14/01/2017 Dateline London


Similar Content

Browse content similar to 14/01/2017. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



Hello and welcome to Dateline London.


Does the Trump presidency promise a new golden age


And Britain's Prime Minister promises to work for a "shared


society" while the Red Cross says there is a humanitarian crisis


Separating the facts from the fake news today,


my guests are Michael Goldfarb, of Politico, Nesrine Malik,


who is a Sudanese journalist, Stefanie Bolzen, of Die Welt,


and Iain Martin, formerly editor of the Scotsman,


It's all a conspiracy against Donald Trump by US


intelligence and the media, or it's a conspiracy


by Donald Trump's supporters - and perhaps Russian intelligence -


to help Trump become President and embarrass


Either way, how far can Mr Trump's team of talented family members,


billionaires, ex-generals and others heal America's obvious divisions?


This is the week when he will become President of the United States.


Detox about bringing the country together. People want that. Will it


happen? Now, it will not happen. The country is divided. It is not a new


thing. It is not something that has happened in last year and a half


since Donald Trump declared he would run for president and he has become


a divisive figure. The country has been building to this since you are


correspondent in Washington, Gavin. You wrote a book about her angry


Americans wear. Sometimes when the economy is bad, the sense of being


at a distance with fellow citizens is pushed to the site when the


economy is OK. It has not been OK since the crash in 2008 for many.


Even if he was a more emollient and traditional politician, I don't see


that he could bring the country together. Barack Obama is exactly


that. He wasn't able to bridge the divide. The other part of your


question, about who do you trust? Use extraordinary good at exploiting


that question. Who do you trust? After decades and decades in which


the traditional news media, and they include the BBC New York Times, have


had their reputations, principally trashed. -- reputations


comprehensively trashed. Millions of people every day get their news from


sources that are decidedly nontraditional. There is exploiting


whom? The traditional way of finding it would be to Gundogan find out.


There is no time in the modern news cycle. It is an extraordinary change


of historical circumstance. The other part of this, and so many


things have gone on in the last week, but to have gas and who will


become president of the US in a fight with US intelligence services


and suggesting there could be warmer relations with Russia... That in any


time in the last 50 years, would seem like that sentence got mixed


up. Many things sound like they could never have happened before.


That is the answer to your question. Donald Trump not only casual


divides, she doesn't want to. -- he does not want to. The way that he


got to where he is today is by exploiting divides. In his last


press conference, which he gave when he was in a fight with CNN, when


things get calm, Donald Trump gets nervous and has to provide content


and substance. So he asked to provide drama all the time. He is


going to govern from the fringes. He is going to govern people on his


side and alienate everyone else. Whether that includes the CIA, the


Republican party, whoever, he knows that all he needs is the support of


those people who voted for him. They got him to where he is. Until, when


he says they need a tax to pay for the wall in Mexico, Congress don't


agree. Otherwise his domestic programme will not happen. But you


have to remember that even though some Republicans made very wise,


lofty pronouncements and Trump and how they are not happy he is here


and they tried so hard to make sure that there was a decent candidate,


he brought them back from the brink. He brought them back from death will


stop they were in the hinterland. They are now back in the driving


seat. They need to work with them to ensure they have a future in


Government. There's all kinds of parts of this for Germany as well.


We will get to that in a minute. I was thinking, the German elections


coming up. Germany is clearly quite alarmed that the kind of


intervention which now most people, wider conspiracy theories is


believed Russia did play a role in the US election. If it happens, it


can happen in Germany. There is a lot of nervousness ahead of the


elections in Germany in September. Everyone is expecting more Russian


intervention in domestic German politics. For example, there was a


lot of... There was a big story when refugee crisis started in 2015, with


a fake story about a Russian girl being rates by refugees. That came


out and was manipulated story. You can see that what we see now in the


US is just... It is happening in Europe as well. We will all have to


deal with this? Yes. And it is a big challenge. It is an extraordinary


week and we will get on to do these the fight with the doctors in


Britain, which is politically very brave. We also have which is


politically quite brave and American president to say that he thinks


there might be something a bit wrong within American intelligence. That


is quite brave. It is very brave when you consider what happened to


some of the previous presidency got into a row with the CIA. JFK springs


to mind and sold as Richard Nixon. What on earth ever happened to him?


