:00:23. > :00:25.Hello and welcome to Dateline London.
:00:26. > :00:28.The fall of Aleppo - how significant a moment is this -
:00:29. > :00:34.Plus, Britain's ambassador to the European Union reports
:00:35. > :00:42.Our guests today are: Jef McAllister who is an American
:00:43. > :00:44.writer and broadcaster, Suzanne Lynch of the Irish Times,
:00:45. > :00:47.Abdel Bari Atwan who writes on Arab affairs and Alex Deane
:00:48. > :00:57.President Assad's forces have taken over Aleppo amid repeated
:00:58. > :00:59.and credible reports of appalling human rights abuses -
:01:00. > :01:01.and much hand wringing about the West "doing something."
:01:02. > :01:04.What is the "something" that could or should have been done?
:01:05. > :01:06.What are the consequences of the fall of Aleppo?
:01:07. > :01:08.And does it merely show that Russian policy -
:01:09. > :01:10.however horrific the consequences - is at least coherent,
:01:11. > :01:14.whereas Western policy has made little sense,
:01:15. > :01:27.First of all, this is a very big moment, yes? It is a big moment. It
:01:28. > :01:30.is a turning point, not only in Syria but the whole of the Middle
:01:31. > :01:35.East. It proves that Russia has got the upper hand. Russia is winning
:01:36. > :01:40.and the West is losing on the Middle East. This is the turning point.
:01:41. > :01:48.There are outcries saying we should do this but you can't do anything.
:01:49. > :01:52.Any intervention could drag us to a third World War. Here, Putin is
:01:53. > :02:06.determined to come There is Iran and Iran. What will
:02:07. > :02:21.happen next in Syria, it will be the battle of Idlib. They have managed
:02:22. > :02:27.to gather all the Al-Qaeda and Idlib. Now the next step that the
:02:28. > :02:33.Russians and Assad will say is they are terrorists and we want to get
:02:34. > :02:34.rid of them. If you want to intervene you are supporting
:02:35. > :02:42.terrorists. You are separating the moderate opposition or armed
:02:43. > :02:51.fighters from the radical one, the Islamist on so that Islamist is when
:02:52. > :02:56.most of them and go to Idlib. The choice for the West and Aleppo, you
:02:57. > :03:04.have to choose. Either Assad or actually Al-Qaeda. If you intervene
:03:05. > :03:08.you have Al-Qaeda. If you don't intervene you are helping Assad. But
:03:09. > :03:15.Assad emerges victorious and it will be very difficult to oppose him
:03:16. > :03:20.since Aleppo. The hand of his forces. Have we just got it wrong?
:03:21. > :03:28.In terms of Russian policy, that is perfectly coherent policy, has the
:03:29. > :03:31.west got it wrong? The Russians have been brutal but consistent. They
:03:32. > :03:36.have achieved the end they set out to reach which is more than you can
:03:37. > :03:39.say for Western policy in Syria. Bearing in mind we were against
:03:40. > :03:44.Assad before we were for him, we still say we are against him now.
