28/01/2017 Dateline London

Hello and welcome to Dateline London.

How "special" is Britain's so-called "special relationship"

And how wise is it for a British prime minister to try to get close

to an American president - and end up with a picture

My guests today are: Alex Deane who is a conservative commentator,

Agnes Poirier of France's Marianne, Mustapha Karkouti of Gulf News and

Jef McAllister, an American writer and broadcaster

A British ambassador to Washington once told me -

as we awaited the first meeting between the then British

prime minister and a new American president -

that they were "fated to get on wonderfully well."

He meant that whatever the personal chemistry - or lack of it -

the totality of the relationship between the UK and US was so

But how well does that work with Theresa May and Donald Trump?

It seems to me the most interesting thing about it is that it took place

within the first few days? Yes, the first foreign head to be in to see

the American presence, I think the quote from your former ambassador

friend is right. These are two countries that need to work hard to

get on and I don't think there is any secret that we struggle somewhat

under President Obama who is not as well disposed to the British

interest as the now president seems to be. I suppose my point is this,

whether you agreed with Brexit or not, that is now the directional

travel that our country is on. President Obama and his preferred

successor Hillary Clinton set themselves Paul square against that

so even if you voted against Brexit and power and ardent Remainer, you

should now be happy, that we have a president who looks optimistic and

positively at the path that we are set on. You may dislike Donald Trump

or many other reasons and those reasons may be valid but on this it

is good fry country that it happened, and went the way that we

did. Do you see this as some British press sees it, as a danger that a

Prime Minister gets too close to an American president. It was said that

Tony Blair got too close to George Bush and that lead us into the mess

of Iraq? When I watch the press conference, I thought the Prime

Minister came out of that exceptionally well and if you think

about anyone who's policy positions changed, it was Trump, not May. One

week ago he was saying that Nato was obsolete, with encouragement of

Theresa May it is now 100% relevant and he supports it. And maybe

general Matias two. He said that he would step back, and support the

general 's position. In the same way that he seems to be rowing back on

torture as well. But he does seem to be bit double, and the other one is

Ukraine. Where Theresa made straight that our country and there is has a

significant position of difference and she didn't back down one bit.

What did you make of it? Well I wish I could share your enthusiasm, of

course he is the presidents of the United States, the used and nine it

and we had to work with the man. On the other hand as a friend Britain,

I felt, I was shivering, just seeing them holding hands which the British

media paid Seo much of it. It is on every single newspaper. It was a

temporary safety measure I believe, they were walking downstairs. He was

being polite. He was being polite but I just don't see Angela Merkel

being led the way that she is. I thought it was a bit embarrassing

for Britain. Also, that press conference, the FT said that there

was considerable warmth between the two. What I saw was considerable

awkwardness, she was walking on eggshells of course and she managed

to get him to say at least not on camera, that he was backing Nato

100% and that is a in itself, but otherwise, she was going there, Ray

few words from the president about the trade deal, but Article 50 has

not been triggered yet so she's not actually cable or starting at entry

negotiations. You can have talks of course but you didn't say anything

on that trade deal apart from Brexit was the most wonderful things. To

pick up on Alex's point, wasn't the most interesting thing about

yesterday that whatever one may say about Donald Trump and a lot has

been said all over the place about him, he appears to be pragmatic

enough to listen to people who actually know what they talk about.

If he listens to General Mattis four example is somebody with a long

career in defence, it is very clear that he doesn't think that torture

is a good idea. I know, but you can't actually ignore, the fact that

an American president says that personally, you think that torture

works. It is difficult to ignore. But you cannot ignore the fact that

he said even if he thinks that, he will defer to someone else. I

thought it was an interesting point. It is still to Moxon tip becomes a

dictatorship. What do you make of it? I think Theresa May left

Washington saying to herself, I cannot trust this man. I don't think

she will trust this man. Because he is a man who changes his mind every

day. And he is a loner in a way. When he stands up in the press

conference and says, look, I am rich, very, very rich. As if he says

I don't need this job and this money so I'm doing you a favour to be here

in this position. You cannot trust this man in a way. Yes of course he

said I'm with you 100% over Nato, but give him two or three months,

easy going to stick to his position? I doubt it. And I'm sure Theresa May

doubts it. That is interesting. You've seen lots of presidents at

the White House, it has been quite an extremely weak for Donald Trump?

