28/06/2014 Dateline London

Hello and welcome to Dateline London.

The row over the presidency of the European Commission.

And the phone hacking trial leads to the conviction of David Cameron's

Barri Atwan who is an Arab writer and journalist

Agnes Poirier of Marianne, Polly Toynbee of the Guardian

Jean Claude Juncker once famously said of the EU during the financial

crisis that we, the political leaders , know what to do, it's just

that we don't know how to get re`elected once we have done it.

The British prime minister David Cameron opposed Mr Juncker's

appointment as President of The European Commission right to

Where does all this leave Mr Cameron and the possibility

What you think of Juncker? Juncker, funny how David Cameron personalised

the issue to the point when the sun newspaper wrote he was Europe was no

cry most dangerous man. He is an dangerous at all and is past his

prime. He is no danger whatsoever. He has a sharp mind so he should not

be dismissed but the thing that is extraordinary is nobody really

wanted Juncker. Nobody, not that he isn't competent, he has been a

European insider which isn't a bad thing. It means he's experienced. He

knows how things are done. It isn't by bullying or given ultimatum is

the way David Cameron has done this week. But he had a cause, David

Cameron, which he could have won. How could he have played it

differently? It was the charge of the light Brigade! Bullying is what

you learn at Eton or Oxford but it isn't something that goes down well

in Europe. You have to play by the rules, not to say in front of German

TV cameras that Europe is the problem. It didn't go down well in

Berlin. Stop antagonising everyone and he would have got his way.

Honestly, it is strange why he is launching a war against the European

Union and Brussels. What he is gaining, he has miscalculated,

definitely. You can't impose your will on 26 countries. You can't say

either we introduce reforms, except our reforms and ideas or we are not

going to stay in the EU. From Mr Cameron?s perspective he is batting

for Britain, he is a federalist so laying aside the personal thing, it

is what Juncker believes and what he wants, a train towards a more

perfect union and Britain doesn't want that. Cameron is hoping this is

giving him a boost which it seems to be in the polls, people think he is

taking a strong stand and the other parties are backing him in Britain.

What he missed read was the fact this stuff about Juncker is a

sideshow. He was going to lose the vote, that was clear weeks ago.

People in Britain if they're going to vote against the Tory party it

will not be because of strong Claude Juncker. It will be because they

feel membership in the European Union hurts an economic league, that

it isn't bring the benefits it should. If Cameron had been smart,

he would have said I understand it's a lost cause but I will get

something out of it, a strong economic portfolio for Britain in

the EU that would liberalise services and bring greater benefits

to the British people. That is a long game he would have been smarter

playing. If he played the long game, the Conservatives would be within

the European People's the Conservatives would be within

the party the centre`right grouping. He has always played a quick

advantage. Helping himself get elected, rallying his own party, he

said we will pull out of the European People's party. He lost his

influence with Angela Merkel, a majority in Europe of a party quite

like the Conservatives, Christian Democrats, he would have been in

there with the majority negotiating from the beginning. It is quite

extraordinary people do mount. He seemed ignorant of the process and

didn't understand that during the European elections someone was

chosen as a candidate, this was not part of the British electoral

campaign. There were public debates about it in English on TV. Cameron

seemed to be asleep on the job. The Financial Times talks about his

incompetence. He is an incompetent person because he's always after the

short`term headlines and always late at the table and late at the game.

This time, it has been a disaster. It looks as if we are getting nearer

to the exit. The newspapers say we are getting nearer to the exit which

isn't what he wants but maybe he is changing his mind. Maybe he is

becoming a genuine Eurosceptic. Maybe that will help him win the

election but it is short termism. He is damaging the interests of his

country. Britain is hated in the European Union because to please

some Eurosceptics? It does go down rather well with the voters in the

short`term. Europe is in the major concern of the British. Few turned

out in the European elections. British people will say this is

typical of the European Union, a backstairs deal, somebody nobody

beautifully once and he gets the job. It is good material propaganda

for the tabloids. Yes, let's use Europe as a scapegoat. In the end,

let's have the long view. He might be the British Prime Minister to

take Britain out of Europe. He will have to face and to look at history

in the eyes. Every time he has been willing to take the risk, he knows

it is the wrong thing to do and would be a catastrophe for industry,

the investors in Britain have said we would probably move if you pull

out of Europe. So, he knows it is a real risk to the state of the

economy so he's playing a short`term gain that is lethal. It could lead

us to sleepwalk out of Europe. And everybody will lose because Europe

will be damaged if Britain leaves. It is absurd that Juncker should be

a charismatic leader, everyone be more horrified if he was. The fact

he is a routine Eurocrat is about what people want because 27

countries don't want to be led by some amazing governor like Tony

Blair. It is not back kind of job. It is hard to get 27 people to agree

to everything. Please take Tony Blair, in the Middle East, we have

had enough of him! You would be doing us a favour.

