24/09/2016 Dateline London

Hello and welcome to Dateline London.

The future of the British Labour Party - if it has one.

And the prospects for peace in Syria - if there are any.

Alexander Nekrassov, who is a Russian commentator.

Stephanie Baker of Bloomberg Markets.

And political broadcaster Steve Richards.

First, the Labour leadership election, which sets

the course for the party, presumably, for the next few years.

Certainly a massive mandate for Jeremy Corbyn as the new leader of

the party, Leader of the Opposition, but presumably a massive kick in the

teeth for the MPs who opposed them. A massive kick in the teeth and a

wholly predictable one. There was an overwhelming lesson from this

leadership contest, it is that the so-called rebels who trickled the

contest must be the most strategically inept group of

scheming tacticians in the history of British politics. Their objective

in the early summer after the referendum was the room is Jeremy

Corbyn. They gave him the dream platform. Obviously now, but at the

time as well. Which is a leadership contest. He won by last time, they

hadn't change the membership since last year, they haven't got a

weighted candidate to take him on, and wholly predictably, the end

result of the second leadership contest is an authority enhancing

victory for Jeremy Corbyn. So if these rebels, and I understand all

the dilemmas they faced, lecture us about how they are the ones with the

strategic insight to wind a general election, I will wonder about that

in the light of this. They need to do some deep thinking about how to

work with this situation. They've tried this, it hasn't worked. They

spent a year publicly slapping him off, that has an undermine him with

this electorate. They need to think again about how they play this from

now on. What they've been doing so far has been strategically inept.

For Jeremy Corbyn, it is as it has always been in the context of his

party, he has won two landslide wins and so within his party, albeit the

membership and not the MPs, he remains the king. And not to mention

the 60 million people who are not members of the British Labour Party

who have an interest in the next Government will be and he was in

leadership now. Here is the big question, Jeremy Corbyn's people

have said give him a chance to do this without the endless attacks.

Maybe he will have more success. The rebels say it is nothing to do with

their noises, it is about him not being up to it. We cannot know the

answer to that, he has never been given the space to lead his party

without all the constant noise. The poll suggests before this contest,

his ratings were abysmally low. But how much is that to do with the...

It's a miracle frankly anyone is backing this party at the moment, it

has been wholly dysfunctional. The question is, if he becomes less

obviously dysfunctional, does his and its ratings improve? The only

way we would find that out is if the rebels start to cooperate with him

or try to. Rather than undermined him every minute of the day. It

could be that he then is found totally wanting and I think they

would have a better case, but they carry on undermining him, he will

always have the excuse that it is them him and not him. Mustapha, had

easy this? Presumably, wanted e-book the positions of what Steve is

saying, every election will be a buy, the local elections next may

take place and so on, whatever the general election says, how do you

see it for him? A constant series of tests within the party and outside?

Once Jeremy Corbyn said he can run an annual leadership election, I

think. So he has done to so far. Certainly, if this goes on, it will

damage the party, no doubt about that. -- he has done to Max over.

Solidly, he won the election today, but can he win the nation, can he

win the national election? And he lead Labour into winning the general

election in two years, 2.5 years' time? This is doubtful, apparently.

You cannot win general elections with 500,000 members. It is

interesting, one poll, we can put health warnings on polls, said

amongst Redditch people on the NHS, always the strongest or one of the

strongest issues for the Labour Party since they invented it, he was

behind Theresa May on whether he could look after it. Do you see that

kind of thing as being part of the rebellion? People are saying, you're

not competent within the party and that undoubtedly has undermined him.