For America? It is such a blizzard of things you can hardly even

remember how it began, the speech at the CIA where he is standing in

front of the wall of the fallen and uses it as a long talk about his own

wonderfulness. Where he says that the news media made up his

differences with intelligence agencies which was a lie. Two people

for whom not lying actually matters because that is their jobs, trying

to figure out things. And to say, that of course there was tremendous

voter fraud and that was the only reason why I didn't get the popular

vote. That was another lie and he said that to them. That was seven

days ago. A long week. And the executive order that was in favour

of torture, which has now been rescinded. But there is a law

against it anyway so the executive order is irrelevant and James Mattis

was against it. Theresa May, I think it is important for the president

and the Prime Minister tried to get on, yes, there is a little bit of

the supplicant trying to rush in but it's fine, this is an important

relationship. If it goes well for the US it is a force multiplier for

Britain, I would point to the relationship that Tony Blair and

George Bush had in the days after September the 11th when it actually

worked really well where Blair would go to Washington, he at the second

highest approval rating of any public figure in the United States

and he would come back to Europe and all of the European Prime Minister

's would line up to have dinner with him because they wanted to

understand what Bush was saying and he was kind of the ambassador. It

all went wrong when he became too supplicant three over Iraq and he

didn't pull back. So that is a danger, of being a Democrat in a

Conservative thing. I think the worrying thing about this visit, yes

it looks like a normal visit, but Trump is not a normal president. He

does not believe in the Liberal International order, he believes in

himself coming getting attention for himself. If you look at all of his

biographers, they say he has never had any friends. He doesn't have any

long-term friends, he discards his wise when they are not useful to

him. He doesn't believe in alliances and long-term building, he believes

in transactions and beating the other guy in a deal. Here we have

Britain that has given away its European home and is looking for

deals. Are you saying that these are two leaders that have got no mates?