:03:45. > :03:48.The stated position of our Foreign Secretary, when he meets other
:03:49. > :03:52.counterparts is the future of Syria has to be without Assad, even though
:03:53. > :03:58.this seems to make it far more likely he remains in place. Plainly
:03:59. > :04:01.if this series of events in Aleppo brings peace then it is to be
:04:02. > :04:04.welcomed. I think there are many who would rather we were talking about
:04:05. > :04:10.the fall of Assad rather than the fall of rebels. The caveat from my
:04:11. > :04:13.perspective is in 2011, 2012, when there was a nascent movement we
:04:14. > :04:21.could have supported to oppose Assad and it was consistent and coherent,
:04:22. > :04:25.we effectively let that be crushed. The British parliamentary vote was
:04:26. > :04:30.the crowning glory of that lack of action. The jihadists took over. One
:04:31. > :04:33.of the ways you can tell that happened is they wanted
:04:34. > :04:36.international journalists to be in Aleppo because they would tell the
:04:37. > :04:41.story of Aleppo and Syria to the world, to kidnapping and murdering
:04:42. > :04:46.journalists because they wanted a monopoly of news. That is what the
:04:47. > :04:53.jihadists have achieved. A lot of people looking at this blame Obama
:04:54. > :04:57.and you set a red line and when somebody crossed it he did not do
:04:58. > :05:02.anything, over gas attacks and so on. We know about WMD in Iraq and
:05:03. > :05:10.people being very suspicious but the buck stops with Obama? I think that
:05:11. > :05:14.is right. I have been sympathetic to him because after the ridiculousness
:05:15. > :05:19.and terrible misery and stupidity of Iraq where the lesson is obviously
:05:20. > :05:24.needed to be learned, that just because you want a good outcome in a
:05:25. > :05:28.complicated country you can just achieve it by having a no-fly zone,
:05:29. > :05:32.I have been very sympathetic to Obama, not wanting to make a more
:05:33. > :05:37.stupid mistake than doing nothing. But when you look at the outcome you
:05:38. > :05:40.have to think a no-fly zone that Hillary wanted, or at least
:05:41. > :05:45.establishing the red line and forcing it to some degree, pushing
:05:46. > :05:48.back somehow, going forward and taking a risk would have resulted in
:05:49. > :05:52.something better than the outcome we have now, which is not just better
:05:53. > :06:04.than the Middle East but will also be bad for -- better for refugees,
:06:05. > :06:08.it makes the West look stupid. Putin does not the three have a coherent
:06:09. > :06:13.policy but he has picked a target and he has won. He has still won and
:06:14. > :06:17.people pay attention to that. I think the timing of the fall of
:06:18. > :06:20.Aleppo could not be worse for President Obama because it will
:06:21. > :06:25.overshadow his last month in the White House. We may see some action
:06:26. > :06:29.from him in the next few weeks over Russia's involvement and the hacking
:06:30. > :06:33.which is separate but connected given Russian involvement. The
:06:34. > :06:37.timing is interesting. I think around the world people are in wait
:06:38. > :06:41.and see mode waiting for the new administration to take their seats
:06:42. > :06:46.in the White House. Obviously, the actions in the last few weeks
:06:47. > :06:51.whereby the Russian backed assault in Aleppo was about getting facts on
:06:52. > :06:55.the ground, rushing as quickly as possible to get that situation in so
:06:56. > :07:00.we have a fey to complete if you like in the city before Donald Trump
:07:01. > :07:04.takes over. There are still rebel strongholds throughout the country
:07:05. > :07:10.so this is by no means over. It may in fact just be the beginning. How
:07:11. > :07:15.was the scene in the Gulf and Saudi Arabia? I talked to a very prominent
:07:16. > :07:19.businessman from that area, an Arab businessman, and he said the Arab
:07:20. > :07:23.world is so completely divided it does not make sense to talk about an
:07:24. > :07:30.Arab world. Libya is a disaster, we know what is happening in Yemen, and
:07:31. > :07:37.he is very, very worried about the future of prosperous Gulf states in
:07:38. > :07:41.Saudi Arabia. They are very embarrassed, particularly cut out
:07:42. > :07:45.and other states. They were promising the Syrian people for the
:07:46. > :07:51.last six years that they will oppose Assad. There is no future for Assad
:07:52. > :08:01.in Syria at all. He has to leave. The Foreign Minister, he must go by
:08:02. > :08:08.political settlement or military adventure. But in the end, Syrians
:08:09. > :08:14.are frustrated and so angry with Qatar and Saudi Arabia, you let us
:08:15. > :08:20.down, the American allies let us down. We have suffered a lot with
:08:21. > :08:29.6000 refugees and more than 600,000 were killed, and now Aleppo. Hands
:08:30. > :08:32.of Assad. But talking about Obama, I believe he was extremely wise when
:08:33. > :08:38.he did not intervene, when he chickened out when it came to the
:08:39. > :08:45.chemical weapons. There will be a confrontation with Russia. Was he
:08:46. > :08:48.going for the head of Assad or the chemical weapons? It was the
:08:49. > :08:53.chemical weapons and he has got it. We can see the picture from outside.
