22/08/2011 Newsnight


In-depth investigation and analysis of the stories behind the day's headlines with Jeremy Paxman.

Similar Content

Browse content similar to 22/08/2011. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



It's not yet all over in Lybia, but it looks as if it is almost over.


What now? They celebrate the downfall of the


dictator, but how to ensure that what follows is better, or even


coherent, is this the end of a revolution or the start of new


conflicts? Power now resides in Benghazi, but


is the so-called National Transitional Council to be trusted?


Their man in London is here, as is the International Development


Secretary. Remember this: Never fall again for


the doctrine of isolationism, because the world truly cannot


afford it. Is Libya akin to Kosovo, the sort of military action he


tried to sell to the world. If so, can we expect more western


interventions, or are they limited merely to tyrannies that look


vulnerable. It is a wipout in the Test Match,


as India demolish India again, is an entire pool of home-grown talent


being ignored. There is only one Asian guy in there at the moment.


You are telling me there is no other Asian player in the whole of


the system? Colonel Gaddafi was always a man


whose political claims were as plausible as his dyed hair and


pantomime military uniforms. But his promise to fight on tonight is


especially empty. His regime has collapsed with surprising speed,


and the rebels now control most of the Libyan capital and it is


reported tonight the International Airport. President Obama has said


Gaddafi's only option is to quit the stage.


We piece together the battle for Tripoli.


It is not the end quite yet, but today surely marked the tipping


point. In Tripoli jubilant crowds sing the


new National Anthem. In fact, the old National Anthem from the days


of the king, overthrown by Gaddafi in 1969.


Just a few days ago it seemed the Libyan civil war was in stalemate,


but suddenly everything has changed. Today, the crowds could dare to


smash Gaddafi's picture. As rebels streamed into Tripoli,


claiming to control most, but certainly not all of the city,


after their rapid advance. So he played his last card f you


can saying, his last game. So all the army of Gaddafi now they fight


without any orders, without anything.


But Gaddafi's troops have not all surrendered. Today a BBC team


filmed this take on a rebel convoy, travelling along the coast towards


the centre of Tripoli. And tonight a doctor in the city


told Newsnight he expected more resistance. We have to expect some


resistance. Otherwise we are not imagining well, so the resistance


is expected. But not so effective. Though the rebels are still


threatened by some pro-Gaddafi force, the most decisive battle has


already been fought. The rebels stormed into the city


last night, firing their weapons in celebration. But how do they


finally manage to take Tripoli? It seems there were two key factor,


the assault seems to have been well co-ordinated by different rebel


groups w NATO bombing strikes also playing a crucial role.


At the weekend, rebels pushing in from the Tunisian border, finally


took Zawiya, a major turning point. With anti-Gaddafi forces gaining


control of supply roads in the south, and Misrata in the east


secured, it left the Libyan leader surrounded and under siege. When


the rebels reached the headquarters of the Khamis Brigade, and found it


abandoned, the full scale assault on Tripoli was on. Inside Tripoli


itself, areas sympathetic to the rebels were quick to respond.


Fashloum and Tajoura fell as local people took to the streets, as did


the symbolically important Green Square. It isn't over yet, parts of


Tripoli, including the port, and Bab Al-Aziziya, Gaddafi's compound,


still appear to be under the control of Gaddafi's forces.


The second factor was NATO. There has been a blitz of NATO air


attacks on targets in and around Tripoli in the past few day, and


continuing today. The highest number in one location since the


bombing campaign began. They could not have succeeded


without NATO's assistance, that has to be recognised. They simply would


not have taken Zawiya as quickly as they did. They would not have


advanced on Tripoli, if NATO air strikes hadn't softened up regime


armour so effectively. People on the ground in Libya recognise this.


The challenge for NATO now is to get back behind the scenes,


unobtrusively, and extend discreet assistance, without twisting arms


or making a public show of it. What is still not known, of course,


is the where abouts of Gaddafi himself. Who faces an arrest


warrant from the International Criminal Court, for alleged crimes


against humanity. The rebel National Transitional Council say


they hope he is captured alive. TRANSLATION: We hope that he is


captured alive. So that he will be given a fair trial. Tonight his


future looks bleak. Two of his sons are said to have been captured and


now to be in rebel hands. A third, Mohammed, escaped, he was on the


phone to a TV station. TRANSLATION: I'm being attacked


right now, this is gunfire inside my house. They are inside my house.


