29/04/2017 Dateline London

Hello, and welcome to Dateline London.

This week we'll be discussing general elections -

the campaign is in its early stages here in the UK, rather

We'll assess Donald Trump's first 100 days in office and look

at the under-reported tensions between India, and China.

With me today are Ashis Ray, the Indian broadcaster

The North American broadcaster Jeffrey Kofman,

Ned Temko, the political commentator and Eunice Goes,

Just a few days, it feels like coming to a British general

election. Ned, don't look bored at the start! It is low-key? It might

get even lower, you never know. The British press often talks about a

phoney war before an election campaign really starts. What is odd

about this is it is kind of a phoney election. Despite the prospectus,

Theresa May saying I need this mandate to strengthen my negotiation

position with the EU, even she must know that it has nothing to do with

the EU. Even if she were to get Putin sized majorities in this

election, it would not change the basic structure of the negotiations

that Britain has to have with 27 other European countries. I think...

I would disagree a bit. I think if she gets a commanding majority, it

does give her much more authority than if she squeaks Bible has to

deal with a minority parliament. I think she is looking for that

mandate. -- if she squeaks by. She is also trying to squash dissent in

her own party. The real mandate that she once, this is true in a

different way, for the anti-mandate that Jeremy Corbyn feels, it is

about British politics. If she wins resoundingly, it is more a message

to the Boris Johnsons of this world. In a way, to the far right of the

Tory party. In other words, in theory, if she wants the so-called

soft Brexit... Which she doesn't? Well, we don't know. Have you heard

the phrase Brexit means Brexit? That is all we know. Let's posit the

possibility that she once a kind of lukewarm Brexit. It is conceivable

that if the Ideologically rigid side of the Tory party knew that they

have a Tory leader that just got a personal mandate to lead, it might

change things. She was looking at the polls? Of course. The opinion

polls? Yes, she was looking at the opinion polls. She was also looking

at the economic figures. The economic situation is deteriorating,

rising inflation, unemployment, maybe there might be some trouble

ahead. Also, we haven't felt the economic impact of Brexit. That

might take another two, three or four years to take place. She wants

to have room for manoeuvre so that she was not going to be punished

immediately after Brexit with a terrible electoral result. So, she

is factoring in all of this. Of course, being so ahead in the polls,

she is the most popular Prime Minister in 40 years. This is really

something incredible. She's trying to take advantage of this position.

She is also creating one of the most boring elections and campaigns in

living memory. I think it is up to the opposition parties, some of them

in a sore condition, a really weak condition, to make it a Brexit

election. There are lots of questions that the government has

not answered. Even Labour is confused about Brexit, which makes

it very difficult. There is a political calculus going on as well,

she knows the polls, she knows she has extraordinarily weak opposition

in Corbyn, who a lot of people in Labour cannot tolerate, perfect

alignment of the stars. But she is also looking at these very complex

Brexit negotiations, which are going to take a couple of years and

thinking, wait a minute, if I wait until we run out of our mandate, we

will be right in the middle of key Brexit negotiations and we will have

to suspend them for an election campaign. If I do this now, I have a

good four year run and we can get this wrapped up before I have to go

back to the polls. Will she engage in this? Yes, I have been covering

elections in this country since 1979. I see this as a situation

where she saw an opportunity, nine months into the job, she saw an

opportunity, the opportunity being that Jeremy Corbyn is so far down in

the polls that it gives her a chance to perhaps enhance her position,

strengthen her hand. That said, it is also true that three years down

the road, the economy in Britain may not be as hunky-dory as it is at the

moment. So, that was also a factor that played in. More than that, this

was an election where she wants to talk about Brexit, and Brexit alone.

The fact that she is the best person to negotiate with the 27 countries

that she has to talk to. Whereas Jeremy Corbyn, I think, will try

very hard to focus on housing and health. Those are the two areas that

Labour are seen to be stronger on, compared to the Conservatives. A few

more weeks to go, June the 8th. It is a little bit close in France. The

French election is fascinating. Who thought we would be where we are

today, and we build up to Meder seven? That is true, I think it is

going to be very close. We have Macron, the most devoted candidate.

