30/12/2017 Dateline London

Hello, and welcome to

Dateline London, I'm Jane Hill.

We're taking time today to look

ahead to the world in 2018,

in Britain, the rest of Europe,

the US and around the world.

With me is the British

commentator and columnist

for the Sunday Telegraph,

Janet Daley,

the writer on Arab Affairs,

Abdel Bari Atwan,

from Germany's Die Welt,

Stephanie Bolzen,

and from the US,

Stryker McGuire from Bloomberg.

A warm welcome to you all. Thank you

for joining us.

We begin in Europe.

January is a time for talks -

phase two of the Brexit negotiations

will finally get underway

between the UK and EU,

while in Germany Angela Merkel has

to resume discussions about forming

a government, after her attempts

to do so failed in the wake

of September's election.

Janet, it took a very long time

to get through phase one

of the Brexit talks.

How optimistic are you going

into the next round?

Yes, optimistic ultimately, but it

is going to be messy and bloody. It

is all every stage of this will

follow the trajectory of the

preliminary stage, so it looks like

a my asthma off chaos and

recrimination, and tell five minutes

until midnight when suddenly it will

be resolved and that is because

economic reality has to take royalty

over political vanity. The extent of

the recriminations and poisonous

atmosphere is correlated to the need

to find a solution to the bitterness

that European capitals feel about

the UK leaving. But ultimately,

there will be a kind of good news,

which most of the media will regard

as a surprise, even though it was

inevitable and somehow or other it

will come right in terms of peasant

nation. What that will actually

mean, your guess is as good as mine

-- in terms of presentation. Because

of all the recrimination and chaos,

which will miraculously dissolve in

everybody congratulating everybody

else will actually strengthen the

position of Theresa May, so she

personally will be stronger this

year than last year.

And that is so

interesting, domestically.

I just

can't believe there will be -- there

won't be recrimination. But there

will be. This would hug will be

really small.

In the last period,

they were all calling each other

names, all costing each other out of

the garden, and then suddenly, Rob

Theresa May was praised. Absolutely,

it was all wonderful and happy.

Mutual regard, that will happen at

least half a dozen times in the next

year.

I think that the true

believers are never going to be

satisfied with what she gets.

That

is true. But they are a smaller and

smaller number.

She deserves the

praise, to be honest. Many people

predicted that she would not be up

to the job, so she managed to

handle... She would not even be

there. Yes, exactly. Many people had

a huge doubt about her capabilities

to actually negotiate these tough

issues, and to be fair to her, they

managed to at least first achieved

the border problem with Northern

Ireland. Also the British expats in

Europe, and European expat in

Britain. In a short time, it is a

huge achievement. The next phase

will be difficult, but judging by

the first phase, I am optimistic.

We

are very much here to look forward

to the year ahead. Here in this city

we are rightly or wrongly obsessed

with Brexit. Germany has its own

issues to confront, and we sometimes

forget that Germany is technically

does not have its formal government

yet.

Yes, there were elections in

September, then coalition talks with

two smaller parties, these broke

down and now on January seven there

will be the next round with the

social Democrats, which may mean we

will see a third round of coalition

between the two big parties.

What

does that mean? I am not the macro

try not to put Brexit in my next

sentence! But what will it mean for

the negotiations? Not much. Angela

Merkel is seen as the rock at the

heart of this.

Whatever the

government is in Germany, it will

not make a difference towards

Brexit. Some people say if it is a

coalition with the social Democrats

which would mean that Michael

Schultz will be Vice Chancellor,

whatever he might be, it might mean

a harder time for Britain because he

is a European, but it won't change

much. It is not only Germany

negotiating with Britain, do not

forget this. I attended the last

summit in Brussels and I had not

been there for a long time. When you

live in Britain, it is Brexit all

day and all night, but bear, hardly

anybody talks about Brexit, they

talk about their own organs. It is

massive in Europe -- their own

problems. Europe is pretty much in

2018 looking at itself, not so much

Britain.

Much of the rest of the

world looks at Angela Merkel as a

kind of rock, and they yearn for her

continuance. Not in Germany though.

I know! Is the rest of the world

wrong to have this much faith?

Tomorrow, it is the 30th time she

will hold the New Year speech. It is

a very solid institution at the end

of the year, to have an outlook

towards the next year, and it is her

13th time. The Germans are tired of

her. As you rightly say, she sees

herself as a rock. You have Donald

Trump, Brexit, wards, so she sees a

duty of serving the country as her

mandate.

You have mentioned the

Tramp, excellent. Let's turn to the

US where analysts are already

speculating about the possible

results of the mid-term elections

and could upset me on the cards for

Trump?

But that, of course,

isn't until November -

much could happen before then

in the unpredictable White House.

Stryker, rather than thinking

about elections, should

we perhaps be focusing

on Robert Mueller's

Russia investigation?

Well, we can think about Robert

Mueller, and clearly that is hugely

important. However, there is this

almost sort of incredibly narrow

view of the Trump administration in

terms of its troubled as being

Robert Mueller and Russia, and I

don't think that is a terminal

problem, frankly.