As for his own whereabouts, if Gaddafi is still in Libya, as seems


likely, it is possible he has fled his residence and fortified


compound in Tripoli, and his possible hideouts include his birth


place, Sirte in the east, and still under his forces' control. He could


be out in his beloved desert, perhaps around Sabha, with Libyan


tribes, still loyal. After nearly 42 years Gaddafi's era is surely


over. With us is the International


Development Secretary, Andrew Mitchell, you must be delighted our


side won? I think so far so good. But there's an awful lot of


uncertainty and doubt still around. Of course, presumably the danger in


your mind is this will degenerate into something like the situation


in Iraq, after the apparent victory? We hope we have learned


the lessons of Iraq, in the work that Britain and other countries


have been doing on stablisation, for what comes when the fighting is


over. That process, of course, will belong to the National Transitional


Council, it will be led and owned by them. But there is a huge amount


of work that Britain and other countries have done into planning


for what goes next. We are not still maintaining the fiction that


this was a civil war, despite the fact that we had planes involved,


special forces on the ground, the French armed the rebels, we are not


maintaining that fiction any longer are we? We are absolutely clear


that the reason we joined the coalition, the reason we helped


lead the coalition and provided our planes and airmen and women was to


stop a bloody massacre taking place in Benghazi. If we hadn't


intervened, you don't need to look in the crystal ball, it is in the


book, Gaddafi said he would go from house-to-house in Benghazi. The


reason for the intervention was to stop that massacre taking place.


And we will stop a similar massacre in Syria, will we? Syria is a very


different position. First of all, the whole of the Arab world was


deeply opposed to what Gaddafi was doing. Syria is different. It is


not to do what you can do, because there are things you cannot do.


That is why, although our room for manoeuvre is constrained, in Libya


it is clear what was needed to be done and we did it. We should be


proud of the fact that Britain helped to lead that effort. You are


saying we do what the Arab world allows us to do in the Arab world?


I think it is the art of the possible. It was possible on Libya


to take this action, and I think most people are extremely pleased


we did so. The limits of our principles are what other


Governments in that part of the world, frequently themselves


tyrannies, decree as possible? of the problem with Syria is there


isn't agreement in the way there was on Libya. That is another


factor as well. Will we seek a UN resolution authorising the use of


force to protect civilians in Syria? I don't think that is


practical. What we can do to protect civilians what we are doing


through organisations like the ICRC, one of the few organisations who


can get into Syria and through whom we can try to bring some


humanitarian help to people in a very dark place. What is the


difference between Syria and Libya? It is the art of the possible, and


it is also the fact that there was widespread agreement on the action


we took on Lybia, which has been lacking consistently on Syria.


be clear of this, you are proud of what we did in Libya? I think it


was the right beings and a brave decision the Government and Prime


Minister took. There were many people who said you could not


impose a no-fly zone, you couldn't achieve what we achieved from the


air, and we have. We averted what would undoubtedly have been a


bloody massacre in Benghazi. As far as Colonel Gaddafi is concerned


what would you like the National Transitional Council to do with


him? He should surrender, he should tell his rapidly diminishing band


of supporters to lay down their arms. Then it is matter for the NTC,


the authorities in Libya, over whether he should go through a


justice system in Libya, or whether he should be sent to the Hague.


have no feelings on that as a Government? It is matter for the


Libyan people, power exercised through the National Transitional


Council. Surely we should be committed to him appearing before


the International Criminal Court at the moment? They are not a member


of the ICC at the moment, the commitment is to him undergoing


justice. In the way the ICC work, that can be done by a justice


system inside Libya, or failing that, the Hague. Were the National


Transitional Council, or whatever that evolves into, and we have no


idea, to decide he should face some form of summary justice, and be


hanged along with his familiarly we are quite content to let them do


that? We do know what the National Transitional Council plans, they


plan a new constitution, they plan a new approach with elections after


eight months. That is what the National Transitional Council will


announce when the fighting is over. The chairman is able to go to


Tripoli. The new constitution will determine the nature of the justice


system in Libya. That is why I say it is a matter for the National


Transitional Council to decide whether or not Gaddafi should face


justice in the Hague under the ICC, or whether it should be done


through Libyan justice. Once the NTC has taken power, will we be


requesting that Mr Al-Megrahi come back to serve the rest of his


sentence in a Scottish jail? There is a process for that. But nars for


the Scottish Government to decide. We have - it is a matter for the


Scottish Government to decide. We condemn the decision taken, we


think it was the wrong decision, the fact that Mr Al-Megrahi is


alive today rather underlines that point. Thank you very much. Just


briefly joining us from New York is John Bolton, the former US


Ambassador, we will talk to him at greater length in a minute or two.


