:00:03. > :00:13.the top of the hour. Now on BBC News, Dateline London with Gavin
:00:13. > :00:26.
:00:26. > :00:31.Esler. Hello and welcome to Dateline
:00:31. > :00:34.London. The presidents of the world's two most powerful countries,
:00:34. > :00:39.the United States and China, are to meet in an informal summit. Russian
:00:39. > :00:43.missiles for Syria. And the EU relaxes the rules. Are we witnessing
:00:43. > :00:45.the slow death of European austerity policies? My guests today are Diane
:00:46. > :00:48.Wei Liang, the Chinese writer, Nesrine Malik, who is a writer on
:00:48. > :00:54.Arab affairs, Jef McCallister, who's an American writer and broadcaster
:00:54. > :00:56.and Adam Raphael of Transport Magazine.
:00:56. > :00:59.The new Chinese president, Xi Jinping, has been demonstrating
:00:59. > :01:02.China's interests across the world by visiting the Caribbean ahead of a
:01:02. > :01:06.summit with President Obama. Obama wants, among other things, China's
:01:06. > :01:13.help with North Korea. What does China want and can the United States
:01:13. > :01:21.give it to them? How important is this summit to the new leadership of
:01:21. > :01:25.China? It is important, it is China going to America, and it is one of
:01:25. > :01:30.the overseas trips for the new president, but it is less of a
:01:30. > :01:37.prominent visit for the new leadership than what it used to be.
:01:37. > :01:43.For example, the crazies president had been to Russia and Africa for
:01:43. > :01:48.his first overseas bedsit. -- the previous president. This time he is
:01:48. > :01:52.going to the Caribbean to see President Obama. The new China is
:01:52. > :01:56.more confident than the old leadership and it is there a way of
:01:56. > :01:59.demonstrating that China is an emerging new power. They want to
:01:59. > :02:05.demonstrate that they are building relationships with many countries,
:02:05. > :02:12.not just America. It is interesting that they have been to the Caribbean
:02:12. > :02:18.countries. We know that China has influence and Latin America and
:02:18. > :02:24.Africa. The business of China is business, in a way. It is business
:02:24. > :02:30.and there are also political issues. I suspect there will be discussions
:02:30. > :02:36.about the security arrangements in Asia. America's pivot and their
:02:36. > :02:44.deployment of aircraft in Asia. But by and large, I am not sure what
:02:44. > :02:48.America can offer or do for China. It may be the other way around?
:02:48. > :02:55.China may be able to help America in terms of North Korea and trade
:02:55. > :02:59.issues. In China, the visit of the president is popular, but much more
:02:59. > :03:08.interesting is what the new first lady is going to wear. That is a big
:03:08. > :03:15.change. America's pivot, we should explain. President Obama has
:03:15. > :03:20.suggested that American forces are concentrated on the Pacific theatre.
:03:20. > :03:25.Yes, and in the earlier stages, that was triggered by the conflict
:03:25. > :03:29.between China and Japan over the islands. Now with the development in
:03:29. > :03:35.North Korea, more and more military forces are ringed applied into that
:03:35. > :03:43.area. There is a justification for that. But China is against this
:03:43. > :03:49.movement. How is this seen in Washington? Is it a big deal? It is
:03:49. > :03:53.a big deal. These summits always get attention, but this is intended to
:03:53. > :03:59.be an informal visit. It was put up two months in advance of when the
:03:59. > :04:04.meeting was expected to be, because there have been some tensions. I
:04:04. > :04:08.think that what America can do for China, it is what I paid and can do
:04:08. > :04:15.for any team -year-old boy, which is sort of, get out of the way and
:04:15. > :04:19.respect me. China is becoming a great power. In China, they do not
:04:19. > :04:25.always believe that the United States understands and respects
:04:25. > :04:28.this. They'd is a chip on the shoulder. I do not think America if
:04:28. > :04:32.a chip on the shoulder. I do not think America if did respect China.
:04:32. > :04:40.I would say that that is not true any longer. It may not have been
:04:40. > :04:43.true in the 19th century, but there is that sense, you fed us opium, the
:04:43. > :04:48.British did that more than the Americans, but we are rising power
:04:48. > :04:54.and we demand that you respect us. We do not believe that you are doing
:04:54. > :04:58.it, which is why the pivot to Asia, in the context of Washington, the
:04:58. > :05:02.traditional allies are getting nervous because China is stretching
:05:03. > :05:07.its elbows and they are threatening ceilings and territories. It is
:05:07. > :05:12.wanting to show that it is a great power. How do they do that, they
:05:12. > :05:16.attack a little island in the South China Sea or something like that.
:05:16. > :05:21.America feels that this is a defensive vivid to reassure our
:05:21. > :05:27.traditional allies that things are not getting worse. But things could
:05:27. > :05:32.escalate. China and the US have virtually nothing to disagree about.
