29/03/2014 Dateline London

Dateline London with Gavin is love. `` Gavin Esler.

Hello and welcome to Dateline London. Today's programme is a tale

of three leaders. Is Turkey's Prime Minister Erdogan turning into a new

Sultan? Does Labour leader Ed Miliband have the right stuff to

lead written? And how much is President Obama leading America's

view in the 21st century. With my my guests John Fisher Burns from the

New York Times, Nabila Ramdani a French writer, Emre Caliskan from

the Turkish BBC service and Owen Jones from the Independent.

So far Prime Minister Erdogan has succeeded in reforming the economy

but his attempts to ban Twitter and the allegations of corruption mean

his critics claim he is a new Sultan. Is Prime Minister Erdogan

now a liability to the big wrist Turkish democracy he has helped to

build? How is he seen in Turkey is that he obviously has strong support

in some areas. It is very divided and polarised in Turkey right now.

The local elections are turning out to be a confidence vote for

Erdogan. According to the polls he will get between 40 and 45% of the

votes but at the same time, this means 60% or 55% of society are

against him. So it is a dilemma. Given that he has turned these

elections into a bit of a mandate for the fairly fractious nature of

the other parties, it could mean that he will retain control even in

Istanbul where there are a few protests. He is an example of the

Turkish majority in politics. Most of the people, according to the last

survey, 50% of the people consider him authoritarian and he interferes

in people's lifestyle. Even though he is gaining in Ankara, the concern

about his role will last. I want to widen it out to talk about how

important Turkey is. In terms of something like Twitter, why is he

trying to do that? In the modern world and modern Turkey, it is

pretty nigh on impossible to ban social media. I think he is

confident about his role and his support. But at the same time, he is

trying to unite the votes. Even if he is doing something wrong, he is

trying to unite the votes in favour of him. He is trying to show a

strong image to the voters. If you banned Twitter and said we do not

care about other countries, he will show how the Turkish public are

strong. It is a strange rhetoric from a politician's point of view.

How important do you think Turkey being? They have tried to say we

have a position of leadership in the Islamic world. It is only episodic

li in headlines here and in the rest of Europe but I think it matters a

great deal for one reason above all others, which is Turkey has been

seen as a model on its way for the future development across the Muslim

world. What we are seeing now ominously is the potential failure

of an experiment to marry Islamist and democracy. Goodness knows,

democracy is having a bad time in much of the rest of the Middle East,

at least, and if this Twitter ban, the attempt to close down access to

YouTube and some of the other authoritarian measures taken by

Prime Minister Erdogan are any indication, I think that is deeply

worrying. It was seen as potentially one model for how countries like

Egypt might make a transition between a democracy and it is not

working in Egypt or many other countries. Absolutely and Turkey's

policies are important to the Arab world. You were speaking about

headlines. Erdogan can cut himself lucky that Putin has been hogging

the headlines because he has been getting away with outrageous

anti`democratic policies, banning Facebook and Twitter, it is like

banning the whether these days. You cannot switch off Twitter or

Facebook. It does not prevent information to circulate. But is he

a new Sultan? Yes. He has been rattled crucially by domestic

policies and very serious allegations of corruption on a vast

scale and indeed, he has also been invoking national security threats.

But to dismiss judges and prosecutors and police officers who

are investigating corruption, is not the way you expect a 21st century

country which wants to be a democracy to act. Absolutely. His

attitude has been similar to the attitude of Arab despots during the

Arab spring. It's interesting you bring up Putin because they have

both marketed themselves a strong leaders who contrast themselves with

the economic chaos of the 1990s which affected in different ways

Turkey and Russia. I think the point you make about the strategic

importance of Turkey is key when you are talking about this whole issue.

Turkey's human rights has long lacked scrutiny. Because it is a

NATO country, Western ally and strategic importance. In the 1990s

you had this brutal conflict in Kurdish areas, 3000 villages wiped

off the face of the Earth, bombed, shelled and with thousands of deaths

the Western world Bailey covered it. It is the biggest jailer of

journalists. It beats China and Iran. This attempt to ban Twitter

and YouTube is striking because it goes against defying laws of gravity

almost, but it should bring into context these wider human rights

violations which do not just Mark Erdogan's rule but his predecessors.