For Trump himself?

Yes. You think he will survive? I do

think he will survive, yes. I do,

however, think it is a distraction.

But I feel like it has been more of

a distraction in the past than it

will be in the future. In the

future, because of the elections

that will occur in November, and

also because he is hugely unpopular.

In percentage terms, he is

historically unpopular at this stage

in his presidency. Therefore, having

spent his first year being forced to

be pretty much a traditional

conservative Republican in his

policies, not in his actions, but in

his policies.

With the tax cuts?

Absolutely. You have not seen Trump

unchained, and that is trade war.

Trump unchained is even more a

change of social policy in the

United States. He has made huge

changes in the judiciary, which

hardly any of us talk about, but

hundreds and hundreds of judges

coming in who represent a very, very

different point of view to the one

that has prevailed in the last

decade or so. I think that because

he may see the next election as a

kind of deadline, he may see that

these ten, 11 months are super

important in terms of making things

happen that he wants to happen...

You say we have not seen him

unchained. That is a striking phase.

Is he going to be? He has been

surrounded by people, he has been

hemmed in by the people around him.

I think we put too much credence

into his tweets, too much weight

into his tweets. You have to look at

what he has actually done, and it

has not been very much. One reason

is because he is really blockaded by

a kind of establishment, but I'm not

sure that that establishment can

hold.

When we look at his foreign

policy, it is provocative and a

disaster, we don't know how he is

going to handle North Korea. He

promised to change the regime, or

bomb North Korea, to put an end to

these nuclear tests, it could not do

so completely. When it comes to the

middle East, in Syria he was

defeated. In Russia, they now have

the upper hand, so when we talk

about his latest move to move the

American embassy from Tel Aviv to

Jerusalem, it has created huge

problems in the Middle East. The

American image is very, very

damaged. Internally, maybe he

improves the economy and implement

rates, but outside as a superpower,

it is losing a lot.

I think that is

true, even though I am Jewish and a

supporter of Israel, I thought that

was a gratuitous gesture, the idea

of moving the amnesty to Jerusalem,

especially as it cannot happen for a

couple of years. I thought, what on

earth is the point of that? It is

just to do with the political

strategy over Iraq. Iran is the

chief sponsor of Hezbollah and

Hamas, and I think that he was

trying to show that Iran is not the

powerful player that it pretends to

be in the region, so if there was

any logic to that move, that is what

it was. But I actually think that

his foreign policy is so ultimately

isolationist and protectionist that

what he is doing is claiming to be

removing America from the world

stage. On the other hand, he makes

these very aggressive moves about

North Korea. The secretary of state

seems to be running a completely

separate foreign policy, though it

is difficult to tell what their

intentions are. Internally, has

accomplished very little. The tax

bill was the first legislative

success. But the Justice area is

very important and that could change

the social policy of the country.

But he is trying to con a run, --

Iran but he is helping it by these

moves. In heart sing the role of

Iran in the region -- enhancing.

But

Barack Obama paved the way for that.

That was the most appalling foreign

policy mistake in living memory, and

having inherited that situation, you

cannot blame the Trump White House

all that much.

We are talking so

much about foreign policy, and your

point about world reputation and so

on, but ultimately, people in other

countries are not voting for him.

No, his policies seem to be based,

because there is no coherence

really, but they seem to be based on

two things. His own instincts, the

way he has always operated. And

also, the base, this group of

people. It has led in Arabic into

Al-Qaeda. -- translates. It is all

about the base and what he promised

them will stop that is the Jerusalem

think he promised it during the

campaign.

It does have something to

do with the power play with Iran.

There was a kind of logic.

That is

interesting, it takes us on to

broadening our discussion. Even as

we go to air in the last few days,

there have been striking scenes in

Iran, with thousands of people

taking part in anti-government

protests.

Where could this lead?

And there are numerous

other pressure points

in the world in 2018 -

North Korea and its testing

of ballistic missiles,

and what of so-called Islamic State,

after it was driven out

of its Raqqa heartland.

Bari, are the protests in Iran

primarily about the economy,

where could they lead?

Actually it is more than the

economy. The economic situation is

very difficult in Iran, definitely

the prices are going up

dramatically, Iran under punishment

by the United States, by Europe, but

I believe also people would like to

have more important moves to improve

that standard of living in Iran

itself. You have opposition. The

protest happened again five years

ago, so we don't know yet whether

this will be a huge uprising, a huge

protest, whether they will succeed

to change that ruling elite in Iran.

We don't know yet. But now we have

two kind of protests. The opposition

of the government who are saying we

don't want to be involved in

Lebanon, we don't want to be

involved in Palestine, we don't want

to be involved in Syria, we want to

concentrate on Iran itself. But you

also have a counter protest, which

is supporting the government. This

is the problem. Now, are we going to

see clashes between the two sides,

and is it going to last longer than

many people anticipated is not until

now, there is no blank cheque. But

what happened in Syria, for example,

or Iraq or Egypt or Yemen, until

now, you know, there are about 50

people arrested, and this proved to

be Billy macrame that the Iranian

regime -- we have to wait and see.