At 54% of his voters were voting tactically. That means it is not

somebody who has a lot of enthusiasm behind him. The French electoral

system has been designed to give the opportunity to voters to come in the

first round, vote with their heart, and the second round is to vote with

your head. Tactically. So, they are already doing it in the first round,

which means some people are very alarmed. His main problem is going

to being confusing those voters on the left and right, convince them

that Marine Le Pen is a real danger. -- enthusing. He has been working on

that, he has been campaigning in areas where the Front National is

very strong. He has been employing Tony Blair masochistic tactics,

getting engaged in dialogues, some very vivid conversations with

voters. I don't know if, in two weeks of the campaign, it will be

enough to convince voters. Marine Le Pen, on the other hand, she is

clearly targeting voters on the left. She keeps making references to

the banking background of Macron, using the language of the candidate

of the radical left. She might get around 15% of those radical

left-wing voters. It will be much tighter and extension is going to be

the greatest enemy of Emmanuel Macron. What we think of Marine Le

Pen standing back from her leadership of the Front National?

And her leader, who has been exposed as believing... The Holocaust

denier? The interim leader. She is chasing her own shadow. Having

played this punditry game for a while, I am reluctant to predict any

margins, any victors, given the outcomes we have seen in Brexit and

Trump. I will predict that Corbyn will not be Prime Minister! Yes,

well... That an exception. I think it is hard to see Marine Le Pen, she

is such a polarising figure and has a solid base, but when you look at

how the votes played in the third and fourth position in the first

round of the election, it is very hard to see how it works. The real

danger is people staying home. If you remember when Marine Le Pen's

father went through this ballet, you know, they defeated Le Pen, but they

did it with people on the left holding a nose and saying they would

vote for anybody apart from him. Exactly, the voters that supported

Francois Fillon, the centre-right candidate, are very hesitant of

voting for Macron. It's a problem, because Fillon was campaigning on

the margins of the radical right. I think there will be a lot of voters

of Fillon who will vote for Marine Le Pen. Interesting, it is a new

phenomenon that the two major parties have been knocked out.

Effectively you have an independent candidate emerging from the centre.

And, of course, a well-known right-wing candidate. I suspected to

be closer than what people have been predicting. But we are into new

politics these days. An independent could become President. And the

youngest President ever? A situation, a country like America,

the position of President of France is a hallowed position in the eyes

of the French. For a man of that age to become President is

extraordinary. It would be another thing to have legislative power

behind him, we would not know that until June. It's an interesting

point, when you look at trends globally, Trump being the guy that

is going to time to clean out the swamp, Brexit being a vote against

the old order, Macron very much fits into that trend. He is not from the

traditional old line parties. His ideology might be different, he is

much more conservative mainstream than Trump, much less disruptive

than Brexit, but it is this trend of people saying, I'm fed up with the

old order. There is also this trend of the working class people, who

traditionally vote for left-wing parties, veering towards parties

which are very much to the right. It has happened in Britain, in the

shape of Ukip, it has happened in the case of Trump, and now also,

perhaps to a certain extent, in France. We may have proved that the

French election is a little more interesting than the British one.

Let's turn to India. Tensions between India and China

have been growing recently. Cross border skirmishes,

bellicose rhetoric, all making Ashis, bring us up to date. It has

been growing and worsening for some time. Explain what your assessment

is where tensions are? There was a lot more tension between India and

China these days than what was the case three years ago, lets say.