The big success he is supposed to have had is to keep the military out

of politics. They called it a post modern included Tabak our back in

1997 when the military got rid of the government. In the 80s there was

a brutal coups d'etat will stop. When he came to power he promised to

support the US accession process. That was a huge process to do with

human rights, freedom of speech and individualism. But since he came to

power, the problems started to be visible. The main problem in Turkey

is because the Turkish legislation process is so central. It allows

them to be authoritarian or autocratic to outlaw the election

process. That is the parallel with Putin. Putin likes the elections to

get what he sees as a mandate. He's on record as saying adopting

democracy is like a train... It is a more wealthy country than it was ten

years ago. To see the aspiration to join the EU? He banned Facebook and

Twitter and YouTube so Turkey faced the biggest civil disobedience in

Turkish politics. Even though he will put his own views on society, I

think in new young emerging middle class and generation would go for

the EU processing later. Often conspiracy theorists talk about

false flag operations, manufactured things to provide a pretext for

attack. They were discussing using a terraced attack manufactured on

Turkish soil as a pretext to attack Syria. I do not think this has been

scrutinised enough. Do you not think, why has there not been more

media coverage's that was what was used to shut down YouTube. That is a

scandal. The funny thing is about the ban of

YouTube and Twitter, it is not legal. It has been initiated by a

Turkish regulator without any co`decision. That kind of posturing,

adopting autocratic measures, is a problem for Turkey. It has to be

consistent. It is a country that is deemed to be supportive of democracy

in the Arab world and they looked to be castigating Syria and yet, at

home, it carries on with human rights abuses. It raises questions

about Turkey's return to the European Union. With this play out

in a different way of those negotiations have advanced and there

was a different date for Turkey's accession to the EU. Would that have

constrained Urdu gun? And did the rejection of his bid add to his turn

towards the Sultanate? If it remains an aspiration it is a potential

checkout. Being leader of the opposition in Britain is never

easy. The government holds all the levers of power. Ed Miliband has

been helped by his party's consistent lead in the opinion

polls, but that has slipped. How far does he look like a credible Prime

Minister in waiting? He has been taking a lot of flak in the last

week, since the Budget. How do you see how things will develop? Labour

got a shot in the arm. Ed Miliband announced a price freeze on energy

bills, bills are soaring whilst the companies are making money, and the

Conservatives on the defensive. What has happened in the last weeks into

the budget, which the Chancellor announced, is Labour's lead has

dropped. It is not because Labour's poll has slipped but because the

Conservatives have won back some support from the populist right`wing

party, UKIP. The problem that Labour has is that they suffered the second

worst defeat in post`war history in 22010. To recover from that is

almost without President. `` precedent. They have won over are

not of Lib Dem voters, who are horrified that they join the

Conservative Party. UKIP has been gnawing away at Conservative

support. That is why they have got this consistent lead. The problem is

if you look at the personal ratings, Ed Miliband's personal rating is

worse than David Cameron's, and they do not have a lead on the economy.

That is accurate. Although leaders have won elections when they have

not been rated as highly as the Prime Minister. You can see David

Cameron as Prime Minister because he is. By the currency Ed Miliband as

Prime Minister is another question. When I hear Ed Miliband, he sounds

like a rather decent and well`intentioned left`wing academic

who is waking up to a growing rejection of the global economy

amongst the British people, or somebody who has got a spectacularly

wrong. I have to say, he uses language like unacceptable

treatment. He speaks about small businesses needing to be protected

from big energy firms and crippling bills. He is concerned about the

pressure people are under. This is decent language. But I do worry

about him not being an obvious choice to lead a thrusting

capitalist country, trying to compete in a ferocious global

economy. Dare I say, he might be the type of politician that Michael foot

was ` honest, intellectual, attractive propositions, but an

electoral disaster. You talked about how personal ratings isn't

everything. Margaret Thatcher massively trailed Jim Callaghan as

the third Prime Minister but the Tories won the election but these

are unprecedented times. We are going through the longest fall in

living standards since the 1870s. You have got half a million people

dependent on food banks and the majority of people in poverty are

people in work. To say what Reagan said in the United States, do you

feel better off than when this government came to power, and the

answer is no. The policies on energy are risky tactic. It will set us up

for blackouts that Wix periods and Jim Callaghan's government. I have

spent most of my professional life abroad and coming home to this

country on a New York Times posting, it struck me with Mr

Miliband that it is back to the future. He reminds me of the Labour

Party leaders who I grew up with in a way. He is trying to turn the

clock back and he just does not like `` looked like a modern man to me.

He's very proud. Who can argue with filial pride, of a Marxist and an

intellectual. He frequently invokes this as being a principal influence

on his upbringing. For example, a state imposed energy price freeze,

it just harks back to a Labour government of the 1970s. The second

thing I would say is, the Labour Party looks under his leadership

like an opposition party, it does not look like a government in

waiting. We have seen a resurgence of Conservative... Do you accept in

terms of big ideas, you do not get a lot of big ideas from the Labour

Party? There is not a coherent alternative being offered, I agree.

In the run`up to the election may have to come up with coherent ideas

which with people. In terms of the policies, I have to take your word

on that. When he called for a temporary energy prices at a time

when people have to choose between heating their home and feeding their

kids, Fleet Street called him a froth that commonest revolutionary.

