10/03/2018 Dateline London

Hello.

Welcome.

This is Dateline London,

the programme which brings together

international correspondents based

here with British columnists

who write about the world beyond.

It's been a week in which the old

Cold War powers appear to be

flexing their muscles, and Europeans

fear what it may mean for them.

Donald Trump - trade

warrior and peace maker?

Was someone in Russia responsible

for the poisoning on an English

street of a double-agent?

And, after Italians deliver

the political mainstream another

drubbing, are Europe's leaders

capable of fighting back?

With me: Yasmin Alibhai Brown,

who came to the UK as a refugee

from a hostile country and is now

a political commentator.

Agnes Poirier of the

French news magazine

Marianne.

Stephanie Baker, US

journalist writing from here

for Bloomberg Markets.

Ian Birrell, columnist

with the British newspaper

The Mail on Sunday.

A warm welcome to you all, good to

have you with us again.

The news that Donald Trump

is to meet Kim Jong-Un,

the North Korean leader,

to discuss reducing the nuclear

threat surprised many.

Only hours earlier he'd been

posing as a warrior,

at least in trade terms -

signing into law tariffs aimed

at repelling imports

of steel and aluminium.

"Trade wars are good and easy

to win", President Trump tweeted.

Six months ago, the President warned

he could unleash "fire, fury and,

frankly, power" against Pyongyang.

Perhaps the summit with Kim suggest

that's a war Mr Trump

doesn't think he can win.

Ian, is it evident that his

combination of mockery and threats

has delivered?

No, I think obviously

the positive and optimistic hope of

this is that two mavericks might

make a deal. But I think it's highly

unlikely. I think the truth is,

Trump has a habit of being boastful

and bragging and and and e-fit very

different things are happening. Here

he has gone out on a limb, we are

seeing him grow back a bit in

America, he has gone out on a limb

and promised this, giving away with

one of his cards, just like with

recognition of Jerusalem. The truth

is, they are talking about very

different things. Trump wants to see

nuclear weapon is removed from

Pyongyang. Qian Yan will not do

that, it is a vile state run by a

very small elite and they depend on

the nuclear weapons for safety.

You

have been to both North and South

Korea?

I spent a long time with

dissidents, somebody in the special

forces with North Korea, he said

that during the sunshine policy,

which won a Nobel Prize, they were

ramping up ideas of how to attack

cities in the south, how to use

nerve agents, building up stockpiles

of nuclear and biological weapons.

They are talking about very

different things. North Korea are

talking about things such as

demilitarisation, denuclearisation

of the Korean peninsular and a

removal of the threat. What they are

releasing, they don't want America

and American weapons on the

peninsula. It is a very different

thing. People always talk, they want

to hear talks, they want to see

people getting around the table

together. But nobody comes up with,

where is the deal? There is no deal,

because Pyongyang will not remove

its weaponry and can't be trusted.

And the world can't give anything to

help.

Is Kim Jong-un playing Donald

Trump?

I think that is the fear.

Sceptics have said that he could be

walking into a clap. And Trump,

because he is very confident, thinks

that this is a sales job and he can

market his way out of it. It is

consistent with the reality TV show

formats of the presidency. That, you

know, he loves to surprise, he loves

the unconventional, he loves to be

first to do something. In this case,

the first time a sitting US

president meets with a North Korean

leader. There has been speculation

in the US that this was an attempt

to distract from a more damaging

story, this alleged hush money paid

to this pornography star, headlines

about Stormy Daniels were dominating

and this is a way to push those

down.

This is an actress who claims

that she had a relationship with

Trump, but he has denied a.