He is playing a dangerous public quite clever game. He understands


media and how to disrupt media and block part of the traditional


structures in a way that gives him Inc". Ultimately, the problem for


him is the promises he makes essentially defy economic logic. He


talks about increasing entitlements, lowering taxes, detection is --


protectionism but then making life better for American workers. But


prices will go up if they go that route. So it is very difficult to


see how he can, between now and the midterms, which is the beauty of the


American system, he has two years, if in those two years does not go


economically quite as he has promised people in Michigan and


those sorts of states that voted for him, then he has a problem. Of


course, his response then will be to blame Congress. He will be the man


who says, I try to do other stuff and it is just because these two


parties are completely useless. This is a swap that they have to dream.


He won so narrowly and on such a quirk of the electoral system, he


starts with Hillary having 3 million more votes in the electoral college.


His approval ratings, probably aside from Hilary, the worst of any


president. Reagan's budget director says we break it now, we fix it


later. In other words, spend money and worry about that later. That is


presumably what he will try to do? I do not think his mind goes far as


that. Or even as far as the midterms! I don't think that as it


works. The interesting thing to watch, said from his Twitter feed,


which I do wish they would stop, he plays the American mainstream media


like a fiddle. Who cares what he treats any more? We're not supposed


to normalise Donald Trump. This is is normal behaviour, at 3am he says


something crazy. The real action is now focused on Congress. It is


completely in the hands of the Republicans. They are deeply and


geological party. We should be looking at what they do more than


what he does. -- ideological party. And knowing that, we have to look at


which Republicans will stand up to him. In the Senate, guys like John


McCain, he has just been re-elected, he has six years, 1.5 Trump terms,


and it is possible he could run for a second term. He has 1.5 terms to


face up to a guy like John McCain. In the Senate, Villa 's


possibilities of standing and vision back against any -- a new


administration short on common political sense.


But the problem the rest of us have is that the president, as you know,


has the most power in terms of an executive order in an agency. That


is why people are worried. People are quite scared. In the event of a


terror attack some unforeseen foreign prices, the Imperial


Presidency, as it has grown in the last 40, 50 years, has a huge power.


He has freedom not just a tweet but to act on those tweets and take


action... And he has support. The point you made earlier about him


defying logic I trying to propose economic measures that are not


doable, we sit here for months before the election saying, Trump


cannot win because it defies logic. He won because he defied logic. His


supporters do not care. People who support them plainly do not care


about what he promises on the economy. There is no benchmark. You


can blame everything on his opponents, like Brexit, if it goes


wrong, it is the fault of the remainder is -- people who voted


remain. Let's move on. Russians - and friends


of the Kremlin - hate to be reminded that the Soviet Union


was on the Nazi side Stalin and Hitler carved up


Poland between them - and then, when Stalin joined


the winning side, his comradely forces occupied Poland and imposed


Communist governments. Now Poland is being reinforced by US


troops and other Nato forces, and so how serious is the prospect


of new conflict in Europe This is something Germans and people


in Scandinavia in particular are very sensitive about for obvious


reasons. And it is not only about Poland but the reinsurance


measurements that are started in Poland, Bulgaria and Romania. I was


in Lithuania to watch the final exercise of Nato troops before they


start deploying. The British will go to Estonia, I think. There is around


5000 troops in this region, reassuring measures. If you go to


Lithuania, they have a long, tragic story of occupation by the Germans,


then of course by Russia. There is a tangible fear. People are scared


there. If you look at the numbers, 5000 Nato troops, but if you look


couple of miles over the border, 100,000 Russian troops on the


western border of Russia and you have these missiles that can be


equipped with nuclear weapons. If you talk to people in Natal, the


question is, will we really see a state and state war? Is this


possible? On the other hand, we talked about Trump and manipulation


of the German election. There is also the case of manipulation in


other areas and destabilisation. How do you see this? The way you


characterise this, it is a deterrent, a trip were, it is not


the to fight a war but to say that we're interested.