Journalists from Al Jazeera are in jail in Egypt provoking worldwide

outrage at the increasingly dictatorial military regime there.

Are we back to the bad old days of military dictatorship?

And how far are these journalists pawns in the big Middle East game

between Arab governments about their relationship with

Diesel trumped up charges. Definitely, a kangaroo court.

Military rule is coming back to Egypt and the Middle East. Those

journalists are scapegoats, they are victims of the war between Kacar and

Egypt. There is a huge problem between the two countries. Al

Jazeera took a side supporting the Muslim Brotherhood which is owned by

Kacar. That was the Arabic channel. Peter Greste it who I know doesn't

even speak Arabic. They are professional, they were doing their

job, they work for al Jazeera English and nothing to do with the

problems between the countries. How can you convince a military dictator

that those people are innocent and should not be sentenced to ten years

in prison and simply because he hates cats are? A week ago they

sentenced 183 people to death and before that more than a thousand.

Egypt is going through a dictatorship phase. The military

coup is now using the iron fist but those people are innocent and they

should not be charged or tried. They can send them home, but to send them

to imprisonment for ten years I think this is unfair and

unjustified. And al Jazeera journalists have become a cause

c?l?bre because they foreign and because of the wider she political

situation but let's not forget Egypt has now over a dozen Egyptian

journalists who are in prison, not just foreigners. This is a regime

that is cracking down on free expression and dissent and we need

to be clear about what is happening and the US, which you would have

thought could exercise some influence over the government in

Cairo, is not having any effect whatsoever. It was extraordinary

that they did that as John Kerry was there. He renewed age, renewed

links, terrible mistake and you would expect given these courts are

so political that they would acknowledge that `` age. Is there

anyway now that they could be got at, anyway anybody can influence

them? General Al`Sisi needs to issue a pardon. He could release them and

try to rectify his damaged image on the West. In any case, they should

come to a resolution before the end of the year. I don't see the US

resuming its economic aid, those journalists still in by Christmas.

They have been imprisoned for nearly a year without any justification. Do

you think in the bigger picture this points up that old bike occasion in

the Arab world you have a strong dictator or you have Islamists,

there is nothing in between, that is what we thought the Arab Springwood

change. It hasn't. There is change but for the worse. If you see the

outcome of the Arab Spring, Libya is a failed state and a lot of deaths

and problems. In Syria, there is a civil war, the same in Iraqi.

