic

groups, and only a small minority of officers are from those groups.

They would say they are aware of that and are changing the problem.

It is too slow. It is changing, not just the colour, but also the face.

I'm talking about Islam a phobia, and the Daily Mail. Muslims are now

the target. Muslims are suspects of being terrorists. Look at Abu

Qatada. He is portrayed in the media as a superpower threatening

not only Britain but the whole of Europe, the whole of the white

countries. Unbelievable! You are exaggerated! Is completely out of

proportion. We should not fail to recognise that where we are now was

quite different to where we were 20 years ago. Countries like France

and Spain, there policing services so -- service is so autocratic. In

France, you have so many problems in the Muslim and North African

communities. In Britain, we have checks and balances. They are not

perfect, but we are... The Daily Mail, this hated racist newspaper,

was the newspaper that went out on a limb on Stephen Lawrence. I was

at lunch with the editor and a couple of other people and Sir Paul

Condon, the head of the Met Police at the time. He was saying there,

there's a wall of silence, we can't find out anything about it. My

editor, a man of very short temper, went berserk. He said, I have had

boys out, looking for, we know who they are. We have not had a wall of

silence. And she named people, even though you faced legal costs.

the libel people and the lawyers were in connections. It shows how

important this is for the British. The whole community sited behind

Stephen Lawrence's family because it was a case of unfairness and

injustice. The British hate injustice and unfairness, and I

think it was a very special case. It is not unlike what you got in

France, or Mark Duggan. There was very little sympathy in that case.

There are laws going to be passing this country in relation to certain

Muslim radicals. But this country is sending weapons to Syria!

William Hague is every day saying we have to send weapons, we have to

support the rebels. If you want to are the rebels and at the same

time... Hypocrisy! To come back to the legacy of Stephen Lawrence's

death, when I talk to people in black communities up and down

Britain, there is a worry about knife crime within the community.

But that leads to friction with the police. And that is where I think

the hypocrisy exists and and people of black and Caribbean or origin.

Stephen Lawrence was killed by white racist murders -- murderers,

but the highest number of knife crimes committed by young black

boys. Communities in many places are presenting a wall of silence.