Which underlines, look, it is 100 years this year since the Russian


Revolution. I think we need to start thinking about Russia again


seriously. Trying to understand Russian psychology. History gives us


some quite basic lessons. Do not invade Russia. Do not try and


provoke Russia. Russia is so vast that armies could be swallowed up in


it. Essentially, the thing to do is to try and contain Russia. Suggest


to Russia that we are serious about Western defence and we need to start


thinking again... Brexit to one side. The much bigger European


question is the integrity of the West and Western security. We have


got out of the habit of having to think about this in the last 25


years or so and it is now back front and centre. Part of that is that at


the end of the Cold War, to put it in simple terms, the West won the


Cold War. Natal won the Cold War and there was no big conference or


Congress in Vienna, there was no Versailles Treaty. The Russians had


reasons to believe they were discounted because they were weak.


That was perhaps, looking at it, a long-term mistake. It was, and one


that people have not learned from in the past. I know that it is tedious


when people hark back to Nazi Germany but it is the same mistake


people make with Nazi Germany in World War I. A sense that it was the


end of history, they had dominated and there was no sort of plan. One


of the main lesson is that a staggering that people have not


learned, to see how Brexit is played out in the troubled action is played


out, and I think if you are an immigrant, these things are clear in


your head. But the fact that Natal and the European Union and all these


things happened because there was a fair that there could be a big


rupturing incident. World War II, people think it would happen again


but these things have receded from the public consciousness in a way


that I find really strange. In a way that I think people of the South


have not forgotten. And they do feel that these threats are real and


imminent. In answer to the question you made the first place, how


dangerous and how feasible is it, how realistic is it that we could


descend into a conflict, I think it is entirely feasible. Blunder into


it. Blunder into it with a series of unfortunate events. This is where


the World War I analogy comes in. The steps that led to the conflict


beginning where a series of blunders. The incorrect dramatic


assumptions about how far governments will go. I have to be


give up the Congress of Vienna. Poland was partitioned at the


Congress of Vienna. To bring about a Donald Trump, and mean, it is


something that we still can't know. It has been reported today,


actually, that in late December, Barack Obama that new sanctions on


Russia because of the allegations of hacking into the DNC and trying to


interfere with the American election. On the very day that he


did that, the incoming head of the National Security Agency, retired


General Mike Flynn, was on the phone to the Russian Embassy. In fact,


apparently, through the transition period, he is in regular contact


with the Russian Embassy and has been a regular guest on Russia,


today. The devil's advocate position is, Donald Trump is right. We need a


better relationship with Russia. Maybe you can do it. Maybe having


someone from Exxon, used to dealing with Russia, is a good thing. It


could be good, but what does that mean in terms of your European


partners, since 1945? Rex Tillerson, who is Secretary of State designate,


said, how would you have dealt with the invasion of Ukraine? He said...


The reason they say that Vladimir Putin has been respectful of Angela


Merkel, she sees the broader picture and this is what she sees through. I


agree with you, you need to find a new language with Russia. All the


polemic doesn't take us anywhere. The big question the end of the day


is, how do you read Vladimir Putin? They say that he is like a dancer


with the woman. When you step back, he will come forward. To keep that


balance right... He is a classic Russian. He is a prerevolutionary


figure, in a sense. He uses the techniques of the KGB and FSB and


never really left the KGB. The way that he thinks about Russia is he


wants to restore a concept of respect for Russia and Russia being


a great power. And only once, other than possibly during the Revolution


and at the end of the First World War, has Russia been properly fully


defeated. That was from 89 until 2000. The response and swing back


was the choice of someone like flooding Britain to restore an idea


of Russian pride. -- someone like Vladimir Putin. People cottoned on


that that well ago but the response to Vladimir Putin has been to laugh


at him, for five years ago, and recently to basically disintegrate


in the face of this resolved from Russia. It was interesting that in


the headlines it said the operation of Nato troops was called Atlantic


resolved at the same time Europe is falling apart and America's


detaching itself from Europe and potentially from Natal. So, do not


laugh at him but do not disintegrate in the face of the Russian


determination. Let's move on. In Britain, we have had prime


ministers talk of the big society and the shared society,


of those "left behind", the squeezed middle and JAMs -


just about managing. This week, we also heard


the National Health Service faces Instead of debating acronyms


and slogans, how serious are the social problems facing


Britain, in particular those associated with the ever-spiralling


cost of health care? Whatever you think of it, it is


quite bright for Downing Street to say that the family doctors, the


most respected profession in Britain, pretty much, need to work


longer, and if they don't, they will lose funding. Opinion polls suggest


there is resentment from people about the deal done to give GPs


shorter hours. I think you're right, in the middle of this crisis, it is


a brave and somewhat reckless strategy. There is also a degree


of... There is something seriously wrong here and that is a problem not


so much quickly with the NHS. It is a problem with social care, a


problem that Western countries have. Britain's population above the age


of 85 full double in the next ten years. Britain has not had a proper


grown-up conversation about how that should be dealt with and paid for.


