24/06/2017 Dateline London

Hello and welcome to Dateline London at the end of a week in which one

leader held on against the odds whilst another found

The unlucky one was Saudi Arabia's Crown Prince,

replaced by a relative half his age, an encouraging sign

Britain's Prime Minister Theresa May, though,

made it to the Brussels summit of European leaders,

defying predictions she would quickly be deposed

It was the week where her government began negotiating Brexit.

Those leading the talks exchanged gifts - a book on mountaineering

Just how much of an uphill struggle will it be?

With me are Steve Richards, UK political commentator and author

Mina al-Oraibi, an Iraqi-British journalist, who's about to become

Agnes Poirier, UK editor with the French magazine Marianne,

and American writer and broadcaster Jeff McAllister.

A warm welcome to you all. Agnes, what did you make of how these

Brexit talks began? Being an Anglophile and a fan of Britain, I

am saddened by it because Theresa may was allowed to talk after coffee

on Thursday's evening dinner and that she was asked to leave the room

so that the 27 other European leaders could actually continue

their conversations because as Angola macro, Macron said, EU summit

is not therefore Brexit talks. First we need to agree on diverse storms

and then Brexit talks can start. She came with what she said a fair and

serious offer an EU citizens living in Britain and it was unfair and

compared to the EU offer. The guaranteed lifetime rights of UK

citizens in living in the EU. Britain as for replication but it

falls short. Be strong and stable government, she is weak and

unstable. It is nothing serious. It does not going very well for the

rest. Steve, was it as bad as all that? Yeah. It is very interesting

when Theresa may triggered our Google -- Article 50 was betrayed as

an act of steely leadership comparable to Margaret Thatcher at

her peak. When in reality what she was doing was triggering a sequence

where she was passing control of the Manor of Brexit to the rest of

European union. That is the dynamic as outlined in Lisbon Treaty of

which Article 50 years apart. She can come to summits and it is not

weakened position here in the UK, and it is very weak, that has

brought this about. It is the dynamic of Brexit as defined by

Article 50. Even if she had arrived with a mandate bolstered... If she

had had a majority by 200, this would have happened. One of the

things they said is we have devolved this. This is negotiation that the

commission will handle. You can Google. Other search engines are

available. An lots of levels she has not got the leave about because,

because of the way this dynamic will now be played out. I agree with you

in terms of the mechanics but I do think that at least inside the UK,

the way Theresa May is viewed today is so different from where Greene

before the election, everything is being interpreted and read by people

because of her weakness at the time you have seen Angela Merkel and back

COMMENTATOR: -- Emmanuel Macron seeing stronger. We see Britain as

weaker on multiple levels. I think that is played in peoples minds is

not the reality having negotiation with happened. What did you think of

the guests? A walking stick for David geysers, made in the part of

France. In return, Mr Davies gave him a book about an expedition to

the Himalayas. Perhaps the walking stick can be used in a more forceful

fashion its negotiations get to uncharted territory to use. It is a

fascinating because she did look like she was bestriding the world

like a colossus before everyone predicted the victory and all the

steam has gone out. Not just the steam for her personally but this

whole project of what is Brexit. The polls are now showing that people do

not want a hard Brexit, they wanted economics first Brexit. What is

that? How do they get it? What you have to give up to get a soft

Brexit? All of a sudden the benefits of staying in the EU under the

current deal start to seem pretty good by comparison to what is a huge

strain of attention if you look at the Queen's speech, the bill that

people are going to be paying attention to be strange, technical

getting out of the EU, all these civil servants are being diverted to

Brexit things. The has productivity Robins, economic problems, the tower

fire shows that has growing inequality, all of the red Tory

claims and promises that she made when she first began... Appealing to

working people? Capitalism can be made to work you, this thing she

said when she first became Prime Minister all went out the window and

that is why Jeremy Corbyn did so well. The Tories seem stuck in the

courts of Brexit, there is no animating or captivating principle

for her orally for the rest of them, as far as I can see. It is very bad

time for which is politics. How long can she carry on like this?

It depends on her own capacity to cope. In my view, I've Risley did a

series for the BBC on all the modern Prime Minister 's basically in our

lifetime, British Prime Ministers, some talks to camera, comparing her

with any of them I think she's is the weakest position of any Prime

Minister in our lifetimes. The reason I say that is partly

practical, number ten, which has to counter all these big government

departments is wholly under resourced. It is a small machine.

Exactly, the best of times it has to be my school -- muscle to compete

with the Treasury. The Cabinet feels as if they can do what they want,

that they do not have to get her permission because she cannot get

rid of them again. She cannot sack these people. So they are stronger.

So all that is true and that did not apply to Gordon Brown at his most

traumatised, etc. There is that side of it. How long can she carry on?

The Tory party do not want a general election. Could you not change

leader without that? You could. You need her to voluntarily go at the

current situation. No one is doing to wield the dagger like Michael

Heseltine in the Shakespearean drama we are living through. She will have

to decide. None of us know, including her, whether she is ready

for the mountainous ascent with all the wider sense of political

impotence. It will be very, very tough on any human being and I think

that, in the short term, is the issue. In the medium term, I don't

think she will be around for the whole of this Parliament. In the

short term it is whether she can handle both and all the other

unexpected nightmares that will erupt.