This is interesting, you mentioned the NHS, certainly there are other

issues. The other no he mentioned in his acceptance speech, 4 million

hungry people in the country, so there is a lot of poverty, a lot of

NHS trouble and all of that, he can in fact use these important issues

to probably recruit and change the political psyche within the Labour

movement. See a? He is very popular in the country, he has a lot of

paper within the Labour Party, a lot of people to join across the

country. -- people. He wants them to go out and knock on doors and

campaign immediately. Has been an inspirational figure for some

people. Graeme Mackie talks all the time about democracy, but he somehow

equates winning the backing of 300,000 Labour parties as more

important then Labour MPs who were elected 9 million voters and erase

this disconnect and I think the Democratic efforts in how the Labour

Party is structured. The thing I think that rebel Labour MPs, it

looks like they will sit back and either be picked off by momentum or

face wipe-out at the next election. The thing I would like to focus on

is the elephant in the room, Brexit. It is the thing Jeremy Corbyn never

talks about. I don't think he has raised the issue at Prime Minister's

Questions since the referendum. There are 60 million people who

voted for Remain and they have no party to vote for at this point in

the next election. The fact that he has failed to challenge the

Government on the lack of a Brexit plan, the divisions within the Tory

Party over this issue, highlights his lackluster campaigning in the

run-up to the election. Angus Robertson of the SNP at Westminster

who has challenged the Government repeatedly on Brexit and built

allegedly have a Brexit plan, there have been a number of comments on

social media saying, at least somebody is challenging him. You

think, given that is possibly the biggest political issue of the three

or four years... It is staggering that he has failed to challenge her

on it. She is so easily challenged on it, there are so many issues at

the top on this issue. That is why we saw Tim Farron of the Lib Dems

this week make a conscientious graph are those voters.

It will change everything at the election. You use to be a Kremlin

advisor, maybe you know... I disagree with all of this. I will

tell you why. First of all, Theresa May's appointment as Prime Minister

was a godsend for Jeremy Corbyn because he has more legitimacy now

than Theresa May because the Conservatives have bypassed the

grassroots who were aching to elect a completely different candidate, by

the way. Now they are angry against her. The problem with Theresa May is

that she is trying her best to avoid Brexit completely. This grammar

school reform was absolutely not the timely at all because it distracts

attention from her main role homage to implement exit, to implement the

will of the British people. Who needs grammar schools now, when

nobody knows what's quick to happen with the EU? In this respect, Jeremy

Corbyn looks very professional in a sense. He does not involve himself

with a Brexit, because he can see the mess across, on the other side.

Cable leave the tour is to provide the road opposition? I will tell you

something, if you think there are only Blair supporters of the

laborers are, there are on the Conservative side as well who are

very worried about the Labour side. An interesting point, but let me put

it to you this way. The Conservative Party may be fundamentally split on

that issue and the grammar school issue and many others, but they are

much better at hiding their divisions in the Labour Party. That

may be an advantage or a disadvantage but... But wait for

Brexit, starts to break them up big time. Nobody has yet said on the

Conservative side, especially Theresa May, this is what we are

going to do roughly, this is what we're going to do. There is nothing.

The division has Artie started. Boris Johnson says something, David

Davis says something. So you see this breaking up of the

Conservative. I think you raise both of you in different ways key points.

I don't know if Jeremy Corbyn needs a Kremlin 's most men at the moment.