His

lawyer paid her off before the US

election. Some people are saying, if

he can't do an airtight deal with a

pornography star, how is he going to

do a deal with North Korea?! The

White House has suffered

unprecedented departures in

turnover, the State Department is

not operating at full capacity, we

don't have an ambassador to South

Korea or an Assistant Secretary of

State for Asia. The person on point

for North Korea stepped down in

frustration. Rex Tillerson was

blindsided by this and not

consulted. If you are going to do a

deal with North Korea, you do need

to prepare. Of course, diplomacy is

better than the sort of schoolyard

taunts on Twitter, but this is a

high risk gamble that may not pay

off.

What about Ian's point about

mavericks, mavericks can we the

rules" we have got these two

gorillas, really,

who are really

shaping up for a fight or a victory.

But I disagree with what he and has

just said. We were thinking of how

we might disagree exact but I do

disagree, over 60 years, the Korean

Bird's Hill has been in this

situation. What was really moving

was to see how the people on both

sides came together. They wanted to

come together over the Winter

Olympic Games. And I think one has

to think of a way to demilitarise

the entire zone. The US has no

business being there anyway. And

Japan now has two rethink its own

policies on defence. But I certainly

think that this doesn't come out of

anything sensible like that, it

comes out of these two men, who are

arguably the least rational and most

macho men upon the planet.

Two meant

Yasmine is not going to invite

around 40!

I think, you know, you

save a North Korean leader is

rational, I have the feeling he is

pretty rational, he's ruthless --

Jasmine is not going to invite them

around 40. I don't think Rocket

Man... I don't think he is

ridiculous at all. The idea actually

comes from him. I like his father

and grandfather, he's going to be

treated as an equal. You know, his

strange family has been ruling. And

years. And the Korean -- for 70

years. The war hasn't officially

ended. I agree with you when you

save or is room for massive

misunderstanding. I think the

sanctions are beginning to bite and

this is the reason why came once you

have some time. -- Y Kim Jong-un

wants to have some time. It happened

by former Jimmy Carter and Madeleine

Albright, it's been going on for

decades. Each time North Korea says,

OK, we're not going to suspend...

But I'm saying it's nothing to do

with him or Trump in that sense,

they are playing games with each

other. They want to be whatever they

think they can be. You are right

about the first, you know, I'm on

telly, and always the start of my

own drama, what goes on. Ian has

done programmes on it, and other

journalists do, what goes on in

North Korea is just so shocking, and

we don't know half of it, really.

I'm not defending the country, but I

do think the people of these two

careers need a break. But we don't

talk about

China and Japan. China

doesn't want to see the US have more

say than China. But China has been

retreating. Usually it was the

choice, you know, the first choice

for North Korea. So this is really,

you know, the Asian countries, how

they going to react? They have got

something to play that.

Also, we

must not fall for the PR of North

Korea. The reality is, it is such a

tightly restricted country, you have

to be part of the elite even to live

in Pyongyang, you need paperwork to

go anywhere in the country. The only

people to come out are members of

the elite. The elite are doing very

well there. The rest of society is

being crossed. At the core of it, it

is the world's worst regime. It is

not just hype and propaganda. This

is a country which runs death camps

and have been accused by the UN of

breaking also also rules.

But the

people on both sides are desperate.

Divided countries help nobody in the

end. Long-term, 100 years from now,

one wishes to see a united Korea.

I'm going to be ruthless now and

we're going to move on.

A week ago, perhaps

as you were watching this programme,

a man and his daughter collapsed

onto a bench in an English cathedral

city.

Sergei Skripal was a Russian

former double agent,

jailed by Moscow and then

freed in a spy swap.

He's lived quietly

in the UK ever since.

The use of nerve agent prompted

suspicion of state-sponsored

poisoning, not exactly discouraged

by the presenter on state television

who warned Russian traitors -

"don't go to England, something

is not right there".

Yasmin, what's wrong?

Well, I think

it is... This is not a surprise. We

don't know. I keep hearing, we don't

have the full facts. I don't even

know if we ever will have the kind

of evidence that people need to

prove whether it came from, who did

what. We still don't know what

happened to Litvinenko, we don't

know what properly happened that.

