22/02/2014 Dateline London

to the Pope. There is a full bulletin of the News

of the top of the hour with me but now, Dateline London with Gavin

Esler. Hello and welcome to Dateline

London. The Ukraine crisis is the country eventually destined to fall

apart? Plus Scotland's staying with us? Will it be the EU which saves

the UK? Our guests are Henry Chu of the LA Times, Annette Dittert of ARD

TV, Dmitri Shishkin of BBC global news and Iain Martin, a journalist

and author. At the end of the Cold War, the Czechs and Slovaks went

their separate ways and the former Yugoslavia fell apart violently.

Ukraine is divided over its possible relationship with the European

Union. Given the politics and diplomacy over the past few days,

can the Ukraine crisis end peacefully?

The Winter Olympics in Sochi ends this weekend. The Russians have an

interest and perhaps Mr Putin will exert his influence more muse cue

particularly next week? I think the most important thing is that the

violence appears to have stopped for the time being -- muscularly. For

Putin, I don't doubt he was keeping an eye on what has been happening

there, although he was obviously more involved with Sochi. Russia

will try to play its part in Ukraine's peaceful efforts, although

I have a hunch that they also would like to have maybe some kind of back

step and see how the situation will be developing with the EU efforts.

We have diplomacy going on in the last 24 hours, obviously. Russia's

position on Ukraine, and we can discuss it further, but the most

important thing for Russia is that the Ukraine as a country keeps in

one part or keeps as a single country and the important thing is

that Kiev stops. Putin is scared of chaos so close to home.

Putin owes his political career to the saving Russia from chaos, as he

would see it from the Yeltsin era. He looks around and sees the chaos

in Yugoslavia and Syria, it's hardly surprising that he feels, or from

his position, he feels sensitive to what is happening? And this is

exactly what the Russian audience has been hearing from the state

channels and other mass media outlets. Russia has always main

teenaged that when west tries to meddle into the sobering countries,

the outcome is no, there is no proof that the outcome is likely to be

positive for that particular country and they always cite Iraq, Syria,

lots of Middle Eastern countries for that matter actually, and it also

started obviously even earlier. In Russia's eyes, it started with

Serbia and Kosovo, the Balkans. You were a foreign correspondent for a

while, so you know this area, particularly the west of Ukraine

very well. How do you see things right now? I have to agree that

Putin will not lose his grip on the Ukraine at all. I'm very, very,

unoptimistic about a positive outcome. On the other hand I would

contradict you a bit. Chaos is something that Putin's also used for

hirms always. He has -- for himself always. He has escalated this

conflict to declare, like in Syria, a situation, a Civil War to then

have it to secure its own influence in the area. That's something he'll

very much use as well. He's used that cleverly in the past. You can

see that tactically. The reports that Russia's pulled out its add

viewer from Ukraine before the agreement was signed yesterday and

so that gives them a way to detach themselves from the process, not be

investing in it and perhaps use fit it goes wrong. Also the level of

representation, what was interesting, whereas EU countries

were sending Foreign Ministers and the like, Russia sends human rights

ombudsman, so it's in Russian hierarchy, the human rights

ombudsman is somewhere there. It had looked until the

extraordinary scenes this morning in Kiev, ooze though Putin had

outplayed the EU. It looked as though the European Union had been

outgained, it looks timid, difficult to organise a response. In how it's

produced a situation in which Putin's Al lie, we know he doesn't

particularly like the Ukraine, but we know that he is now on the border

-- Al lie. The capital is empty, the presidential palace has given over

to the protesters. That was unimaginable just 24 hours ago.