I'm joking! -- spokesman. I agree with you. I think that actually, all

the media focuses on the disarray of the Labour Party. If I had to

measure which party faced the deeper crisis, I would say this is

counterintuitive, I would say it's the Conservative Party, because

Brexit is insoluble and although you are right, they are better at the

moment at hiding divisions, Europe has brought down every single Tory

Prime Minister since Margaret Thatcher and they were facing much

easier challenges than Theresa May does over Brexit. That raises the

interest in question about the weather, at any point, the Labour

Party can get its act together to appear as a credible alternative,

because at some point in the next couple of years, the Tory Party will

be in crisis over Brexit. That implies people will be looking to an

alternative. That's what happened in the mid-90s when they were in crisis

over the master treaty in Europe. The key question is Tomic can later

get the act together and I think, in a way, the task for them to pull

themselves together will be easier than the Tories coming round to some

sort of united position on Brexit. But at the moment, days show no sign

of it. But... You may be the first time... I want to move on, but let

me push that. Each of the previous Conservative leaders brought down by

Brexit had a degree of legitimate legitimacy that Theresa May doesn't

have in the sense that they all faced the British public, they were

all elected, they all had trouble over Brexit. John Major Tidwell,

David Cameron obviously was reelected Prime Minister, Margaret

Thatcher as well. -- did well. Does that suggest if you are facing these

problems that you would go for an early election if the Prime

Minister, because the problems are so difficult? You would completely

deny it now but maybe in a gear's time? Side it depends, I think,

partly on the on the what the polls are doing in the year's time. If she

is miles ahead and feels that she has an agreement, it would be

tempting to get an electoral endorsement for this. Those are two

very big if. Especially the very good agreement one. Is she finds one

that united Conservative Party and most people say, oh, wow, this is

pretty damn good. She would be knocking at an open door with the

election, but I don't think the negotiation she will be about to

embark on will be as straightforward as that. I do not think there will

be as straightforward as that. An aid convoy heading

for the besieged Syrian town of Aleppo was destroyed this week --

despite supposed ceasefires and agreements on humanitarian

assistance for those people trying to stay alive in what used

to be one of the great Do we know who did

what to whom and why? And how badly tattered are relations

now between Russia and the West? First of all, give us a sense of the

Kremlin's thinking. What do they want in Syria? What do they want is

a good outcome? First of all, I think that what the Kremlin wants is

a stable Syria. I don't understand this thinking that Russia is

actually interested in this instability. I don't think the

Americans are also interested, but the Americans are sucked by their

own policy into creating this instability. I think that after the

cease-fire was agreed, we saw the bombing of the Syrian troops by

the... Mistaken, and then suddenly is his moods and immediately and

takes over the crucial position of the town, I think that distrust

taken. But to use the Russian vendors during the bombing the aid

convoy -- accuse, come on, guys, it is a work like this. When you see

the footage produced by the drones, showing the convoy burning, but

there are no signs of bombs around them. You cannot bomb a convoy

without leaving craters around. Is there a crime you Kremlin serious to

what happened credible? The footage from the drones shows there was

rebels there, trucks and guns and so on, the agreement was that the

Syrians and the rebels come of the Syrian army and the rebels, leave

that route alone, they leave and allow the convoy to go. But then the

footage shows the rebels actually accompanying boat convoy. -- the

convoy. The Kremlin things the rebels has done the damage to

discredits the cease-fire in their package. Mustapha is from Syria.