What is happening is that that pressure is then loaded onto the NHS


in accident and emergency. You'll get the headlines from 20 years ago,


30 years ago. NHS is always impresses. Especially in January. --


always in crisis. I think it is an exaggeration. Does Germany do things


better? Your Health Service in general costs more per Ashya of --


per share of GDP. It does. Almost every day, you have a headline about


the NHS. In Germany, headline about the Health Service is probably if


they pay for a massage or acupuncture treatment. Not life and


death. It is people in miserable conditions. You think, I do not want


to get ill. They have brilliant doctors, but the capacity is


completely... It is money. In Germany, you pay around 16% of your


salary into a contribution insurance system. It is not tax paid like in


the UK. I looked at the numbers. In Germany, per capita, you haven't


eight hospital beds per capita. In the UK, 2.9 beds per capita. GDP is


around 11 or 12%. In Germany. In the UK, 8%. In Germany, you pay more


money to solve the problems. And you have a lot of people in the UK and


you have had savings and savings in public services while more people


come into the country. But then you have the democratic rubble when


people get older. -- demographic problem. You need more money but


other things as well. One is not to be partisan when dealing with the


Labour Party and Conservative Party. Whenever you see a debate about the


NHS, it is always posturing. It is never people try to find common


ground. The posturing and partisanship handset. -- harms it.


It is a political hot potato which is why there are these headlines. If


you observe it in the last 20 years, no-one in Government will say, this


is something that predates us and will probably happen after we leave.


Everyone is trying to prove that firstly, there is no issue, which is


what Theresa May was trying to do by deflecting it onto GPs. GPs not


pulling their weight. If there is an issue, it is one precipitated by


legacy. That is something we picked up from Government before. There is


a lot of dishonesty, political fear and partisanship. Political fear, we


know that one person who went in to see Tony Blair to be promoted was


terribly worried he would get Health. To get it is a bit of...


Maybe that is why they have not replaced Jeremy Hunt after all these


years. No-one else raised his hand in Cabinet and said, I will take it.


Jeremy is doing such a novel job, someone has to fix it. It is a very


difficult job. Very difficult job. NHS, after the monarchy, the thing


that defines being a modern Brit, the sense of pride in the NHS... It


the opening ceremony of the NHS. I come from America and went last if I


would never move back, I think, how much money, even with some form of


Obamacare, which would be around in a month, but the amount of money


have to earn before I pay tax just to ensure my family... Here, that


whole thing has been lifted from my shoulders. There is a cultural


fixation on it. I think there is a cultural fixation on the NHS in this


country and people think that there is this... There was an interview


with immigrants to see how well the integrated in the UK. When asked


what the NHS dans four, one said National Health Service, and then


someone said, no, it is envy of the world.


This is the curious thing about the British. I accept that there needs


to be more money, particularly on social care. But almost alone in


Europe or in the world is this concept of a massive National


Service, run effectively from a desk in Whitehall, with a staff of more


than 1 million people. Highly centralised. And whenever there is a


problem in a part of the system, it becomes a mash of -- massive


national scandal. This is not to other countries do it.


The Health Service has evolved to this point and changes began going


back to the 1980s, when there is an idea of starting the beast coming


from conservatives. -- conservatism. People would get fed up with social


care and want to go private. And look, the other thing, and this


might come out wrong, but because the population of this country shot


up after 2004, this put a tremendous stress that has not been budgeted


for or accurately assessed by all the consultants who are meant to


figure out that. That is true, but as well as more


money, the opposite is true. We need a more partisan discussion because


we need to be the consensus and there has to be room for new ideas,


like what Germany, France and Italy are doing. Let's move on.


That's it for Dateline London for this week.


You can comment on the programme on Twitter and engage


We're back next week at the same time -


Hello. It is a quieter day for most of us today. There will be a


scattering of showers but also some sunshine as well. Some showers


running food North Sea coasts could be wintry and this north-west of a


Download Subtitles