If you look at the polls, not only did that have huge support, but many

people would go further. Not just Labour voters but Tory voters and

UKIP voters want renationalisation of energy. And rail. So he is more

moderate. He and the Labour Party have staked their chances on the

failure of the Conservative Lib Dem coalition energy policies. As we

hear from Mr Cameron almost every time he stands up at the dispatch

box, there has been no real attainment for the Labour

government's role in the economic crisis. Can I take you quickly up on

that. The whole idea of overspending, Tories backed

Labour's plans pound for pound. What Labour did failed to regulate the

banks but the Tories are calling for less regulation of the banks so the

whole argument is completely without foundation. Our elections are over a

year away, you can tell that people are gearing up for them! It is the

same thing, Miliband should be a concrete alternative. His economic

conditions, most supporters are not commonest. `` communist. Barack

Obama's foreign policy has suffered difficulties in the Middle East. How

credible is the Obama engagement with the rest of the world? Do you

think he has a career in foreign policy? We would all agree that

President Obama is such an overwhelmingly appealing character.

It seems to me that when confronted with the hard realities of the

world, he has seemed more often than not to be the Harvard graduate

student that he once was and that he has had some trouble grasping the

hard realities of the world and the slowness with which he and his

administration responded to the Russian seizure of the Crimea was

read on and have that. It seems to me that Mr Putin read Mr Obama early

on and calculated how far he could go. He seems now to have understood

he has gone as far as he can for some time. And backtracking,

perhaps? My mind goes back to Ronald Reagan, represented as the cowboy,

with not any sophistication such as we see from President Obama. Yet

President Reagan, by instinct, understood what turned out to be the

most effective way to deal with the soviet union. I am not sure

President Obama has grasped it. He has been having frank discussions

with the Saudis. It points up the difficulties in the Middle East, the

hand of friendship and so on. It has not delivered anything for the US,

has it? Perhaps in Iran there is the possibility of an opening, but not

eat it `` Egypt and Syria is a mess. If you are happy with the idea that

he aimed at giving arrest to countries `` giving a rest too

interventionist policy, yes. But he has been adopting a minimus foreign

policy. It is nothing to do with isolationism but everything to do

with pragmatic policy protecting American interests and lives. That

is why he came up with this wishy`washy foreign policy trying to

maintain America's status as a world superpower while he was actually

retreating as much as possible. This has led to some pretty

unsatisfactory and disastrous policies, not least in the Arab

world. Look at the way he was completely outmanoeuvred by

President Assad as regards chemical weapons in Syria. At one stage it

looked like we would see American strikes on Assad and the next

moment, Assad was able to carry on with his killing. The nearest

America got to intervention was in the now very controversial

intervention in Libya, when the French and British did most of the

bombing. As far as the rest of the Arab world was concerned it is the

status quo. In Egypt, there was no firm confirmation. Let us not forget

Palestine. The peace process is nowhere near resolution. Have seen a

lot of John Kerry in the region but Palestinian territories are still

under Israeli occupation and the Gaza Strip is still an open`air

prison. More crucially, the unbridled expansionist policies of

Israel as regards illegal settlements, that is the major

stumbling block as in the peace process. You have said that Libya

was not a success? It was an example of intervention collapsing into

anarchy. But it is also the decline of US power. If we go back to the

end of the Cold War, the US's global output has gone down a fifth from

that. It has lost its backyard in Latin America with assertive

governments demanding independence. The Iraq war helped shift the

balance of power in the Middle East towards Iran. One thing could change

this. If fracking works in the way that its advocates say it will do

and provides America with the energy security it has not had for years

and it becomes an energy exporter, it could be much more isolationist.

Why would it need interest in the Middle East? There are questions

over fracking. It certainly is the case, and people in the Middle East

would like this, where instead you have US backed dictatorships like in

Saudi Arabia and Yemen, you have drawn attacks in the Middle East, a

lot of those people would quite like the US to disengage. A lot of this

is about foreign policy. On the other hand, Americans want a strong

president. If you consider Syria, his minimal foreign policy took a

blow because of Al`Qaeda in Syria. XXX you made an important point ``

you made an important point about the Bush era. President Obama

deserves credit for extracting America from those wars. The world

should be careful what you wish were. `` we have lived under a pax

Americana since the Second World War and it is still the most powerful

nation on earth. I think it will be a much more unruly world if they

will retreat. That is it for this week. You can comment on the

programme on Twitter. We are back next week at the same time. Goodbye.

For most parts of the country it is set to be a lovely weekend with

increasingly warm sunshine. It will be dry nearly everywhere as well and

there will be a refreshing breeze. Not so rosy for all of us. There is

always an exception. Although warm air is wafting up from the