This man was killed in 2006 because

of polonium, nobody can actually say

for certain who killed him.

The son

of the man who's just been killed by

in mysterious circumstances last

year in Saint Petersburg. We don't

know. But what we do know is that

Putin asked for the law to be

changed at one point so that

traitors who had fled abroad could

be cut down. So, I see connections

between those kind of ambitions and

what we see. And why did they move

to Salisbury? This really is a

question!

LAUGHTER

It is near Porton Down, the research

establishment for chemical and

biological weapons.

Britain is

really a magnet for all spy stories.

There is something in the British

psyche that attracts that, but

that's another programme. What is

striking is that you could have

thought that this man was safe. You

know, he was a double agent, he

admitted to his crime, he had been

sentenced and officially pardoned

and been the object of a swap, so

everything is fine. So now they are

digging up his wife's two -- grave

and his son.

People are wearing

hazmat suit in case there is any

contamination.

Whoever did it, I

think the connections are pretty

right, I mean, it's extremely

frightening. You know, they say we

can out strike whenever we want and

whoever we want, and there's nothing

much you can do. I have the feeling

that if in 2006, almost 12 years

ago, if the British Government had

reacted more forcefully, perhaps

they wouldn't have considered it

twice before doing what they did in

Salisbury. But it's going to take

another ten years, you know, we're

starting the major and long-lasting

inquiry. We will know more in ten

years' time.

But we can just shut

down their bank accounts.

This is

the point. London, the UK, has more

power than many Western countries

because of the amount of Russian

money that flows through London. And

so if they want to make the Russians

pay, they've got the ability to.

And

the local MP who is a government

minister and also happens to be in

the British Treasury, the British

finance ministry, but something on

social media to say, there are

financial measures, this is one of

the weapons that could be used.

They

haven't implemented the legislation

to make the Litvinenko law take

effect.

To seize assets even before

proof?

This would allow them to

blacklist Russian individuals with

ties to human rights abuses or

Russian government officials that

they have traced to nefarious

activities. So they could push ahead

with that, and they really need to.

And if they do, you know, narrow

down the cause of this and who was

responsible, there should be much

stronger response, I agree with

that. The response to Litvinenko was

not strong enough. They should

consider a boycott of the World Cup,

which is an incredibly important...

It is due to open this summer in

Russia.

It is an incredibly

important event for Putin, is a his

moment on the international stage.

That is a way to make him pay.

One

of the Government Security ministers

were saying on Saturday morning,

someone has come onto our soil who

has recklessly and brazenly

committed -- in nasty crime using a

nerve agent, you have to act in

those circumstances?

There are three

certainties. President Putin wiggles

away and finds cracks in Western

societies and is pushing his

right-wing malevolent creed, in

Syria he is warming and killing

thousands of people. He did the

first annexation on European soil

and shot down a civilian airliner,

he kills lots of his enemies. The

second certainty is that Britain

will continue to talk tough and do

nothing. We did nothing over

Ukraine, really, few sanctions here

and there. The third thing is very

clear, Britain is the capital of

dirty money in the world. All of the

money is washed here by British

lawyers, estate agents and bankers

and sanctioned by British

politicians. If Britain wants to

take tough action instead of

registering state-controlled Mafia

is basically companies that are

operating here instead of allowing

all of this money to washed through

here, Britain will do nothing and

carry on taking the money. And it is

to our shame.

All we are about is

money now.

Italy's national election may not

have delivered a government yet,

but there was a clear

winner - populism.

Between them, 69% of voters

supported parties that have

challenged the political mainstream.

It isn't just Italy.

From Germany to Greece,

from the Netherlands to Hungary,

a consensus that held

since the collapse of

the Eastern Bloc 30 years

appears to be breaking up.

Angela Merkel, now that Germany

has a government again,

albeit one from a shrunken political

centre, says she'll roll

up her sleeves to begin reform

of the European Union.