I would be interested to ask you Mr Bolton, do you think when Mr


Gaddafi goes, Mr Al-Megrahi should be requested to be returned to a


Scottish jail? No, I think he should be sent to the United States


where we could try him. The terms under which the US agreed to Al-


Megrahi being tried in a Spanish court have been violated both by


the Government of Libya and by the Government of Great Britain. I


think that any commitment that we might have made that would release


him from the potential of American prosecution, for, afterall, killing


189 Americans, has been voided. My view would be he deserves to come


to this country to have a trial here. And you will be asking for


that, if you were in Government, would you? I certainly would,


absolutely. We are going to talk you a bit more in a moment or two.


First we will have another piece of tape. The overthrow of Gaddafi is a


long way from the end of the story. Power now seems to lie with


something called the National Transitional Council, but who are


they? How did they get the gig? Can they be trusted. We spent much of


recent weeks with the Libyan rebels. When the advance came it was


unexpectedly fast. After months of near stalemate, the road to Tripoli


suddenly opened up. The streets of the capital, so often until


recently the scene of demonstrations in support of


Colonel Gaddafi, were now filled with jubilant rebel fighters. The


battle for Tripoli isn't over yet, but the regime's grip on the


capital, which had held out, despite months of NATO air strikes,


this weekend appeared to slip away. Libya's rebel force, so often


derided as a rabble, looked much more organised. They didn't do it


alone. NATO was serving as the rebel Air Force. An auxiliary air


arm of the free Libyan forces. There is no doubt about the way


they interpreted their mission to protect civilians, was to


facilitate a rebel advance on Tripoli. That was obvious from the


high degree of assistance they furnished to the rebels as they


marched towards Tripoli. NATO's stated mandate throughout the


conflict has been to protect civilians and civilian


infrastructure. But if there was one thing that both the rebels and


Colonel Gaddafi could agree on, it was that Britain and others were


firmly supporting the National Transitional Council. The NTC, the


rebels' political leadership in Benghazi. Last month, along with


more than 30 other countries, the UK formally recognised the


unelected body as Libya's sole, legitimate governing authority.


Through its actions the National Transitional Council has shown its


commitment to a more open and democratic Lybia, something it is


working to achieve through an inclusive political process. This


is in stark contrast to Gaddafi, whose brutality against the Libyan


people has striped him of all legitimacy. Who exactly are these


rebels, that the National Transitional Council says it


represents? The revolution had its first flowering in Benghazi, which


became the political capital of the opposition. But the rebels'