There was a different government them. There is an element of

bellicosity between the two belligerents, if you like. More on

the behalf of China. The situation is like this. The former ruler of

Tibet, he went to India, he got sanctuary, and has been in exile in

India for more than 60 years, he is a person that China is

ultrasensitive about. There is a long-standing border dispute between

India and Pakistan, sorry, India and China, which is described by China

as South Tibet, which India claims as part of India. That was put on

the back burner in 1993, in the form of a treaty which was called the

Peace And Tranquillity Treaty. Discussions would continue, but in

the meanwhile, economic relations in particular would forge ahead. And

they have. Trade between the two countries runs into tens of

billions, 100 billion. Having said that, every time the Dalai Lama

visits this sensitive area, which is claimed by China to be South Tibet,

he goes there specifically to visit a monastery will stop it tells -- to

visit a monastery. It is of tremendous importance to Buddhism.

He was there in 2009, when China raised objections. Wasn't that his

first landing spot when he came from exile? He came through that area. He

fled Tibet. He came through, and settled in India. He is a person

that raises China's heckles. China tends to go over the top on this

matter. India has try to keep a lid on it. The previous Indian

government, I think, did better than the present one. There is certainly

an element of rhetoric going on, which I dare say will not lead to

war or any of that kind. But you find the border violations are

taking place all the time. I think it reflects the aspirations of India

to be a global superpower. The two most populous countries, as

neighbours, India in the shadow economically and geopolitically, of

China, which is much wealthier, much more powerful, has a much stronger

army. India, with its own internal issues of extreme poverty and

corruption cannot be an equal player with China. But this bellicosity, as

I think you rightly call it, reflects this desire to be seen as

not being taken advantage of all taken for granted. There is also

rising nationalism in both countries. The ruler in China, the

ruling party in China, we have seen nationalism in both countries. I

tend to agree, this has been going on since the 1960s. No major uproar,

skirmishers, episodic skirmishes that are taking place when something

more controversial takes place. India's economy, under the shadow of

China, it is interesting because it has a much more dynamic economy in

some places, certainly more high-tech. It is more malleable and

adaptable, in theory. It is against that background where China is not

only asserting itself with better ties with Pakistan, but also East

Africa, development projects, trade across Pakistan. You can understand

India's reticence about this. The wild card, again, is our friend

Donald Trump, who, despite the previous administration and the

Trans-Pacific Partnership, the tilt to Asia, is basically in a bromance

with the leadership of China now, because of North Korea. One of the

reasons why tensions have risen between India and China is because

India has moved closer to the United States. It certainly did under the

Obama administration. What will happen at the Donald Trump, one

doesn't know. This has offended China. It is India and the United

States ganging up against China. That is one of the reasons why

tensions are higher today than they were a couple of years ago. And your

anxieties as well, about Kashmir, why we should be more concerned,

even more concerned now than we have been in the past? The United States

and India, going up against China, China has forged closer and closer

to Pakistan. It is a counter ganging up against India, with China and

Pakistan. What has happened is that this economic Commodore, as it is

called, a massive corridor through disputed territory, as mandated by

the United Nations. The entire area of Kashmir is disputed, as far as

the United Nations is concerned. So, driving a highway, and economic

corridor through territory which is disputed, is something which

obviously India is not happy about. He has been mentioned already in the

last couple of minutes, you can't avoid that, we must talk about the

United States. You probably know that President Trump is completing

his first 100 days in office. Jeffrey, you are not too long back

from the US. I was very struck that Donald Trump said he was finding the

job harder than he anticipated? Era go figure! Isn't that a revealing

comment? He told Reuters news agency that the job is much harder than

anticipated. He had a good life beforehand, he enjoyed it, maybe he

is suffocating? Maybe we should have a whip round and give him his old

life back? Exactly, the cocoon, he finds it quite airless, and he

misses being able to drive. He ran his business empire by decree. By

bullying. It just doesn't work. When you run a business the way he does,

it is all about money. It is all about profit. Everybody sits on the

table going, how can we make more money? Congress doesn't work that

way. You have so many competing interests. You have so many people

with regional interests, political interests, ideologies, power bases.