:08:54. > :08:58.The Russians are on the ground. The Americans are not on the ground. I
:08:59. > :09:02.wanted to broaden that conversation about Russia's aims because we have
:09:03. > :09:06.seen in a lot of newspapers today, allegations of Russia at King not
:09:07. > :09:10.just the United States but the United Kingdom. They are making the
:09:11. > :09:19.suggestion that he may not have a global foreign policy -- Russia
:09:20. > :09:25.hacking the United States. If the status quo does not assist Russia's
:09:26. > :09:29.national insurance it will upset it. That is why Theresa May is convening
:09:30. > :09:36.our National Security Council to investigate allegations. This is a
:09:37. > :09:40.serious concern not just in Russia but across Europe. We have a series
:09:41. > :09:46.of elections next year and there are a lot of fears about Russia's
:09:47. > :09:54.involvement. The National Front in France has already got a loan from a
:09:55. > :09:56.bank close to the Kremlin. Another development is the centre-right
:09:57. > :10:02.candidate for the French presidential election. He is
:10:03. > :10:10.pro-Russian. He met Angela Merkel on the fringes of a meeting in Brussels
:10:11. > :10:13.this week. We could be licking at a situation of France where we have a
:10:14. > :10:19.pro Russian President, either as the centre-right candidate or Marine Le
:10:20. > :10:24.Pen. We also have a pro-Russian president in the United States. And
:10:25. > :10:29.he may have been elected because of Russian involvement. The leaks came
:10:30. > :10:35.from Putin and the false information which got put into the ecosystem.
:10:36. > :10:43.Even if he wasn't elected, his relaxed attitude to hacking with the
:10:44. > :10:47.CIA saying... It is unprecedented. It is unbelievable that he has not
:10:48. > :10:52.only be negative but he said he does not trust the intelligence agencies
:10:53. > :10:55.to give a fair assessment of what is happening. I agree that his own
:10:56. > :11:05.position on the intelligence services is odd. Not awed! His
:11:06. > :11:09.position on Russia per se is odd and his position with the intelligence
:11:10. > :11:17.services is deeply worrying but I see no evidence that Russia
:11:18. > :11:19.manipulated the election result. The question of the president of the
:11:20. > :11:25.United States being relaxed about hacking by a foreign government, I
:11:26. > :11:32.think we all agree on. What is he going to do with any of these
:11:33. > :11:37.issues? I would make the argument that if there is to be more fighting
:11:38. > :11:41.in Syria, perhaps he can join in on the side of the Russians. I would
:11:42. > :11:50.not go that far necessarily, but I think he is not going to put any
:11:51. > :11:56.brake-macro on. I think he is going to make a gamble that our real enemy
:11:57. > :12:01.is Isis. They're going to lie with the Russians against Isis. I dead
:12:02. > :12:04.care if it is messy, I did Kerry that international human rights, we
:12:05. > :12:11.are just going to go for our enemies. -- I don't care about
:12:12. > :12:17.international human rights. The French candidate is a clear. With
:12:18. > :12:22.Trump, we are not clear. We have general Mike Flynn for example. How
:12:23. > :12:29.is he? He has been pictured beside Putin but he is very anti-Iran. Iran
:12:30. > :12:36.is a player now. There are militants being supported by Iran who are on
:12:37. > :12:40.Assad's side. Where do you see Russia's role in all this? There are
:12:41. > :12:44.those who think Russia has brilliantly muddied so many waters.
:12:45. > :12:50.We have confusion about the American election. We have in Ukraine, what
:12:51. > :12:53.they say has happened in Ukraine is certainly not what many other people
:12:54. > :13:00.think is happening. People in the Baltic region are very concerned.