France's Emmanuel Macron, a rare

mainstream winner of the last year,

even suggested post-Brexit Britain

would soon be hammering on the EU's

door, pleading to be let back in.

Is that a case of hubris?

Can I

unpick that narrative of doom and

gloom and populism in golfing Europe

that you find mainly in the British

media. I'm not saying it doesn't

exist, but if you go back since

Brexit, since Britain shot itself in

the foot, there's this element of

schadenfreude. They want, you know,

some part of the British media, the

conservative part, they want

everybody else act as unreasonably.

There was not a day passed without

an article before the French

presidential election saying Marine

Le Pen is going to win. We want her

to win, probably. No, she didn't,

and she was never going to be

elected. Then Angela Merkel can't

form that coalition in September.

Then you have all of these articles,

oh, Germany is unstable, Germany is

unfinished, Merkel is going to go.

Of course she wasn't going to go. It

was going to be difficult, she did

it as expected. As for the Italian

elections. I mean, I wouldn't say it

is 70% that voted for popular --

populism.

If they voted for 5-star

and the Northern league coalition.

They were pro-European and very and

-- until very recently. Look at the

electoral system in Italy, it's been

like this since the Second World

War. I'm not surprised at all by

what's happening there, and it's not

going to make much difference.

Forget about Matteo Renzi, once

elected with 40% only a few back.

Things change in Italy, and that's

not going to change. Merkel is

there, Macron was elected

not going to change. Merkel is

there, Macron was elected, yes,

Macron is very pro-European and 40

and like most young Europeans and

British young people, they offer

more integration. And it's going to

happen. It doesn't mean that, you

know, the complacency and lack of

democracy in the European

institutions shouldn't be addressed.

And I think there's a recognition of

that. And Brexit was a shock.

I

think there's a real question mark

over this, you know, Franco German

plan for closer integration now as a

result of this election. You know,

more than 50% of Italian voters

voted for anti-EU parties. You know,

Italy is now dominated by

politicians who have promised deep

tax cuts, lavish spending

programmes, and who while anti-EU.

You know, look at for instance the

plan for a banking union in Europe.

Do you really think that German

banks are going to sign up to a

banking union to stop Italian banks

when Italy is dominated by

politicians that have decided to

just below budget spending open? You

know, I think that is...

You are

taking a longer view, talking about

50 years' time.

Right, in the

broader context you have seen the

collapse of the centre-left across

Europe, which is really down to the

fact that the social Democratic

parties have not defended the

welfare state as they had

previously, and they squeezed it as

a way of paying for, you know, the

outcome of the 2008 financial

crisis. And this is the price.

They've allowed these Populist

parties to come up with a similar

type of, you know, platform off, you

know, we're going to give you, we're

going to give you a social spending

programmes that, you know, harks

back to a decade ago, even though we

can't afford it. I mean, look at

Italy now. It's got the second

highest debt to GDP ratio in the

Eurozone. 130% to GDP. So the idea

that they can put shared with those

spending programmes is very

unrealistic.

They have to have

another election, it's not clear.

I'm so pleased you said what you

did, I really needed somebody to say

that, because I'm sick and tired

of... I mean, Ukip, including this

institution. Big up Ukip in the most

shameful way. Whereas you could

debate?

But if you are talking about

those continental results and --

where is Ukip today. We saw the

collapse of the Greek left. A lot of

people thought that was down to

corruption and denying true

statistics. Dutch Labour has fallen

too, less than 6%, used to be the

main party of the left. The French

Socialists, 7.5%.

And the extreme

right as well.

The German SDP, worst

result in some two years, something

is going on, isn't it?