Rather than being able to hang on until December, of course. The

opposition are saying elections by May? Which is a big change from what

they seem to have said yesterday? Yes. The whole dynamics are

interesting. It's amazing what is happening as we speak. I wouldn't

agree that Putin outplayed the EU yesterday. The agreement was a big

success in the European Union and it's the move of the Ukraine towards

the European Union again. The next few days will now be crucial. We'll

see whether Putin will exert his influence. When I say in the

previous few months, in the period when the European Union was slow to

respond, that's what I meant. Yes. America has been relatively on

the sidelines of this. Partly, many of us will criticise Putin for

looking at the word in a certain way, that it's the West v Russia,

NATO and US versus Russia. Of course, on the American side, you

don't want to fall into that trip equally just to present this as

purely a Cold War conflict and we had Obama saying it's no longer a

chess board where you move pieces according to the two actors, as it

once was. There was some wanting to tone that down and to be behind

these things. You have Biden calling Yanukovych even on Thursday so I

don't want to pretend that the administration's absent.

There is a danger there for America and the West in that the Obama

approach, which is very academic, very careful, careful not to be

drawn into making a bindery choice, as you said, in terms of freedom and

morality. The danger is that when you are playing with someone like

Putin who does see the world in those terms, it's very easy to be

outplayed -- binary. If America had taken a stronger position a few

months ago, the deaths might not have happened. I want to pursue a

point that was raised to me by a businesswoman with business

interests in Russia and Ukraine who said, talking about binary

divisions, it's not east v west in Ukraine, it's young v old and there

are many young Russians in Russia as well who don't like the system and

are looking forward to some new relationship at that part of Europe?

From social Points of View, Ukraine is probably one of the most

countries like that. It used to be seen as a country that has the most

potential. 23 years after its independence, we can see the

continuation of this internal struggle. It's, as you say, could be

east against west, young against old or potentially Crimea voicing

concerns about whether it wants to stay in Ukraine, not maybe joining

Russia or going on its own. I would argue that even, some people have

the situation black-and-white, so you have got west speaking or

Ukrainians speaking west, Russias speaking east. It's more complicated

obviously. Russia speaks part of Ukraine who might not necessarily

want to associate themselves with Russia given the criticism they

might have on the Russian Government and the way the Russian society is

being governed by Putin. I would say that the important thing is to

appreciate this complexity and understand that the current thing is

the continuation 2004. All this ten years since the Orange Revolution

has passed, we have seen that the country, even if the country's going

back to its pro-Parliament constitution of 2004 with limited

powers of president and the rest of it, not all of the people are

confident that the opposition A is united, B is capable to tackle

things because a lot of people seem to forget that the economy is this

huge looming thing which nobody currently rightfully so thinking

about because of all of the tragic deaths. Sadly, someone will have to

think about that and deal with that. If Tymoshenko comes out, some

people, experts think the opposition will again be embroiled in this

internal strife. To go back to the question I started

with, do you think it can come to a peaceful conclusion and be, I don't

know, like the Czechs and Slovaks going their separate ways or a

unified country which somehow can cohere? I think it will be very

difficult. I'm not optimistic. Without oversimplifying it, tough

divide between the west and east. When I was a Parliament

correspondent, I was surprised when I came back to the west. Nobody

would want to speak Russian with me, everybody would rather speak Polish

and German and this whole area has been part of the Austria, Hungarian

empire for centuries. Stalin came in and shepherded the borders towards

the west so there is a big divide teen west and east. It goes from

generations, young to old. It's such a divided country and then you have

the fringe behind, you have the European Union versus its own

interests. I don't think that is a happy outcome. There's not one

politician there who's not been compromised. I suppose as far as

Russia is concerned, yesterday when they signed all the agreements, it

seemed as if Yanukovych has the power at least until the December

transition. Who knows what will happen until December. What is

happening now, it appears that Kiev has left, the authorities have left.

As far as Russia is concerned and I'm not advocating their position

here, what is happening here is that a legitimate president of a

sovereign country for some reason that is left the country having

signed the compromised agreement with the opposition without

explaining himself. For Putin, it's looming.