:13:01. > :13:04.They say there are some Russian generals who are saying that a
:13:05. > :13:09.limited nuclear war in Europe is possible. A limited nuclear war,
:13:10. > :13:19.this is something which is wrong footing the past 60 years of what we
:13:20. > :13:23.have endured. We enjoyed 30 years of Russian nonexistence on
:13:24. > :13:27.international politics. America and the West were the dominant figure in
:13:28. > :13:34.the Middle East, in Southeast Asia, in Europe. Now this monster is
:13:35. > :13:42.waking up. Now we have Vladimir Putin. He wants actually to make
:13:43. > :13:50.Russia great, as Trump wants to make the United States great. He came
:13:51. > :13:53.back, you have to remember that Russia was humiliated in Afghanistan
:13:54. > :13:59.by the West. They were defeated, they lost the Soviet Union empire,
:14:00. > :14:05.they were bankrupt, corruption, during Yeltsin and the last days of
:14:06. > :14:10.Gorbachev and the last days of the Soviet Union, it now there is a
:14:11. > :14:15.strong man. He is from the KGB, he wants to reinstate his country on
:14:16. > :14:19.the international map again as a strong superpower. He wants his
:14:20. > :14:24.power back and we are not going to give it to him as an American
:14:25. > :14:29.senator once said. He does want his empire back, doesn't he? I think
:14:30. > :14:33.that is broadly speaking right. There is another thing to come out
:14:34. > :14:38.of that conversation. Last night in his departing press conference Obama
:14:39. > :14:41.said Russia is a small country, a weak country, and insignificant
:14:42. > :14:59.country. Odd sort of trash talking that you often see pre-boxing match
:15:00. > :15:03.between opponents. If that is right, he has the opportunity to impose a
:15:04. > :15:06.fresh round of sanctions, to sharpen the issue, to put it on top of the
:15:07. > :15:08.national agenda and double down, leaving that legacy for President
:15:09. > :15:10.Trump to think about. Perversely, although Trump opposes everything
:15:11. > :15:12.that Obama stands for, if the ticket of sanctions is far more strong on
:15:13. > :15:15.Russia he is less likely to immediately unwind. Let's not fool
:15:16. > :15:19.ourselves about the power of Russia here. We have also got Nato and huge
:15:20. > :15:26.military might. It is down to choice whether they will intervene or not.
:15:27. > :15:31.We are back to Cold War arguments. But a diminished Nato. The hardware
:15:32. > :15:34.is there but the political will is not? Now it is all up to Trump
:15:35. > :15:38.essentially. Let's move on. According to Britain's ambassador
:15:39. > :15:40.to the European Union - one of the best informed people
:15:41. > :15:44.at the sharp end of British policy - the mood in the EU is such that any
:15:45. > :15:47.Brexit deal could mean any future trade deal with the EU would demand
:15:48. > :15:51.up to ten years of negotiations, and be subject to constant sniping
:15:52. > :15:54.from one or other or several In ten years the British
:15:55. > :15:57.government could change twice. What do we make of all this
:15:58. > :16:09.and its implications? First of all, he is the conduit. The
:16:10. > :16:14.ambassador is not saying what I think, he is saying what other
:16:15. > :16:18.people think. Is he right? There is no doubt a significant trade deal
:16:19. > :16:23.between Britain and the EU would take longer than two years set out
:16:24. > :16:26.in Article 50. I think people are fooling themselves. We are looking
:16:27. > :16:29.at a two-year process in the immediate term and then a
:16:30. > :16:33.transitional agreement that would last until a new trade agreement is
:16:34. > :16:38.formed and that could take eight, nine, ten years. I think it could if
:16:39. > :16:44.you look at all the complexities. Very significant this week is Philip
:16:45. > :16:47.Hammond suggests for the first time that he thinks it is a good time to
:16:48. > :16:50.have this transitional arrangement. That is re-constipated politically
:16:51. > :16:54.in Britain. It means after Britain leaves after two years, it would
:16:55. > :16:59.still be subject to the EU in some form. It would still be under EU law
:17:00. > :17:06.or paying into the EU budget. That is real politics. Sir Ivan Rogers
:17:07. > :17:12.reflected what other member states are saying. There was an EU summit
:17:13. > :17:18.which Theresa May attended and they are sticking strong to that line.