Actually, it was completely counter`productive, because people

are not experienced and coexistence between those people and tribes,

they don't understand the Middle East. You have tribal divisions,

sectarian divisions and cultural divisions. You have ethnic

divisions. It is like a Pandora?s box. When you open it, it is

difficult to control. We can understand that in Europe with

Yugoslavia, it was held down by dictatorship and everybody said

wasn't it a great success but the moment the dictatorship was removed,

all of the old ethnic rivalries led to a bloody civil war. It isn't just

an Arab problem. It is a bloody civil war. It isn't just an Arab

problem. It is opposed dictatorship problem. We hope to democracy would

prevail and we hope there will be anti`corruption Moves, a proper

governance in our part of the world but it didn't work. Many people are

changing their position, they say we should reform these dictatorships

because most of them were ageing dictatorships, step`by`step and

after that maybe we will have two keep the countries in tact and keep

people coexisting with each other. 200,000 people killed in Syria... Is

there a problem with the Borders, these countries were never drawn in

a way that was coherent? Yes, this is the problem. By the British and

French. Artificial borders, no question about it because it was

mandated and the Ottoman Empire and the border was drawn after World War

I. The whole thing has changed but even this nation state, it survived

for 100 years. Now, the problem is we have tribal states, sectarian

states which is worse than the agreements. You are writing a book

on ISIS, do you think the threat of ISIS is so severe, it has created

unlikely allies, Iran, Saudi Arabia, the USA, will it change

things and result in more dictatorships? It could be, it could

be more brutal. This is the problem. ISIS managed to change the whole

scene in the Middle East in a few days. They controlled a huge area. A

chunk of Barack and Syria, it never happened before. So, the side that

it was unbelievable `` Iraq's. They left their weapons and headquarters

and they ran away. They are using the same style of President George

Bush junior and senior. It is becoming bloody, executing and

shooting people to frighten everybody. But then they move on, so

are they a durable force? Once they move on, especially if the

government were to collapse, how much support would be up so would be

be able to maintain or administer? People in the Middle East want

stability first, but after that, what can they do? What can civilians

do in front of those people? If you make any mistakes, if you still

money, they flock people simply because they were listening to

music? How powerful IG predicting a new book that Isis are going to

become? They are taking over from Al`Qaeda. They have a huge support

in certain Arab countries. This is the problem, those young, hot`headed

chaps from Britain, from brands, from everywhere. This is the

danger. They have money. They have $2 billion. They put their hands on

$500 million. Once you have money, you can recruit people. Once you

have weapons, they are self`sufficient. They have money and

weapons and a lot of recruits. Many people are joining them now. So this

is the danger. They are in the Middle East, there are not in

Afghanistan. They control the border crossing between Iraq and Syria,

between Jordan and Iraq and now they're very close to the Saudi

border with Jordan. They are ruthless, brittle organisations.

The former editor of the News of the World newspaper Andy Coulson was

famously given a second chance by Prime Minister David Cameron when Mr

Cameron appointed Coulson to run his communications operation in Downing

Street. Now Mr Coulson faces possibly years in jail after being

found guilty of phone hacking and other charges to produce stories for

his newspaper. What is the lasting damage ` if any ` for the British

People buy the press, but in decreasing numbers. It is not

entirely loved. The British press, right click, has an appalling

reputation. Our tabloid press is notorious around the world, mostly

because of the arrival of Rupert Murdoch, who arrived in Britain and

made our press considerably worse and more vicious. He then drag the

others in his tail. People's expectations of the press were

already very low. Even so, this trial should they manage to get even

further below that expectation. The real story is Cameron taking one of

these editors from the very worst newspaper and putting Rupert

Murdoch's man right in the very heart of his own operation in

Downing Street. All political parties suck up to Rupert Murdoch in

a disgusting way, but this was quite unique, to make this man head of

operations, put mad at right there. That is the only reason he chose

Coulson. It was about murder, not the wording class. `` working

class. It was to make sure that Rupert Murdoch and Rebecca looks

were all tied into his operation. Every Prime Minister in Britain

think they can't win without them. John Major says he knew he had had

at the moment Rupert Murdoch turned against him. Pauly said what some

people think about the British press. On the other hand, British

press has exposed a fee for corruption, all kinds of stories. As

you know, some of these stories in France get buried for years. Of

course the balance of power between the press and the government. In a

democracy, where do you strike the balance? In Britain, it has gone to

an extreme situation where the whole political class fears the press. So

in France you could argue that it is the opposite, that journalists are

not as publishers as they should be against their political class, but

what do you want? Actually, it is nice to see this case in particular

reformatting the press. It is true that the British press managed to

expose corruption and other things, but the Hack 700 forums invade the

privacy of people and do what they have done, it is very scandalous.

But the story is produced as a result of that were mostly rubbish.

I may be wrong. Celebrity rubbish. Celebrity rubbish. Maybe it

increased circulation of it, but what is the value of these stories?

Why should they go that far, commit these crimes? Where you are wrong is

to say it has been badly damaged. Because Rupert Murdoch separated his

newspaper bit from the rest of his empire, he has been an enormous

commercial success. He has made far more money since the hacking trial

than before. He's looking triumphant. His woman Rebecca Brooks

has been let off, amazingly. He is triumphant again. He is back in the

saddle, politicians are as frightened of him as ever. The jury

absolutely found Rebecca Brooks was not guilty of any of the offences.

Does it all end here? You cannot gainsay the jury on that, so that is

over. With Coulson, there are still some legs for that to run when the

election comes around. But I still wonder how much of this really

resonates with the British public. When Cameron comes up for

re`election next year, are they really going to think about Coulson

and the hacking trial? So many news outlets have rightfully refused to

sign up to regulations. Going back to Polly, you are right, mad made

millions, but he lost his position, he is exposed. I think this is a

good thing. British politicians will be as desperate to court Embassy now

in the next election as ever they were. Look at Ed Miliband having to

hold up a copy of the sun. I re`flogging a dead donkey here? It

is over for newspapers, isn't it, Wally? ABC all seem to run the

political agenda in Britain. I'm afraid the BBC all too often follows

a collective use people agenda, despite the fact that our newspapers

are 85% owned by very right wing media barons. We still set the

political tone in this country, despite the fact that less people

buy them. Nobody has any other way of deciding what is the news agenda.

Their habits might have changed, the way we consume news, but I heard it

for 25 years that the press is moribund, it is going to die, but it

isn't. The press and the novel have been dying for a very long time.

That's all from us for this week. You can comment on the programme on

twitter. Goodbye. It may be clear and sunny where you

are now, but