:05:32. > :05:37.If this relationship cannot be worked out intelligently, it is a
:05:37. > :05:42.terrible failure of statesmanship on both sides. One thing they could
:05:42. > :05:48.follow it boat is North Korea. The United States does need China there
:05:48. > :05:51.to make some sense into what is going on in North Korea, and also as
:05:51. > :05:58.a control against any real outbreak of madness which might develop in
:05:58. > :06:04.North Korea. I think to treat these two powers as equal superpowers
:06:04. > :06:08.would be wrong. There is no doubt about it, America is still in a
:06:08. > :06:14.totally different league to China. In China, they cannot get the baby
:06:14. > :06:18.milk right. It is still a very important country, and of increasing
:06:19. > :06:24.importance over the years, but in many ways, it is totally
:06:24. > :06:29.underdeveloped. This relationship as to be managed carefully, and I am
:06:29. > :06:33.sure that the pride which has been expressed is very important for
:06:33. > :06:40.America to acknowledge and accept, and to recognise China's place in
:06:40. > :06:45.the world. The one area of difference is trade. The trade
:06:45. > :06:50.imbalances are serious and that could result in real tension.
:06:50. > :06:55.not entirely sure that the US has been behaving in a way that is
:06:55. > :07:00.confident and secure. There is a insecure language coming across and
:07:00. > :07:04.overcompensation. The secretary of defence is reported to have said
:07:04. > :07:09.that America would like to establish that it has military dominance, that
:07:09. > :07:17.it is the superior military power in the region. As secure power would
:07:17. > :07:22.not need to point that out. I feel like the US is trying to remind
:07:22. > :07:26.China, because there is a slight sense of threat. There is more
:07:26. > :07:31.strident, confrontational language from the Chinese, which I actually
:07:31. > :07:36.find quite gratifying. It is interesting to see the American
:07:36. > :07:42.defence secretary be questioned by Chinese delegates. One said, I do
:07:42. > :07:49.not think the US wants to seriously engage with China. I think the US is
:07:49. > :07:54.engaging in rhetoric but it wants to contain China. The US is feeling
:07:54. > :07:59.threatened. It does not understand China and once to contain it. The US
:07:59. > :08:04.is good at trying to engage with belligerent, confrontational
:08:04. > :08:12.superpowers like North Korea, or belligerent powers like Israel. --
:08:12. > :08:16.like Iran. But forging relationships with third world countries,
:08:16. > :08:23.investing in trade, it is a kind of slow, creeping power that the US
:08:23. > :08:29.does not know how to engage with. This is not entirely benign on
:08:29. > :08:32.China's part. I am not saying it is benign. China has been a sexy topic
:08:32. > :08:42.in American foreign policy for a long time, from the visit of Richard
:08:42. > :08:49.Nixon on. I would actually say that China's rise has been a successful
:08:49. > :08:53.American foreign policy. In general, this is a relationship that is going
:08:53. > :08:58.relatively well given all the strains that are inherent in this.
:08:58. > :09:02.This is a big issue in the United States, so-called cyber crime, and
:09:02. > :09:08.it can be traced back to Chinese people, apparently. How is that
:09:08. > :09:14.viewed in China? And sure it will be a topic that will be brought up with
:09:14. > :09:19.President Obama in the summit. It is a serious issue from the point of
:09:19. > :09:24.view of the government in China. But they would state that it is out of
:09:24. > :09:29.their control, it is not state organised crime. But the evacuation
:09:29. > :09:34.is, one is American foreign policy. They have been trying to engage with
:09:34. > :09:40.China. There is a huge group in Washington that wants to contain
:09:40. > :09:44.China. That is a policy that seems to shift from year to year. They are
:09:44. > :09:49.not sure what way they are going. China wants to demonstrate that they
:09:49. > :09:56.want to engage with America, but America is not the world, we want to
:09:56. > :10:01.engage with the world. I have spoken to a number of representatives from
:10:01. > :10:04.African countries and also Latin America, and they say that there are
:10:04. > :10:06.difficulties doing business with China, but it is pretty
:10:07. > :10:13.straightforward and they do not lecture us about human rights and
:10:13. > :10:17.other things, which the British and others tend to do. Is that how you
:10:17. > :10:22.you see it? I am from Sedan and China has a good business
:10:22. > :10:26.relationship with Sudan. The cultural differences are massive,
:10:26. > :10:35.but when it comes to business, China knows how to deal and invest in
:10:35. > :10:39.third World countries. America has been very bad at that. Japan has
:10:39. > :10:43.made any pledge to African countries for the private sector. The way that
:10:43. > :10:47.Japan and China and Asian countries in general engage with Africa and
:10:47. > :10:52.the countries of the South, it is something that America could learn
:10:52. > :10:59.from. They may also be allowing about current -- they may also be
:10:59. > :11:02.allowing corruption and payoffs and not kidding much as well. I do not
:11:02. > :11:07.think American investment concerns are tightly human rights in Africa
:11:07. > :11:10.or the Arab world. Let's move on. The European Union has let an arms
:11:10. > :11:13.embargo on Syria expire while the Russians have reacted by saying they
:11:13. > :11:17.will send anti-aircraft missiles to the Assad regime. This of course has
:11:17. > :11:20.not pleased Israel, among others. And Israel has already shown a
:11:20. > :11:23.willingness and a capacity to bomb Syria when the Israeli government
:11:23. > :11:28.thinks necessary. Are we in danger of seeing a civil war becoming a
:11:28. > :11:33.regional conflict? Perhaps it is already, given how Turkey and
:11:33. > :11:37.Lebanon are being drawn into this, and also a rag. How do you see this,
:11:37. > :11:43.because in a way it is posturing? The Russian missiles are not
:11:43. > :11:46.arriving. Russian missiles are not arriving for a year, and the arms
:11:46. > :11:53.embargoes as lambs but there are no weapons that have been dispatched to
:11:53. > :11:59.Syria. The coverage over the past 48 hours has been about the threat to
:11:59. > :12:05.Israel. John Kerry chastised the Russians and said that there was a
:12:05. > :12:10.threat to Israel. I do not see what any of this has to do with Israel.