:17:19. > :17:23.That has been no concession on the EU side and the conversation on
:17:24. > :17:26.Thursday night took 20 minutes. They took 20 minutes and they are
:17:27. > :17:29.consistently saying we will not discuss this until you come to this
:17:30. > :17:35.but they are obviously discussing among themselves and setting out
:17:36. > :17:38.their own red line. This is pleasing nobody, the Remainers who are
:17:39. > :17:42.sometimes called Remoaners will hate any move and people who want to get
:17:43. > :17:48.out all want to get out straightaway. Do you buy that it is
:17:49. > :17:51.more complicated? That is life. When you have a binary option referendum
:17:52. > :17:55.you have one or two sides but when you live out the reality of that
:17:56. > :18:00.decision it will take longer than some would like. I relaxed about it,
:18:01. > :18:05.I want to get on with it but I am relatively relaxed. Just to clear up
:18:06. > :18:10.one thing, Rogers has done nothing wrong. He is a diplomat conveying
:18:11. > :18:14.information as he rightly should do. We need more intelligent not less.
:18:15. > :18:19.That's not criticise those who deliver it. On the substance, I sort
:18:20. > :18:21.of agree with Sarah but I disagree with the criticism of the two-year
:18:22. > :18:27.period as if there is something wrong with Article 50's process
:18:28. > :18:30.being played out in that time. The article 15 negotiations are purely
:18:31. > :18:35.and simply about Britain leaving the European Union and the different
:18:36. > :18:41.negotiating teams on either side, their mandate is to deal with
:18:42. > :18:47.Article 50, how Britain leaves. How Britain has a racial ship with the
:18:48. > :18:53.EU after that is a separate article. That you cannot just fall off a
:18:54. > :18:57.cliff with no problem. The tone of your voice does not necessarily mean
:18:58. > :19:02.it is wrong. If I was British I would not think it was a good idea.
:19:03. > :19:08.Why would it possibly be a good idea? My point is framing an option
:19:09. > :19:13.in pantomime terms does not make it better or worse, it just says how
:19:14. > :19:24.you feel about it. This is not the same situation. We are not a member
:19:25. > :19:29.of the WTO yet. Since 1995 you are right we gave up an ownership of the
:19:30. > :19:33.WTO to participate via the EU but are any of you seriously claiming
:19:34. > :19:41.that the United Kingdom would be kept out of the WTO as a member?
:19:42. > :19:44.Probably not, I agree. All the complexities, think of Greenland
:19:45. > :19:58.taking three years to leave the EU. Think of Canada... When Norway
:19:59. > :20:04.decided not to join it took eight months. Norway was not a member of
:20:05. > :20:08.the EU. You left the EU. You decided to quit, OK, so you should not
:20:09. > :20:13.expect those people who you turn your back to them, to be nice to
:20:14. > :20:19.you. You cannot ask for free trade agreements and get the same benefits
:20:20. > :20:22.as if you are a member of the EU, no, you can't. You have to leave and
:20:23. > :20:27.after that, they will decide whether they will give you this free trade
:20:28. > :20:31.agreement or not. But you cannot leave and have all the benefits. But
:20:32. > :20:43.you were in favour of Brexit, went to? No, I was against it. I was
:20:44. > :20:46.always against it. The City of London most businesses would like a
:20:47. > :20:50.transitional agreement. Most people in business and trade would like a
:20:51. > :20:54.transitional agreement. This weekend we saw a very important report from
:20:55. > :20:59.the House of Lords on the UK fishing industry. I was very surprised. UK
:21:00. > :21:02.fishing was something you would think would want to come out of the
:21:03. > :21:05.EU altogether and the Common Fisheries Policy that even in that
:21:06. > :21:10.area the House of Lords were saying they would have to keep some EU
:21:11. > :21:16.membership. But the areas with fishermen and women voted
:21:17. > :21:20.overwhelmingly for Brexit. I'm not opposed necessarily to transitional
:21:21. > :21:26.agreements, I think is unlikely that it will be agreed in the timescale
:21:27. > :21:31.set out the treaties. That is the problem isn't it? It take so long to
:21:32. > :21:36.work out. As long as you get to a scenario where Britain can govern
:21:37. > :21:39.itself, decide its own laws and lead its own future than I am