military campaign never developed into a single unified push


westwards, instead, fighting broke out in pockets, the port city of


Misrata became a rebel-held stronghold, isolated and cut off


from the rest of the movement. Then fighting gained momentum on a third


front, in the Nafusa Mountains, ethnic divisions sim merd, there


was an uneasy eye lines. The NT. - uneasy alliance. The NTC has had to


work alongside, the Berbers, who have done much fighting, Islamists,


fighting in Afghanistan and Iraq, those who would classify themselves


as Jihadis, those who are secular, those who are tribunally orientated,


those - tribally orientated, and those interested in only a


democratic Libya. Once the Government falls it will be the


task of the rebel leaders to join the disparate groups, or at least


persuade them not to turn their guns on each other. That happened


in July when a senior rebel commander was shot and killed by


members of a rival rebel brigade. Today the chairman of the NTC


issued a warning to fighters to maintain discipline and security,


and to guard against the threat from what he called Islamist


extremists. With the prospect of victory in sight, the shadow of


Iraq hangs over Libya's future there are, of course, plenty of


differences between the two countries, but the initial euphoria


over the toppling of Saddam Hussein, did lead to a dissent into vicious


infighting, that is a powerful echo. In Iraq the Iraqis deposed the


Government, and through bathecation, it striped out a lot of the senior


- bathification, it striped out a lot of the senior and middle


management. Libya has put some effort into evolving plan so as not


to repeat the hard lessons learned in Iraq. After decades of rule of


one man alone, Libya is a curious mix of political simplicity and


ambition. As I saw skrauld on the walls of Misrata last month. This


one says we want checks and balances on the President's power,


and four-year, non-extendable term limits. That might sound like a


terribly good idea in principle, the question is, after 42 years of


dictatorship, how easy will it be to achieve in practice. Since then,


the rebel political leadership has got round to drafting a


constitution. It is the kind of document that few people would


disagree with. It calls for a multiparty political system, with


equal rights for all. But there is one crucial section, Article Two 9,


which says that the members of the Transitonal National Council may


not nominate for or assume the position of President of state, the


membership of the Legislative Councils, or ministerial portfolios.


It is a guarantee, a reassurance to the rest of Libya, that the


political leaders in Benghazi won't simply seize power as soon as


Tripoli falls. When the fighting end ends and they return to their


normal lives, these people will stop being rebels, but their


biggest challenge may be to come, to maintain their unity of purpose


after their common enemy as been removed. With us now is the UK co-


ordinator in London for the NTC. And John Bolton is still with us.


What is your reaction to the situation tonight. Is it unalloyed


delight or are you apprehensive? You have to multitask in this


situation, I think it is clear that Gaddafi's regime is over, and I


think it is still very uncertain how bloody the end game will be.


That potential is very real. I think there is huge uncertainty now


what follows Gaddafi. There is no doubt in my mind that eliminating


his regime was the right thing to do, but it is very uncertain what


comes next. That is obviously a critical issue. Your worry is what?


The worry is several fold, first, that the rebels fall to fighting


among themselves. And we end up with continuing hostilities and the


risk that Libya would deteriorate to similar to what we have in


Somalia or Yemen, giving Al-Qaeda or others a chance to establish an


operating base. Or second, that among the disparate elements of the


rebel coalition, that radical Islamists, or even Al-Qaeda


elements that NATO has identified, could come to predominate. I don't


say that is inevitable, far from it, it is very uncertain. We have the


UK co-ordinator for the National Transitional Council here. The fact


is, you haven't got anything in common, apart from the fact that


you all wanted Gaddafi to go? the contrary, Jeremy, Libyan


society is the most hom genius society among all the Arab -


homogenesis society among all the Arab nations. Even the tribal


nature of our society has been hugely exaggerate. We are totally


united and determined Libya will be one country and Tripoli the capital.


We are nationalist, overwhelmingly, we think of Libya first. We


determine that after Gaddafi is over, and his regime is effectively


over, we want to rebuild the country along constitutional,


democratic system, that will allow everybody to participate and allow


all Libyans to reach their aspirations. That sounds wonderful,


it has to come true, that's all that needs to happen. I hope it


does. I'm simply saying no-one at the moment can say it honestly will.


Neither can you? We can only rise up to the challenge. We have


already got plans in place, we have the vision in place. The last six


months we have done detailed planning, and we are already


unfolding these plans, and implementing them in Tripoli as we


speak. Unlike other experiences before in other Arab countries that


have been with an American diplomat put in charge and decimating the


institutions, we will be inclusive and maintain all the institutions


of the country and everybody must report back. What about the other


point raised, the danger of some Islamist organisation, Al-Qaeda or


whoever, taking power in Libya, or being able to use it at least as


base? I refer you to a statement by General Mullen, who is the American


Chief-of-Staff, who says on record there is no signs or proof of any


Al-Qaeda elements in Libya. That again is something Gaddafi used as


frightening the west, it has not materialised. Libyan society tends


to be moderate. Libyans are religious, but they are moderates.


They do not tolerate extremism one way or another, we do not have any


Al-Qaeda elements in there. shot the head of the army then?