:12:10. > :12:14.80,000 Syrians have died over the past couple of years. You have a
:12:14. > :12:20.fractious rebel group and a dictator who does not hesitate to use
:12:20. > :12:25.weapons, chemical weapons or weapons from Russia. I do not see red Israel
:12:25. > :12:30.comes into this. The problem with the way that the US engages with
:12:30. > :12:34.foreign policy in the Middle East is that it is pivoted around Israel.
:12:34. > :12:39.They are distracted from the main concerns, the deaths of Syrian
:12:39. > :12:49.citizens and human rights abuses. Throughout the Arab spring, America
:12:49. > :12:49.
:12:49. > :12:53.has not learnt that I -- that Israel is a diversion. The president of
:12:53. > :12:59.silly postures and uses rhetoric and says that Israel is in trouble if we
:12:59. > :13:04.have missiles, but he has enough on his plate. What we need to learn
:13:04. > :13:09.about the rhetoric of Arab dictators is that it is a political tool. He
:13:09. > :13:14.has various factions in his country. His way of accommodating that is
:13:14. > :13:20.saying, I'm going to be strident with Israel. Israel is not a
:13:20. > :13:27.diversion, it is crucial. The other crucial player, which I hope the
:13:27. > :13:32.United States and this country will go for, is Russia. That is the key
:13:32. > :13:36.to any resolution of the situation in Syria. Nothing else can be done,
:13:36. > :13:41.but we need to acknowledge Russian interests, we need to forge what
:13:41. > :13:45.common ground we have with Russia, and therefore, I think this was a
:13:45. > :13:51.big mistake under half of Britain and France to relax this embargo,
:13:51. > :13:57.because Russia sees it as a threat and has responded in kind. That was
:13:57. > :14:03.the wrong thing to do. I understand why the relaxation was stunned. It
:14:03. > :14:07.is a horrific situation in Syria, but the key is Russia. Without
:14:07. > :14:14.Russian cooperation and Russian initiative, and leadership, nothing
:14:14. > :14:19.will be resolved. This week the BBC ran a 3-part -- documentary series
:14:19. > :14:22.on the road to war in Iraq. Watching that, and listening to the news
:14:22. > :14:30.reports about what the mess in Iraq is in now, in terms of taking
:14:30. > :14:33.killings, that must put a brake on any thoughts of intervention,
:14:33. > :14:43.certainly from the point of view of the United States, and perhaps from
:14:43. > :14:43.
:14:43. > :14:50.the Europeans? I think it has two. How can you willingly try to
:14:50. > :14:54.intervene in this conflict, not knowing how it is going to work out?
:14:54. > :14:59.The guys who are the toughest minded, and who have the most guns,
:14:59. > :15:05.start dominating. People move to the extremes. How can you do this? In
:15:05. > :15:15.some ways, it reminds me of Yugoslavia after the fall of Miller
:15:15. > :15:16.
:15:16. > :15:21.switch. People would have been glad to have had the dictator, as was the
:15:21. > :15:25.case in Iraq, in some ways. There is no good way, I think. Eric Obama has
:15:25. > :15:29.been very clear, he wants to spend less money on war, less money trying
:15:29. > :15:38.to intervene in places that he thinks the US will not actually be
:15:38. > :15:45.able to accomplish anything. I don't or no-fly zones, can solve this
:15:45. > :15:52.problem. John McCain and some others would say, this is weakness, but how
:15:52. > :15:58.do you think this goes down with the American people? The polls shown no
:15:58. > :16:08.interest in intervening in Syria. That's because there is no interest.