The British don't get on with the European friends and Donald Trump

doesn't get on with anybody? But there is also a system in which they

used to operate. I think if Vladimir Putin now takes advantage of say,

lessening some sanctions, I don't think Trump is going to opposing

like Obama did. Meddling in the elections and doing things the last

of GDP concerning, I think this desire for Britain to be paying all

of this attention to trade deals within individual countries, and the

smallness of its ambitions it is going to feel like it is the wrong

choice but it is going to fit in with Trump's. The there is false

with what you say, I could agree -- disagree about what Trump was --

agree with Trump speaking front of the wall and it was crass. But I

disagree with you, in exception is with results. I'm not saying you

particularly but the left often says that the result we have had is so

bad that it transcends normal systems. When democracy sometimes

you get results that you don't like and each side has to live with that

result. But I'm so angry that this can't be normal, and therefore the

result is whether it be voting to leave the European Union will Donald

Trump the president must somehow be invalid. Li I don't think it is

invalid, I think it is worrisome and it creates risks, and risks of the

dissolution of the international order that has triggered peace and

security for so many years is a risk. Both playing as not

isolationists, it is I am best. I think it is a new world altogether,

a new political environment, I think everybody is trying to find his or

her place. Like Theresa May. How to deal with this man. It is a very

worrying thing to do, because listening to his speeches, the day

before, in Philadelphia, the mere fact that she was, repeating, the

fact, the two great nations historically, and reminding. Brew

wanting to lead together. The other point that I wanted to make, I'm

very interested in your country's politics, in the enzyme bridges

should because I'm most interested in how Britain fares. Our Prime

Minister didn't choose this hand, she neither voted to leave the

European Union nor did she have any say on Trump being president but

she's dealing with hands that she is being dealt and I'm very proud of

the way that she is conducting herself actually. One of the things

I have wanted to bring up, it has been many years since I have read

the art of the deal, Donald Trump says, or his ghost writer, says

something like you make a better deal when the person in front of you

is desperate to make a deal. That is the thing that I wonder about. Jeff

was talking about Tony Blair and Bush, Tony Blair missed a historical

opportunity at the time, because he did have leveraged over Bush and he

was close to him and he could have done something which he didn't do

and that was a historical mistake in many ways. He could have actually

just before the invasion, he would have been able to tell Bush look,

this was a mistake. Brew but he and colon Powell could have had a senior

conversation. But also he and Colin Powell could have had a senior

conversation. But Britain is very important on the chessboard and can

make a real difference, but what I so, yesterday in Washington, the

British Prime Minister who of course needs to do what she has to do but

she also, there was an element of desperation and she felt really sink

a frantic. I'm a Tory and I love blaming Tony Blair for anything, on

that one it is the job of the new Prime Minister to make sure that we

are close to our closest ally. I want to point out that some of the

bases, for the cooperation is intelligence and offence. Many

things that are part of this regardless of who the Prime Minister

is. But British spending on its own defence has decreased, the number of

aircraft carriers and planes on aircraft carriers, the number of

submarines, the size of the Army. Actually it is getting to the point

where Britain is not gain to be able to make the kind of contributions

should there be a gulf of land war. And I think that is important for

the future. Theresa May does not have as many cards in her hand. A

lot has been made in this side of the land sick about these executive

orders. I'm tempted to ask, so what? Didn't Obama signed an executive

order eight years ago this month. And whatever happened to that? What

I'm trying to get at is the totality of the relationships between Britain

and the United States also involves Theresa May talking to the

Republican party, that went down very well. It is not just about the

president, but whatever you say about all Trump, his freedom former

mover is more limited than people think. I think that is fair if you

look at the executive orders, they are mostly public relations, they

are intended to throw red meat to the base and signal a directional

travel but they are not legally valid because they contradict

legislation or because they are easily provoke a ball or because

there are conditions that haven't come to pass, or they say things

that are already law but people don't remember that Obama has

already done about immigration policy for instance. This is a

common tactic of new presidents, to issue a flurry of executive orders.

I think we have two get used to, Trump doesn't care as much about the

substance. Obama a constitutional law expert cares about doing the

right thing. What Trump always cares about his being at the centre of the

news and getting adulation for it and if it takes executive orders

that don't add up, or end up in the heap on the floor he doesn't care.

How is he viewed in the Middle East in particular on the guv, I was

talking to a golf specialist and they say do you know what, there is

a fair wind but I'm Trump in Gulf nations partly because he recognises

the threat as they see it from Iran and that is a big story in the Gulf?

That is true, I think it would please the Gulf. People in general.

Of his stance on Iran. If he does what he says, they will certainly be

relieved, no doubt about that. This is only one point. You need to think

of stability in the long term, in the entire region, not only,

assuming he launches a war if you like or attacks, hitting the nuclear

facilities or whatever. That is what talking about. Will it be limited to

that part only? Would it threaten the entire region itself? They are

worried, a lot more than Iran, about extremism, fundamentalism in the

region itself. It is proper either first priority as far as politics in

the region. Ease Trump prepared to do anything about that? He did say a

few things about Muslims just if you days ago yesterday.