There is suggestions that an independent Scotland will have to

think about its currency and EU membership. David Bowie mentioned it

at the Brits. He's a great musician. I'm a fan. He's a master of

reinvention and he's done it again and most unlikely for him to come

back reincarnated as a defender of the union. It will make a difference

in that British culture, which has great he was, nationalist, he said

it would be very pro-independence and actually what Bowie has done has

reminded a portion of the Scottish electorate that, he lives in New

York, he's a creature of British culture, he reminded us of what

London is like, a cultural melting pot. Many Scots don't want London

after this to become a foreign city. They want opportunities that the

nationalists didn't see coming. The intervention illustrates that. Where

I think the nationalists have had an incredibly difficult couple of weeks

is that you have to remember that Alex Salmond's entire strategy, and

he's been working on this for 25 years, was all about establishing an

idea of reassurance so that you could vote in Scotland but you still

keep the Queen as Head of State and use the pound and have a guarantee

that it would still be in the European Union in. The last few

weeks, there's been this extraordinary assault by the UK

political establishment saying you can't keep the pound, there won't be

a currency union, the British won't underwrite and subsidise Scottish

registered banks. And the EU? I think where Alex Salmond may have

overplayed his hand is where, he's right that it's almost impossible

longer term to imagine Scotland being entirely excluded from the EU.

But Salmond's position's been Scotland is a member of the EU which

it isn't, the UK is. His position has been that the morning after the

referendum, it's still in the EU. Now, rather than having that

reassurance, the voters are told that there are going to be two,

three, four, five very difficult years involving complicated

negotiations with the EU and potentially with London. Also, the

former editor of the Scotsman, so you are very much in tune with how

public opinion's changed on this, the way that the euro is seen in

Scotland is not the way it was seen a few years ago. To put it mildly.

If Scotland has to apply to get at the EU, it will have to take the

euro, that's it? Salmond is saying he simply won't do that so there's

an impasse there. Salmond, until very recently, until Greece and

until the eurozone imploetion, Salmond's view was that Scotland

needed to get away from the shackle of the sterling zone and join the

euro as quickly as possible. That became electorally impossible. Very,

very difficult for him. So he rapidly on the hoof reinvented his

entire approach and said, we will keep the pound. He didn't gain it

properly and didn't calculate that the English particularly, the

English political establishment wouldn't take this lying down. May

have a review of it? Yes. How do you see it? You have reported on it, how

do you think it's seen across the EU? Most people don't really

understand it first of all and I think it's irrational and

sentimental like the Tories wanting to leave the European Union, yet

they sort of urge the Scottish people to stay within the UK. I

don't think anybody really understands that in Europe and

Brussels certainly and Barroso made that very clear. They have no

interest in a further splitting up of this entity.