:16:08. > :16:09.
:16:09. > :16:14.Well, there is no oil. Yes, because the US has no interests in Syria.
:16:15. > :16:17.From the point of view of China, this is exactly an example of the
:16:17. > :16:26.West's way of dealing with developing countries. China has
:16:26. > :16:31.always had a policy of not interfering. China engages with
:16:31. > :16:37.Africa economically, leaving the internal affairs to the country.
:16:37. > :16:44.Here, you have Syria as an example, where it becomes a battle ground for
:16:44. > :16:53.the EU, for Russia, for America. It is the Syrians who have been killed
:16:53. > :16:57.in this conflict. It was it was following on from the Arab Spring
:16:57. > :17:00.revolts, and it was against a brutal regime. Of course, in that
:17:00. > :17:04.neighbourhood, there are lots of people who starts to put their
:17:04. > :17:08.finger in the pie. Iran and Russia are doing the best job of it, they
:17:08. > :17:13.are the most successful, it appears. Everybody else has not
:17:13. > :17:23.figured out what to do. But the idea that it is benign always to stay
:17:23. > :17:24.
:17:24. > :17:27.away from conflicts is not necessarily ideal. This is where the
:17:27. > :17:32.United Nations may have a role to play in Syria, because that is the
:17:32. > :17:36.way to get Russia and the United States engaged, and a way to get the
:17:36. > :17:41.European Union engaged. There needs to be a concerted agreement amongst
:17:41. > :17:51.the great powers, I'm afraid. That would not necessarily resolve it,
:17:51. > :17:51.
:17:51. > :20:59.Apology for the loss of subtitles for 187 seconds
:20:59. > :21:03.place Europe is. If we had 50% unemployment in this country, there
:21:03. > :21:08.would be total riots, the government would be out, so don't let's pursue
:21:08. > :21:12.this policy any further in Europe. People who are most in favour of
:21:12. > :21:15.austerity, it has been said, see debt as the biggest problem. But
:21:15. > :21:25.most people, if you ask them, are more worried about unemployment,
:21:25. > :21:25.
:21:25. > :21:31.being able to put food on the table. Is that how you see it? I think
:21:31. > :21:39.there is a certain consensus, I'm afraid, but the bottom had been
:21:39. > :21:46.reached, that the crisis is moving away from absolute urgency, and I
:21:46. > :21:52.think that on austerity, the judgment is still out there. I can
:21:52. > :21:55.see that America has benefited from stimulus policies, so, Europe is
:21:55. > :21:59.having second thoughts as to whether austerity has gone too far. But I
:21:59. > :22:05.think the judgment is still out in the long run, who will win out.
:22:05. > :22:12.Another issue here is really, you cannot ask the German taxpayers to
:22:12. > :22:18.continue bailing out countries that have run their economy into the
:22:18. > :22:21.ground. Politically, it will not work. You cannot ask countries which
:22:21. > :22:25.have got high unemployment to be able to pay off their debts, because
:22:25. > :22:31.they simply cannot afford to, and they are in a vicious cycle. It just
:22:31. > :22:37.does not work, for Greece, for example... ? . Per problem is, we do
:22:37. > :22:41.not know what works, you have the school of thought of stimulating
:22:42. > :22:47.growth, you have the school of thought of cutting costs, and the
:22:47. > :22:51.problem is, we do not know what works. I agree with you about
:22:51. > :22:56.Germany, because in the end, when push comes to shove, in the end, the
:22:56. > :23:00.Germans accept that it is totally in their interests to keep Europe
:23:00. > :23:05.going, and to keep the commission going. We saw that over the banking
:23:05. > :23:10.intervention, which stabilised the markets, and we will see it again if
:23:10. > :23:14.there is another real economic crisis. They have shown their commit
:23:14. > :23:22.and, that it is better for Germany to be in Europe, and for Europe to
:23:22. > :23:28.be strong, but at what price? Would the price gets to a certain point
:23:28. > :23:32.where they would not think it was worth doing it? From the point of
:23:32. > :23:37.view of the Obama Administration, is this Europe going through
:23:37. > :23:41.Keynesianism for slow learners? In other words, they just got it
:23:41. > :23:45.wrong? I think that could be said for America as well. The stimulus
:23:45. > :23:51.perhaps has not been as big as it should've been. American debt is now
:23:51. > :23:54.at half the level it was even two years ago, although it is still very
:23:54. > :23:59.large. But the trend line is a lot better than in Europe. But the
:23:59. > :24:04.question is for now, how does Europe try to do the hard things, the
:24:04. > :24:10.structural reforms? I was remembering the Lisbon declaration