The Brexit

thing has kicked up a dust storm and

there is a crisis. But in the end,

good sense will prevail. I think the

European Commission and European

parliaments need more power. I think

to have a kind of, you know, a

parliament which doesn't have any

power, that has been part of the

problem. Reform is absolutely

needed. I think the European project

is much bigger than these individual

kind of rather spoiled people

reactions. The narrative we needed

to change, when this crash happened,

we needed people to say, it's these

bankers, these capitalists, the

worst kind of capitalists, who

brought us here. Instead the

populist people bring -- lane three

immigrants and the EU, we didn't

capture the narrative. I'm really

pleased you've captured that

narrative.

I think you are both been

very complacent. I agree on the

narrative, I think all the wrong

people were blamed and I don't

disagree on that at all. But let's

look at Europe and Eastern Europe as

well, look at Poland, Hungary,

Italy, Spain. You say that France

was fine because the far right

didn't win, but the far right where

the second choice in the election.

But Marine Le Pen is on the way out.

Ukip has disappeared, but of course

it has, it has achieved its aims and

the Tory Party has switched hard to

the right. The idea is that populism

has disappeared, we are living in

interesting times. I know it is

breaking the rule, but none of us

really have a clue where it's going.

It could be going in any direction.

The idea that we can just...

Week

and be fatalistic.

I'm not

fatalistic. I'd just fighting for

what I believe in, tolerance and

borders which are fluid. The idea

that populism isn't a threat is...

The truth is that we are in very

turbulent times which could go

anywhere, there is such distrust of

institutions, politicians, banks,

the church, everything. So many

illusions have been shattered.

That's why this is both an

interesting and a scary time.

We

need to fight back. We can't just

say...

We can't be complacent.

We

are saying, fight! This rolling over

before popular resin with the

history of Europe. Can't afford that

-- rolling over before populism with

the history of Europe.

Why the

institution is not able to grasp

that, and what is that, however you

want to describe it, that broad set

of politicians from the Christian

Democrats to the social Democrats in

so many continental European

countries have appeared to be

superfine, weak, or unable to keep

--, but answers in the way that

Stephanie was talking about?

I don't

think they have been supine or

complacent. I think, you know, when

you go around the world can actually

when you go around the world, people

say to you, I've just been in

Africa, in India, they say, isn't it

extraordinary what has been achieved

by the EU? Here, thousands of years

of war. It's been kind of put to

bed, actually. And, tough though it

is, how nationalism and pan

nationalism play out, this is

admired. In Africa they admired. We

are a bit spoiled. Because we don't

get the kind of that we see.

I've

been to 60 countries in the last

five years and I've never once heard

anyone say, I wish we had the EU!

They may like a lot of things about

Europe... And we are so sceptical of

democracy at a time when people are

fighting and dying for it around the

world, and Trump is actually also

being so cavalier with it and

backing autocrats and everything,

that is part of the problem. We

don't realise how precious democracy

is.

It is a generational point. You

are optimistic about younger people

being pro-European and wanting more

integration. There is a lot of

evidence from the very respected

attitude studies that they do every

year, the pew studies, last autumn.

It said 29% of the people that they

survey approved of a government in

which a strong leader can make

decisions without interference from

Parliament or courts. People are not

that bothered about democracy,

that's quite worrying, we have

become too complacent.

There is a

dissatisfaction within young people.

On the other hand, they didn't

bother to go and vote for Brexit.

And then they bothered to vote in

favour of Jeremy Corbyn just a sort

of Camilo, do something.

They did

vote. A lot more voted than they

were given credit by. Like I will

give you another statistic

from the

foundation. The least happy places

in the world and Europe and North

America. Where is the happiest

country in the world? Nigeria.

It

shows that the idealism that has

existed in lots of likely places,

there is optimism in lots of part is

in the world. But in Europe and

North America we are struggling to

see it when we have things that

others are fighting.

Thank

others are fighting.

Thank you

others are fighting.

Thank you all

others are fighting.

Thank you all very

others are fighting.

Thank you all very much.

others are fighting.

That's it for Dateline

London for this week.

We're back at the same

time a week from now.

You can tweet us with your comments

on the programme - @bbcshaunley.

Goodbye.