But Iran will be the major player in

that coming year. They will be

there. Lennon pool-macro Lebanon,

they will be there. They are a key

player.

How do you think the balance

of power between Saudi Arabia and

Iran will shape up?

A few days ago

there was a report on Israeli

television saying that Trump and

Netanyahu struck a deal in order to

launch a huge and pain against ten

three macro to deprive it of nuclear

progress, and to deprive it of

ballistic missile. They are seeking

a deal in this field. It means the

coming year will be crucial. The

Saudis are in the American camp. The

Saudis sense that Iran is a

dangerous enemy. They look at things

from that angle. I believe look at

Iran in the coming year, it will be

a very major player. They managed to

wind in Syria they have a huge

influence in Iraq, and they are also

having a huge influence, a war by

proxy, in Yemen. So they are a major

player.

And the US administration's

role in that?

It's role at this

point seems to be very much on the

side of the Saudis, and tend to

macro's foreign policy seems to be

motivated, among other things, that

anything that Barack Obama did, he

will not do -- Donald Trump. He is

very anti-Iran. Steve always had

this thing for Iran.

They have been

the main sponsor for terrorism,

there is a justification for being

critical of the Iranian regime, and

particular of not wanting them to

get nuclear weapons.

But it is the

idea of a huge conflict between Iran

and Saudi. What you want to try to

do is to prevent that from

happening.

But what is the

alternative? To go to war against

Iran? It has a huge arsenal of

missiles, also it has military wings

like Hezbollah in Lebanon, so they

can actually create a lot of

problems. That is why the Europeans

are very reserved when it comes to

Iranians policy. There is a nuclear

deal, signed after a brutal and

lengthy negotiation. Now, Trump is

then he will not accept this. What

is the alternative?

There is

scepticism about this deal, about

whether it would prevent Iran from

getting nuclear capability. So there

is a legitimate and justifiable

school of thought that says the Iran

deal was a mistake, and that was

Donald Trump's premise.

But nuclear

organisations are monitoring

Iranians activities and they gave

Iran a clean sheet. They said they

abided with the treaty completely.

They did not break the agreement.

The Europeans supported that point

of view, so why Donald Trump is

actually trying to bang the drums of

war against Iran, this is the

problem.

It is also a problem for

Europe, it will be a problem for

them to say they will stick to this

deal because this is causing another

confrontation between Europe and the

US. Because Europe is so divided on

many things, it will once again

highlight their weakness.

I am

sorry, I must cut you off. As we

approach 2018, we did want to close

with a thought from all of you about

other matters that we have not

touched on. 2017 was striking for so

many things, but particularly for

the #MeToo campaign. Helpful to

women in so many ways, all the

accusations around Harvey Weinstein.

I am interested in your different

perspectives. Where does #MeToo go

in 2018? Does it continue to gather

steam, does it help women in some

countries more than others? It has

been such a seismic shift this year.

Whether or not it continues with the

sort of fervour that it has had, I

honestly don't know, it is hard to

say. But it is clearly such a

powerful force. This means a lot for

Trump. This could be, even if it

does not persist as a huge force for

the next several years, by the time

we reach the next election in the

United States, I think the American

woman voter quickly determine

Trump's pre-election, or not. For

him, it is such a powerful thing

that I think it will emerge again in

all kinds of different ways,

including at election time.

That is

really interesting. We all remember

what he said on that tape, and still

got elected.

Yes, what is important

about everything to do with the

sexual harassment scandal is

awareness. Women are more aware that

they should not accept things that

some men who are in of power might

do to them, and that is important.

But it does come in waves. This is

not the first time. We had this in

Germany five or six years ago. In

Brussels there were scandal. The

question is on the ground, how much

does it really change? I am not so

optimistic about it, especially

because of Trump. How was somebody

elected who is such a misogynist?

And now you say this could want him.

I am not sure this will happen.

Women in America have voted for him,

despite his attitudes towards women.

I don't get it. I will give you the

example of Tunisia. I was told by

the president of Tunisia, I was

elected by women. Without women

votes, I would not be president.

They are very strong and they

managed to counter radical Islamic

groups. They are a power of change.

I believe this is a good example. I

think any women power should also

look at the middle East, look at the

third World and try to help. Women

can be very perfect live as a tool

of change in these parts of our

world. I am optimistic.

I think they

will achieve more.

Janet, are you

optimistic? About what?! Gender

change? I would agree that it comes

in waves. In the history of gender

politics in the lifetime, it is

difficult to translate it into

politics. Women do not vote as

women, they vote as wives, partners,

mothers, you know, grandmothers.

They vote for their families. If

they are working class women, they

are more concerned to the hitting

food on the table than breaking the

glass ceiling. There is class

distinction between highly educated

women and less privileged women. I

don't think this will translate into

election will -- electoral

consequences, though it may have

very different social consequences.

Happy New Year to all of you, and to

everybody watching.

That's it for Dateline

London for now.

Do join us again in 2018. Goodbye.