This is a distraction from the real story, I'm not talking about human

convoys of that. It is not this crazy crisis in the rear. It is much

bigger than that. Russia, the irradiance, the Turkish as well,

their hands are full of Syrian blood for so many years now. Five years

now. How a regime like I said can sustain itself and could gain that

long without the direct and total support of Russian arms, Iranian

money, as well as militia, the Assad regime was about to fall so many

times over the last five years. If it wasn't for the irradiance of port

and direct support of Russia... Russia, you have to admit, it has

strategic interest. -- Iranian. It is the only place they have a

base... Russia does not need those bases, Russia is a nuclear

superpower. We need to stop this cliche about these bases. Russia is

a nuclear superpower, it doesn't need the bases. We are talking about

is situation where we had Iraq disintegrating, losing Government,

losing army and everything, turning into the wild place it is now. We

have had Libya, where Russia stood aside and said to the West and China

as well, by the way, said, OK, you're saying you're going take out

all these nasty people... You're going to do reforms and put in an

new regime, everything will be fine. Disaster in Libya! After Libya and

Iraq, Russia could not stand the sight come up because the West,

including Saudi Arabia, Turkey, turning the Middle East into an

ungovernable region where they wanted to impose their own well and

so on. To say that Russia is helping the Syrian Government, by the way,

Russia is he on the country invited by the Government, no one else had

been invited there... To say that this is a strategic interest because

there are bases in Syria that are not even bases, they are tiny, tiny

ports and so on... It is not the bases, we are not talking about the

basis am a we are talking about the entire region itself. Interest, it

is strategic in the global sense. From Ukraine yet, to you've got the

Russian guys, to pass through Turkey to the Mediterranean, you've got to

have a presence there, no doubt about this. Can you tell me then

what does Putin want in Syria? Is he helping the Syrian to create a

democracy? A stable country? I'm talking about avoiding in other

Libya, which would be a disaster not just for the region but Israel as

well. By the way, Israel has been in touch closely with Russia, they were

worried about the situation developing out of control. I think

we got to the heart of the debate. The criticism of Obama's policy, let

me put it this way, the choice is between stability, which is what

Russia wants, that means you have to have is that, or a ragtag army of

various groups who all hate each other who might fight and that is

definitely instability, therefore the Obama policy is doomed either to

fail or just to keep the war going? The Obama policy has been more or

less about doing very little. He has very consciously distanced himself

from the Syrian conflict, viewing it as an intractable problem. It is

interesting, there is an interview that came out in vanity Fair this

week in which he said that Syria haunts him constantly, he keeps

thinking about what he might have done differently to have saved the

country from so much violence and bloodshed. But I think there was no

support for a never interventionist policy, among the US electorate, he

kept Weir of it. I don't think there is going to make much progress for

the remainder of Obama's term. Let's say Hillary Clinton wins the US

presidential election, which is still an if, she has talked about

taking more action in Syria, creating no-fly zones, etc.. It

would've that will depend on coming to some sort of agreement with

Russia and her relationship with Putin is even frosty or because he

regards Hillary Clinton as having been behind a lot of the public

protest against him in 2011. It goes back to exactly why I think Putin is

intervening to support Assad, which is that he views as set as the

legitimate leader of Syria and that attempts at regime change are off

base. He has criticised Hillary Clinton for tried to undermine his

own position within Russia. I will come back to you, Mustapha, but that

is absolutely the argument, though, isn't it? It was that proverb that

you know better than I, that 100 years of dictatorship might be

better than one year of instability. The awful mess will just continue.

That is the choice you outlined, and nightmarish instability or

maintaining this regime, a means of reason Obama didn't do very much and

found because it is intractable. Just the sequence where the UK were

involved in voting possibly for air strikes against military chemical

weapons targets of aside and now joining Russia and others against

Isis, various points of Syria, highlights the impossibility, one

moment you're attempting to remove the regime by what Obama now inmates

would've been pretty ineffective attacks, the next you are working

with some of his allies in undermining Isis. The whole thing

is... Let me put the question that you put to Alexander to you,

Mustapha. What would you like to see is a credible solution, if Assad is

overthrown? We will get Isis and various other groups all fighting

each other. Of course, there is a possibility, no doubt. But we're not

talking about this or that. Are talking about a total crisis, a

country is being torn apart. You have half the population outside the

country, basically. Either refugee camps or whatever. The regime itself

controlling only a few, I handful of urban cities, including the capital,

but two thirds of the country is not under the control of the regime. The

regime is sustained thereby outside help, talking about the America

certainly, you promised -- the Obama administration has not done enough,

but everyone understands America is pulling out by this crisis,

America's economy is in crisis after Afghanistan and Iraq and is

disappointing particularly in Iraq, certainly we fully understand why

Obama is reluctant to get into Syria. The question is not to send

the troops, curtail Putin. You have so many other means to do that. Not

by sending troops to Syria, but through the international arena.

First of all, there is no trust between America and Russia for the

simple reason that America crossed the line in Ukraine. You do not

meddle in countries that border nuclear superpowers to an extent

that you impose an anti-Russian regime on its border and bring in

Nato troops into the country. This, by the way, is a recipe for World

War III. How Obama... How on earth Obama actually decided to do that,

this is unbelievable. Russia annexed by... Russia and crime area is an

entirely different subject. It would not have happened if there had not

been up to in Kiev. The Russian incursion in Ukraine violated an

agreement... It happened after an illegal coup which all through a

legitimate regime in Kiev, accepted by the EU and the world... We only

have two minutes left. That is the connection about the bad feeling.

Can we move forward? If it is President Hillary Clinton? We have

to wait to see who was going to be... Russia will have to start a

new dial-up. With Obama, it is useless, hopeless. With Clinton it

would be more difficult, with Donald Trump, easier. I might be mistaken,

but at the moment let's wait for the TV debate on Monday which will

probably either wipe out Hillary Clinton completely or she might hold

on for a while. But there is a chance that we will see the election

happening on the 26th. I am wondering if Jeremy Corbyn and

Donald Trump will survive your endorsement Act the kiss of death,

you mean? I can see it now! It will not be on his advertisement. A

former Kremlin adviser says, easier to deal with. We have about 30

seconds left. It sounds at the hopeful it'll go game is being

played with the lives of your people. Absolutely. There was a

shame of the world, no doubt, shame on Russia. On the Obama

administration, to let this bloodshed continue. They could have

stopped that a long time ago, 2011, 2012, 2013. They had 20 of

opportunities for that. We will have to leave it there. That is it for

datelined London this week. -- That's it for Dateline

London for this week. You can comment on the programme

on Twitter @gavinesler, and engage We are back next week

at the same time. Please make a date with

Dateline London.