:21:40. > :21:42.comfortable. If that means we need a transitional agreements than I hope
:21:43. > :21:46.they can come into place. The weird thing is the three of you seem all
:21:47. > :21:51.to believe that the European Union will be fundamentally irrational in
:21:52. > :21:57.its emotional behaviour towards the UK. That may be true. What sort of
:21:58. > :22:01.union do you want us to be in? When you have a divorce, people often get
:22:02. > :22:10.a lot angry when they are on their way out. That how they behave? They
:22:11. > :22:16.often do behave irrationally. All you need is one veto. What is
:22:17. > :22:24.keeping you in that marriage is blackmail... There is fear of
:22:25. > :22:27.leaving and everything. On this side of the table you have already
:22:28. > :22:32.conceded that the EU is a very movable feast. The French elections,
:22:33. > :22:36.we don't know what happen in France, the Italian banks are in a shambles,
:22:37. > :22:41.the Greek problem has not gone away. Syriza is one of the least popular
:22:42. > :22:47.Greek governments and the kernels. This is not a happy club of 27
:22:48. > :22:52.holding hands and having a hug. Which is precisely why they do not
:22:53. > :22:55.want to make it easy for Britain. With 27 countries versus one, I know
:22:56. > :23:00.Britain is a very important global power and a very important trading
:23:01. > :23:04.power, but why would these 27 people give Britain a good deal when they
:23:05. > :23:08.decided to leave earlier? Obviously, there will be pragmatism, there are
:23:09. > :23:19.a lot of exporters crucially from Germany, so Angela Merkel will be
:23:20. > :23:21.very pragmatic about this and she will be the dominant person I
:23:22. > :23:24.think... Assuming she is re-elected. Assuming she is re-elected. They
:23:25. > :23:27.said last bit they cannot have a better position than when they were
:23:28. > :23:32.in the EU. Week the Arabs will solve the problem. Theresa May was the
:23:33. > :23:39.honourable guest of the Gulf Council. But unfortunately, the oil
:23:40. > :23:43.prices are going down and most the countries are suffering. Now she is
:23:44. > :23:49.starting to look to alternative markets. To compensate for 50% of
:23:50. > :24:00.the British exports to the European Union, I think it would be
:24:01. > :24:05.extremely... Why would it stop? Why would the exports stopped? Because
:24:06. > :24:08.the tariffs on, if there are tariffs on British exports and Europe they
:24:09. > :24:15.will not buy as much fish from Britain, that is how it works. Just
:24:16. > :24:20.taking the fish example, how will they take them to Australia? You
:24:21. > :24:26.basically have to have a free trade regime. Why would it not be
:24:27. > :24:30.possible? Alex's main point is that the European Union on the seams are
:24:31. > :24:34.going to act in a rational rather than emotional manner, they may be
:24:35. > :24:40.angry but eventually we have to do a deal and if it is good for everybody
:24:41. > :24:44.to trade their those are the terms. It is not your's position. They have
:24:45. > :24:55.said they don't want that. They would prefer to be in the WTO. What
:24:56. > :25:01.you are describing as a protectionist customs union. That is
:25:02. > :25:04.what they want. David Davis has said he would prefer to prioritise free
:25:05. > :25:14.movement controls over trade. That will be the choice of Britain, not
:25:15. > :25:16.Europe. And he is right. A final thought, on domestic politics, why
:25:17. > :25:21.one reason why I thought the 10-year report will be interesting, we have
:25:22. > :25:29.no idea who will be in government in ten years' time. If germy Corbyn
:25:30. > :25:36.does not get his act together... -- if Jeremy Corbyn does not get his
:25:37. > :25:43.act together, my instinct is, the Labour Party gets -- the
:25:44. > :25:48.Conservative Party gets a free ride in the House of Commons. Jeremy
:25:49. > :25:52.Corbyn does not corral his party. I think our relationship with the EU
:25:53. > :25:58.will come down to some of these trade deals. Barnier seems to think
:25:59. > :26:00.we can get a deal done in less time. We can leave it there because we
:26:01. > :26:04.have 2017 to talk about it! That's it for Dateline
:26:05. > :26:06.London for this week. You can comment on the
:26:07. > :26:07.programme on Twitter We're back next week
:26:08. > :26:11.at the same time. Please make a date
:26:12. > :26:13.with Dateline London.