And also his team started talking about building a database of Muslims

inside the US. And barring people from certain countries like Syria

where you are from. Exactly. And that made a person like Madeline

Albright threaten to convert to Islam if he does that. Is that a bit

of froth? I don't think it is froth, we should listen to people around

the world. On the other hand, he is far less interested in intervening

around the world, it will be not very interesting to liberal

interventionists but it would be much more agreeable to people who

don't want interventions from superpowers. On the other hand,

Balmer dropped hundreds of thousands of bombs, on Muslims, and was widely

regarded by the foreign affairs lobby as a hero. There is a

difference between these two things, would I find it more difficult to

find Davies in the United States will get a bomb dropped on me? Brew

Trump is stopping the drone programme and he will be doing the

same thing -- Trump is not stopping the drone programme. How do you know

that? Brew he hasn't told me, but it is essentially inevitable, that is

what the entire Establishment has been looking to do. And there are

not very alternatives if you want to be a tough guy and if you want to do

things from Washington. The danger is, let's say that he makes the deal

with Russia, sanctions gone in return for cooperation. The problem

with Russia as a ally against terrorism is, they have created a

lot of people from Chechnya who go to Syria because of the tactics they

have used. They kill eight times as many people in the bombing as

American strikes, and if you look at Trump's executive order banning

Muslims, it is from countries none of which sent any of the 911

bombers, the most it affects is Iran. As one Iranians foreign policy

official said, Americans have created more people going to Isis

than Iran has. They have two create this notion that you are actually

increasing radicalism if you team up with the Russians. Your point about

the orders and restricting travel is reasonable, the Ven diagram between

countries that have sent citizen between 911 and the countries who

are banned, do not overlap one bit. Saudi Arabia is of course the

largest single one. And I wanted to return to your Russia point, because

on the one hand as they showed in Syria, the Russians, brutal and

effective, RGB only on the narrow interpretation of what you think

should happen. The Americans and indeed the rest of us. Well meant

and well-intentioned and utterly ineffectual. You have got to pick

your preferred option. Doing peace with Russia, I think there are many

people who will look at that and would say that I would rather that

Russia got on better with United States. If you listen to Theresa May

before she talked to Trump, she was always -- already showing signs that

we should have a different attitude to Russia. Perhaps we will keep

sanctions on the Ukraine but there is room for improvement. This is

happening, if France with you is elected French President, he is for

the moment best placed to be the French president, -- Fillon. There

will be a complete the other side to French foreign policy. It will be a

new era of Franco Russian friendship. And indeed in other

countries in Europe, I think we are going there because we know, Obama

didn't do much. In the sense that, the US has retreated on the

international scene, and with Trump it is going to continue being

isolationist. So basically there is so much room in part of the world in

the Middle East for Russia to play its card and the one is going to

stop Vladimir Putin. So this is where, slowly we are slowly getting

there. Just to return to the torture point. It now seems to have been

shelved but one of the fundamental worries about that, apart from the

inhumanity of torture, is that if you torture one person, you may

create a thousand others who take the same view. It seems to be a very

headline grabbing way of saying something, to talk to his base but

something that will offend, not just many people but make many people

much more likely to be anti-American? I think that is

right, I think torture is always morally wrong, the question now is

whether it is effective or not is secondary. I also wonder to what

extent these are deliberate ploy is to demonstrate a toughness, that is

meant for your political audience rather than for your wider

international audience. I have no doubt that the signals from the

Trump campaign on that went down well with its domestic audience, and

if your primary aim is to get elected, if you remove morale at you

from the question, that is a sensible thing to do. Even if it

alienates people who are not American citizens outside your

country. One question I wonder about Jeff, is the question of Congress

and the Republicans in Congress, the Democrats are in a mess in various

ways but if you are a Republican in Congress facing the election in two

years which is the entire house of representatives, how close would you

be to Donald Trump. Would you say, I would better get very close because

he's the president and he this mandate. Or would you say, this

could come seriously unstuck? Brew so far all of the indications are

that the Republicans have made the bed I happily or not. However

bizarre his pronouncements or offensive about grabbing the private

parts of women. Saved just basically rolled over. The base, the people

that voted for them and that they are scared of, to unseat

Congressman, they cannot afford to get out of the way. Foreign policy,

it probably won't matter a lot, it is Obama care that is perhaps going

to matter. Obviously the Republicans are now showing concern, they have

said repeated so many times and now they are actually responsible for

its becoming Trump care. They lot of the initial proposals would end up

on insuring 20 million people who would have terrible sob stories, and

against them. Now they are starting to feel the pressure. But Trump to

who is not actually really a Republican, he is a deal-maker, will

be glad to come up with a compromise and I think there is room for him to

work with the Republicans. And all of this stuff about impeachment and

all of the horrible things that he is doing, all of these impossible

things that he keeps doing, they will not get in his way. Foreign

policy is what is worrying as far as the Middle East is concerned.

Because foreign policy is bottom of the list, no doubt about that. That

would give the Russians freedom to do whatever they want in the region.

In fact, they are now running the peace conference in Kazakhstan. And

they are the arbiter but they are also, the attackers at the same

time. That is how they are perceived in the region. That is it for

Dateline London for this extremely busy week, we are back the same time

next week, you can of course comment on Twitter. Goodbye.