What about the contrast with Emmanuel Macron who we saw at his

first EU summit as president as well and the man everyone wanted to be

seen shaking hands with or hugging or sharing a joke with, even Arnold

Schwarzenegger showed up in Paris at the end of the week to offer the

terminator's endorsement. And yet already Emmanuel Macron is having to

re-shuffle his government because of potential scandal and he has these

big domestic political challenges. It could all collapse very quickly

for him. We will know pretty quickly if he is

astute and shrewd. The four ministers who left his cabinet, it

is good for him because they did not belong to his party. He does not

need them any more. He has got majority in parliament and he is

walking on water and so far, so good. You know how we call him in

France? Jupiter. Yes, it is something that is not well known.

Explain. It comes from his entourage. They call him Jupiter?

That is how he views himself. After spending two years in president land

that -- president Hollande government. He is going to pass a

law, the majority for it, I do not see how it is not going to happen,

that law will enable him to exceed do executive orders on what the most

present issues. He is going to make changes to the

executive powers. The French president is the most powerful in

terms of institutional powers given to him in the Western world. Yes,

Jupiter is not quite a Democrat. We will see. To go back on Theresa May,

Emmanuel Macron, they have momentum, impotence. Does it change the

negotiations? They are applying the rules we have applied before. Angela

Merkel and Emmanuel Macron, they do not want the block to allow

themselves to be divided on Brexit. And they are not going to allow it.

Britain was hoping probably to lead by lateral negotiations, one-to-one,

and if this is not happening, is the block is concise and coherent then I

don't see... Britain is retreating which is so sad to see. It is

being... A tendency of Britain, 20 centred trees. I think it is sad.

The magic word was pronounced by Emmanuel Macron and a few people

doing that EU summit. Brexit can be reversed. But it was take such a

strong leader in Britain to muster the courage and the vision to

actually say, look, you know. We should not go. Article 50 was up to

make it impossible to get out gracefully. In a sense, Brexit may

be moving further away, it becomes an aspiration of goal but we never

quite get there, we are in two transitional arrangements. The

problem is the clock is running. The sure there will be transitional

arrangements. In theory, most of this House of Commons is still

committed to Brexit. And committed to delivering that referendum

outcome. There are a lot of remain in both parties. I think the Labour

leadership is committed to getting out. On the basis of the referendum.

But there will have to be transitional arrangements which will

mean the UK is still in whilst formally out. Now whether the Tory

Prime Minister, whoever that is, can deliver that two parts of their

Parliamentary party, is one of the many, many questions as to how ever

is this Prime Minister, a sense of this peak nightmare. Let us leave

that one hanging in the air. The 800-year-old leaning minaret

of Mosul leans no more. The mosque below it,

from where the group which calls itself Islamic State proclaimed

a caliphate three years ago, was destroyed as IS beat

a retreat from the city. The push-back against extremists

is taking place in Syria, too and there are signs of reform

in Saudi Arabia, a country often blamed for allowing jihadist

ideology to take hold. The elevation of Mohammed bin Salman

to Crown Prince, aged just 31, is being interpreted

as a signal of change. Mina, who is this man and why should

the world be taking notice of him? Saudi Arabia is important, we need

to take in notice of who is the future leader. He is someone that

people in the region know quite well for the last two years after he was

named deputy crown prince, Minister of defence, quite close to his

father. He is also someone who is young and someone who has brought a

diners to Saudi, part through the vision 2020. Some people like to say

it is just semantic. Absolutely. Not talking about the economy, you can't

just liberalise the economy and lease society behind which I think

is an issue around the world because of the new think let's get economic

's deletion thoroughly society. That impetus to try and change it. It

comes at a time when the region is going through so many events. You

started by referencing the tragedy of Mosul. Also the need to try to

make the politics of the region not about secretary and brutal

ideologies and try to think how do states function. At the heart of

what we are saying in -- seeing in the middle east... Sorry. On the

basis of this point about relations between states, what then do we make

of Saudi Arabia flexing its muscles so brutally towards Qatar? Recently

is an interesting time. I would say you are seeing clarity, not from

Saudi Arabia alone, Egypt and other countries are at least adding

anything we cannot have a small country in the region that is

supporting non-state actors that are supporting groups like everyone from

militias in Libya, cutting deals with militias sitting in a row,

saying there comes a point where we have two stop. Outside of the

region, many of them say the problem is... We have a country in the

region that has been supporting extremist elements but non-state

actors, whether you have the Taliban having a representative office as

though it is an embassy. These are signals that actually have

detrimental effects on lives and that is what we are seeing

translated in the region. Jeff, is this the consequence of

President Trump's recent visit to the region and has very strong

message of support to Saudi Arabia? The reporting is that the Saudis

felt empowered by the green light that they got from Trump who also

pushed very hard to say that he was going to be the pick of the United

States, the bat, he had him to his house for dinner. I find it

fascinating how the US was like we like Mohammed bin Nayef. Oh, this is

America's pic, Mohammed bin Salman. Trump said. I take credit, as he

does that so many things. There still is no evident American policy.