That is a subject of an investigation and we should have


the results soon. We don't know who they are, but they are definitely


not Al-Qaeda members. We do not have an Al-Qaeda organisation in


Libya. It was one of your own, I think. John Bolton. We don't know


yet. John Bolton, the fact of the matter surely is that Libya is


better off tonight than it was under the dictatorship of a


lunatic? Well, I hope so. But I think that remains unproven. As I


say, number one, we still have the prospect of Gaddafi and bitter


enders along with him, not just in Tripoli, but in Brega and Sirte and


other parts of Libya, not yet captured by the rebels, continuing


to hold out. There is the prospect of guerrilla warfare by those who


were part of the Gaddafi regime, or loyal to it. And despite the


optimisim that we have just heard, experts in this country and in


other NATO countries who know a thing or two about Libya are very


worried that the transitional Government will not be able to hold


together. I say again, I don't think it is inevitable that they


will come apart. I just don't think we know at this point, and all of


this will be subject to verification. I think the United


States should work hard to make the successor regime a positive


development. I just don't think we can have confidence at this point


until we know what the outcome will be. It has taken much, much longer


and cost much more than Governments in London and Paris and other NATO


capitals expected. The outcome of a confrontation between the world's


most powerful military alliance and a despot dictator should never have


been in doubt. There were plenty who said it couldn't be done.


Instead it is a victory of sorts for what is known as liberal


interventionism, western democracies making war to spread


their values. But no-one is suggesting they try it in Syria,


for example. Cost vow, Sierra Leone, Afghanistan,


Iraq, and now Libya. The circumstances in which Britain


intervenes and the way it gets involved, has been evolving. David


Cameron says he has learned the lessons of a difficult decade.


I think the Prime Minister and everybody involved in this policy


is terrified of a repeat, the humiliations and the mess we found


in Afghanistan. Everybody is hoping it will be more like the situation


in Bosnia, which was positive. The last two decades have been really


confusing. At times the international community, the US and


the Allies have felt it can do almost anything it wants. At other


times it feels it can do nothing. Looking at Libya, there will be the


great temptation to take responsibility for the whole thing.


At the same time a real fear that things may collapse if we don't get


involved. One of the principles of Tony


Blair's style of liberal intervention, was summed up by the


philosophy that if we break a country we have a responsibility to


fix it. Interventionism doesn't mean just militarily intervening


and then going home. Because the whole principle arises from the


doctrine of the responsibility to protect. That means you have a


responsibility to the citizens of the country, in which you are


intervening, that responsibility doesn't end the moment that a


tyrant is toppled. It means you have a continuing responsibility,


which wasn't very well exercised in the case of Iraq, but we hope


better exercised in Libya. What was interesting from the Prime


Minister's statement is how little he was taking ownership of what is


happening in Libya, he was purposefully playing down Britain's


role? There is much more to be done, it is still a difficult situation


in Tripoli, but it is clear a huge amount has changed in the last few


days, that gives people confidence that the people of Libya are close


to what they want. This is about them, this is not about us, it is


about a country in North Africa that warrants a future of freedom


and democracy, that wantsor part of the Arab Spring. We want to - wants


to be part of the Arab Spring. We shunned be too much about the role


we played. It needs to lie in the correct place, which is in the


ruling authorities in the country itself. As Mr Cameron rightly made


clear, it will be a Libyan-led exercise, the international


community will get involved, only in accordance with requests from


Libya. That is the right way round, rather than trying to impose any


vision from outside on the country in question.


Inside Number Ten, there is an acknowledgement that Britain's


involvement in getting rid of Colonel Gaddafi, if that is indeed


what is happening at the moment was only possible because a stringent


set of criteria were first satisfied. Firstly, western powers


were on board, but not only that, so was the Arab League, the UN gave


its approval as did NATO. By contrast, they say, Tony Blair's


doctrine of international intervention would have demanded


action even if none of those criteria were satisfied.


David Cameron certainly doesn't sound as evangelical in the cause


of spreading democracy, as some of his predecessors. In Cairo in


February, as the Arab Spring formed into uncertain bud, he described


democracy as the patient work of decades. He was not, he declared, a


naive neo-con, who thinks it can be dropped from 40,000 feet. I think


where Tony Blair got it wrong, he always exaggerated our fears and


our power. He was always saying this is an extension threat to


global security, this is a failed state, on the one hand. On the


other hand he would say we can sort it out, give us the troops and


resources, we can sort it out. That needs to be left behind now. We


need to move into a much more modest world, where we are much


more humble, we can do a bit, it is largely about local action, we can


support around the edges, there is a chance of doing something, that


isn't the stuff of great political speeches. The action in Libya may


provide a template for future intervention. It has not thus far


required Britain's rather worn military boots to hit the ground.


It is a template that acknowledges its own limitations. Without, for


example, a complete change in the international climate, it is


difficult to see how it can be extended to Syria or Iran.