Such an interesting paradox for me and far be it for me as an American

to say you should break away from Britain... I think what's

interesting to me in some ways is that actually the EU is paying the

price of its own success. When you hear about places like Scotland,

Caledonia and maybe even parts of the Netherlands, they want to break

away from the nations to which they belong now. All of this under the

umbrella of the EI because it has to them provided this safe place they

can link themselves to, they can imagine their independent leaders

rubbing shoulders with Angela Merkel. This idea that they could

split off and be viable nations has been encourage and Barroso is

saying, you can't break up because the architecture of the EU never

thought about what would happen. But that was a deliberate move made

by the Brussels establishment. And that has been apparent for 20 years,

the idea that if you encouraged a loosening of national bonds and you

encouraged to devolution, potentially independence, you then

we can do nation state. And if you are then dealing with a nation state

like the UK, properly sceptical outside the EU, it looked quite

tempting ten or 15 years ago to try and give money to Scotland in terms

of the regional growth funds and encourage the idea that Scotland

should stand on its own. And you are right, now it comes back to bite the

EU and it is very threatening. For an outsider, it seems naive as far

as Alex Salmond's politics are concerned. The fact that he did not

appreciate that the British stubble shouldn't, the Bank of England, the

EU, the governing parties, all parties in Britain will unleash all

of this political power on him, to ask how he's gone to deal with

things, it seems naive for him as a politician not to have found the

answer to foresee that. But he, as you well know, is a brilliant

political tactician. He is an excellent player of political

jujitsu. He has said that this is bullying from the establishment and

David Cameron coming to Aberdeen with the Cabinet, will that help? In

other words, it is a difficult thing for Cameron to do and perhaps the

best he can hope for is a revival of Labour in Scotland, paradoxically,

the one group who can argue effectively for the union. The

difficulty is that this vote comes down to West Central Scotland and

left of centre voters who, 20 or 30 years ago, it was Labour and

Unionist. That vote is now potentially up for grabs. In those

circumstances, Tories going to Scotland, particularly public-school

educated Tories like George Osborne and David Cameron, is a high-risk

strategy because the party has very few votes in Scotland and they have

very little blood leveraged. What Alex Salmond is now banking on is

that the British establishment intervention will produce Braveheart

style a howl of rage and anger that people who might not be entirely

convinced by the idea of independence just think, well, I'm

not sure about it but I'd don't like being lectured by George Osborne and

David Cameron. This is only the start, the first indication of how

difficult it will continue to be until the referendum vote in

September. So I'm thinking, if seven months before the vote, the British

are already using Jose Manuel Barroso, and maybe he was right

about Scotland, but irrespective of that, this will continue to be, and

this is from outsiders perspective, the closest link I have with

Scotland is a Russian poet. I thought the Russians liked Robert

Burns? True. Like Burns night. It is true. It would be really interesting

to see what people in Catalonia think about it and people in

Corsica. And that is a threat as well. Ozzie Barroso -- Jose Manuel

Barroso has said nothing to that. But let's take a very black and

White example. Not Catalonia because of the separatist movement, what

about when the country once do is integrate? Would they really go

against the Belgian government, for example, and say, negotiate with us

again for the next ten years? But who would remember, if you were just

flounders? It is hard to explain how Scotland, as part of the EU, could

not be independent. -- Flanders. But to touch on this difficult road,

David Cameron is the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, possibly the

last. But he is also the deputy first Minister of Scotland -- as the

Deputy first Minister of Scotland said, the living embodiment of why

you should vote yes. Whatever the rest of the country thinks, that

plays to the kind of voters that he is talking about. You're right, they

are going to have to rely on non-Tory, nonpublic school educated

all additions to make the case. I think we have ready scene what they

feel they need to do in terms of good cop, bad cop. You had David

Cameron love bombing Scotland one week before and then George Osborne

took the gloves off and played hardball. I think they are probably

not off the mark in that there needs to be a hard sell. For those who

might be wavering, soft cell might appeal. -- the soft cell. You might

have a point about cultural leaders. To go back to David Bowie, just to

say, it is not irrational, stay with us, has a degree of power. You might

think, forget what they say, but there is a sense of affection. I

think, as someone who does not want the United Kingdom to break up, I

think it was worth 1000 interventions by a politician. It

was an interesting and important moment. Alex Salmond, in comparison,

risks looking mean minded and ridiculous. His response the other

morning when he gave a speech was to say, you say we can choose the

pound, yes, we can, trying to invoke Barack Obama. Unfortunately he was

doing this in a Hotel function suite in Aberdeen in front of 200 people

rather than 250,000 in a stadium. The effect was slightly ruined. And

there are those who would say that yes, we can write great slogan that

it has not worked out so well for Barack Obama. Also, what the

political stubble shouldn't sing politely on the half of English,

Welsh and Northern Ireland falters, they are saying that yes, you can,

but you should be aware that there are serious consequences. You make

an interesting point about non-political figures, and how they

have been absent from this campaign. I would of thought that the yes side

would have said, let's get Andy Murray talking about the importance

of Scottish independence and JK Rowling might have written Harry

Potter and the importance of the United Kingdom, to get these figures

to exert influence. And yet that has not happened. Not because these

figures are not interested or do not care but because many of them do not

want to step into its just yet. We will have to leave it there. That is

it for Dateline London. You can comment on the programme on Twitter

using the hashtag, BBCdateline. We are back at the same time next

week will stop -- next week. Today will be the better of the two

days of the weekend with dry and bright weather to be found.