Despite all the faffing around, one way or the other. We have mixed

signals. The president tweets on the question of Qatar, or reference was

pointed to Qatar as funding extremism. Brats this will be the

beginning of the end of horror of terrorism. We are hearing from the

US defence Department from the Pentagon, we are very grateful that

Qatar is such a stout ally. We sold 12 billion dollars worth of fighter

jets just three days later. This is complicated, of course. The

fundamental thing is that Trump does not believe in policy. His mind does

not work that way. Remember the cruise muscles into Syria, he said

he was going to have make the people in Syria say. He likes to throw

something into the middle, get the attention, get the buzz and move on

without the complex process that other presidents have had. He has

not filled most of the subordinate positions in the State Department.

There is no one minding the store except for the guys at the very top.

They disagree with each other. There is no way of resolving their

disagreements. As long as he is presidents, I think that will be

true on almost all foreign policy. Are they seizing a moment where

there is a vacuum in terms of Washington's attention and

consistency that actually he might make a lot of noise but he is a weak

figure at the moment? I think there was a vacuum when Obama was

president to when it came to the region. The fact that he had Obama

referred to the leaders of places like Saudi Arabia, as Sunni leaders.

They think it is less about seizing the opportunity vacuum. There is a

moment when they have to stand up and sort what is going out in the

region. One of the issues is what is happening in Iraq and Syria and in

the US, you are right, you had festival we thought Trump was going

to take some action on Syria and then did not. Iran has launched a

missile into the heart of Syria. Leaders feel a week we have to take

action to control this situation. Steve, we're talking about the

imminent feel of Mosul. Is there a confidence now do you think in

Western capitals that first Mosul, finally as Linux beat might be

brought to its knees with Mike -- Islamic state. The degree to which

these territorial holes are fundamental to the potency of ices

or whether they just move on to some other place, there is that issue. To

go back to the American thing what I find so interesting is what in the

end is likely to produce a more stable mood in the Middle East where

there was no American policy or the policy priest to be

counter-productive. As you are saying about Obama, incoherent and

contradictory at different times. In a way, there has been this kind of

vacuum for a very long period of time and I am not quite sure whether

one territorial recapture has significance compared to that broad

context but what do you think? I think it has significance to the

poor people who have been subjected to the terror of them back to. I

think sometimes we get into these conversations, where we are talking

Brexit, if I was one of the 3 million citizens, EU citizens here I

would be worried about Brexit. The problem for Iraq and Syria is the

fact that not having inherent American Western policy. No one

thinks of Boris Johnson as the Foreign Minister. What happens if

you declare Isis defeated. You have troops all over the world now but

there is no plan for the governance and at least securing these

territories. If it is not Isis, some other motion group. If you had

groups to fight them, they are fighting forces, Timbuktu is

declared defeated. What are they going to do? They are not going to

go into jobs that are secured for the country. The danger of what we

saw, Agnes, in Libya when the French and the British kind of help to

bring down Gaddafi and then their attention was diverted elsewhere and

Eve had a lot of people with a lot of weapons with no jobs and not much

hope of a future and they end up fighting among themselves. The

territory and for power. It is true but France and Britain worked well

in responding to an EU mandate which did not exist with Iraq. I would

like to go back on that ultimatum with the Saudis, to Qatar and

basically Qatar, we are not naive about the dark because France and

Britain's economies are tied up with Qatar and we know that Qatar funds

terrorism and we can our streets in Europe. What were the Saudis

thinking when they asked Qatar to actually closed down, took at ties

with Turkey and Iran? I'm thinking what are they hoping. They have ten

days to comply so what is going to happen in ten times time -- ten

days' time. The last time in 2014, promises were made, the trip was

made and everybody said let's make friends but that doesn't seem to be

in the Saudi mood right now. It is not just Saudi. We have to

remember it is not a front. A country as weighty as Egypt standing

behind those shows that there is a problem in the region and you are

right in that 2014, there was this problem, and words were accepted.

The point of this is less of an automated answering these of the

problems that we have highlighted. There is transparency find a

solution. Action rather than words, gestures alone are no longer good

enough because of the consequence of what we've seen happening in the

region. What convinced do have that this can

be resolved in a peaceful manner? The UN is speaking about brokering

any agreement between them. It has to be peaceful in the long term

because the region is so small. There are four mil tyres and so

forth. I do not think anyone is thinking let's go have a military

solution to this. It has come to a four because it has to do. Too long

it has been a point of putting in signals and so forth. It has to be

resolved. How long it will take depends on how Qatar responds at

this point because I think for the GCC countries, the Egypt, they have

made it clear what they want. We have to see what the responses. It

cannot be about changing the subject of thing it is about freedom of

expression, it really is going to the heart of the matter.

Mina, Steve, Agnes and Jeff, thank you but being with us.

That's it for Dateline London for this week -

we're back next week at the same time.

You can comment on the programme on Twitter. From all others on the

programme, goodbye. -- from all of us.