Has that been a shock to him, because he didn't come up with the

political experience? We saw massive failures, trying to kill Obamacare,

it didn't work. Two efforts to ban Muslims from sex, then seven, then

six countries, overruled by the courts. -- trying to ban Muslims

from six and then seven countries. The courts have overruled his

attempts to be an emperor. The question really now is how much he

is learning on the job and can he... He almost as four years to go, 100

days is not much. It hasn't been great. He has moved some of the far

right fringes, Steve Bannon and others out of the centre of power in

the White House. He has this more pragmatic group in the White House

advising him. You say it hasn't been great, his administration would say,

you mentioned it, the US has come out of the Trans-Pacific

Partnership, all of the things he wanted to do. He has a new Supreme

Court Justice as well? That is an achievement for his administration?

His only concrete achievement. If you can call it an achievement. But

it is. I wouldn't like to state the obvious, his failures. But one thing

disturbs me a little bit. I think he might be trying to raise his ratings

by going a little ballistic externally. On the international

stage? Absolutely. He has tried the missiles in Syria, he has tried a

heavy bombing in Afghanistan and he has now started being quite

provocative in the Korean peninsular. It is a dangerous game,

but I think it is one way of trying to raise his ratings, which I

suspect is what his try to do. For 24 hours he was going to kill the

North American Free Trade Agreement, and then backed off. The reassuring

thing, and you are more certain than I am that Steve Bannon and the

alt-right are exiled, the White House still seems to be not fully

functional. I think that is fair. The exception seems to be his

national security team, by and large adults, so there is likely to be a

check on a lot of this foreign adventure instinct, if it is there.

The real problem is that he keeps tweeting and talking. In this

Reuters interview, half of what he said was presidential, we want a

negotiated resolution, if at all possible. In something that is

startling for an American President, he says, we may be headed towards a

major, major conflict. That is fine if you are an op-ed writer, but if

you are dealing with one of the only world leaders that is more unstable

than you are... He makes bizarre comments about mixing national

security issues with... I don't know, eating delicious, beautiful

chocolate cake. It is disconcerting. What I find most disconcerting about

the Trump administration, and I think from a democratic point of

view, Ethekwini to reflect on it, the growing blurring of the lines

between his function and role as President, and his promotional

business interests. To a certain extent, only 100 days have passed,

and it has become more or less accepted. It shouldn't be accepted.

There will be him and his family, using the puppet of the American

presidency to promote the Trump brand. For example, if anchor -- his

daughter on stage? There is this talk about her trademark, getting

registered in China. Coincidentally, they were having dinner together

with the Chinese President. What is happening there? What we are facing,

the recent polls in the US show this, he has the highest disapproval

rating since Eisenhower, at this stage, Obama was 56%, which was to

be accepted. At the core of people that elected him still love him and

forgive his sins. You have these two Americas. Only 2% of people that

voted for them say they would have done differently? You rightly point

out who will be here for four years, in theory. One of the interesting

aspects of the American political system is the separation of powers.

You have senators elected once every six years. The house of

representatives, 400 people in the lower house of Congress, they have

to face the electorate in 18 months' time. So, even though the first 100

days is an artificial benchmark, 200 days is really serious. That is the

time at which individual Republican party congressmen have to decide, is

this guy worth my political capital? Then we see, can he get anything

done? Again, that comes back to the base. With all the tax cuts he is

announcing, he will have the support of Wall Street and the tech

industry. I think he is going to have a much smoother ride than you

are anticipating. I think he will live and die by whether he can

create jobs. It is as simple as that. Success or failure will be

about job creation, employment creation. That said, if I am not

mistaken, I think more than 500 executive positions in the

administration require Senate approval. He has got to only 60 at

the moment. At this time, 100 days, Obama had succeeded in appointing

190. He is rather behind the curve in terms of appointments. How he's

go to handle this, I don't know. I suspect his Russia connection is

still a time bomb which is ticking. One doesn't know what will happen

there. App thank you very much. Great to see you all. Thank you very

much indeed. That is all for this week. Join us

next week if you possibly can. Thanks for watching. Goodbye.

It has been a pretty decent looking day so far across most parts of the

country. We have had a few showers around. For many of us, scenes like

this one, taken by a weather watcher in Newquay. Some patchy