A Foreign Office minister and UN deputy secretary-general is with us


now, along with a Labour MP, we are joined from Washington by Elliott


Abrahams who advised George Bush on Libyan affairs.


Does this prove that interventionism works? It worked in


the case of Libya, I take the point that Libya was a great case. The


people were against the regime, he had been a terrorist, the Arab


League, the UN, everyone was in favour. But it certainly helps the


case, I would say, of liberal interventionism. It is very


striking that David Cameron did not come into office planning this sort


of temptways, or to succumb to this sort of temptation? That's right, I


doubt he will again. This was, as he and his ministers insist, a


once-off, as Elliott has said, all the signals pointed in the right


direction t created an almost irresistable opportunity, and an


irresistable moral duty. That threat to the citizens of Benghazi


we all saw, was something any decent politician would have tried


to act. This raises the very interesting question about when you


feel you can act or you must act and when you feel you shouldn't or


you can't? Clearly in this case there was an international


consensus that had been built up, with the demands from the people of


Libya, who wanted action, who wanted support. I think what we


have to be clear about is the duty to protect the UN resolution that


was established, it was a lot less clear how the international


community should respond. I think it is really positive that there is


a duty to protect civilians when they are threatened by dictators,


this is an important example of that happening. We have to take


care when we take interventions and how it is doss done. The critical


thing is - how it is done. The critical thing is the Libyan people


are at the forefront of determining their destinies, and countries


should intervene with care. only people who can take the


decision about whether to intervene or not, are the people who will do


the intervening, surely? We have the United Nations, we have the


international legal instruments, which need to be observed. We know


from the situation with the Iraq war what happens when there isn't a


consensus. Are you expect to go see more interventions? Not really. I


think for two reasons. It is very interesting the political debate in


Washington, where even the right have been deeply sceptical about


this. Because you know neo-con political ambition has run into


fiscal reality. What we are seeing in the US, the debate about


military overstretch, bringing the troops home, spend the money at


home. We will see a very similar debate here in the UK. So I think


we're going to enter an era of very cautious military engagement abroad,


and also one where you are going to have to do it within the framework


of international law, and frankly, Libya pushed that to the limits.


This went beyond Protestant tection of civilians, and it has done some


- the protection of civilians and has done some damage. Are you


expecting to see more of these interventions? If the occasion


arise, yes. Libya was, from the American point of view, pretty


cheap, in the amount of military force was used, it was quite


minimal, there were no American casualties here. In a sense, after


Afghanistan and Iraq, it is a counter example of how intervention


is possible at quite a limited price. So I think, again, it


encourages the notion that when the situation is ripe, it is a good


thing to do. Can I just pick up on the point, I think it is much too


early to say, to declare what the price was. In the case of


Afghanistan and Iraq, the day that the successful rebels went into


Baghdad and Kabul, backed by foreign forces, was not the end, it


was, frankly, the end of the beginning. Then followed these long


years of difficult reconstruction, of insurgency, of the west feeling


committed to a project it had begun and couldn't leave until it was


successfully finished, and a democratic state established in


those two places. I think it is a little too soon to count our


victory yet, or at least put a cost on that victory.


No-one is predicting that Libya is going to look like Iraq, and any


way, none of us is thinking of putting in gigantic Armed Forces.


We have, on the military front, essentially done our part, now we


leave it largely to the Libyans. But this has set a precedent, which


rather supersedes the precedents of Afghanistan and Iraq, neither of


which has been particularly happy? We need to make a distinction


between the interventions in Iraq and Afghanistan. Particularly in


Iraq, where it was, there involved ground troops, regime change and so


on. In this case, it was about protecting people, and also, I


think this is much more in line with the examples of Kosovo and


Sierra Leone. I think we also need to look back at Bosnia, where


interventions didn't take place until very late on. Thousands of


people were slaughtered. So in the era of cautiousness, which is


correct and right, we do have to make sure, that as the


international community we don't let slaughters take place either.


If you were watching this in Damascus, or even in the Syrian


embassy in London, wouldn't you conclude, well, we know precisely


what the limits of western intervention are likely to be now.


They are what they can get away with, they think? Hold on a moment,


two points, one I think both my colleagues in the panel are correct.


As long as we have learned the lessons of Iraq and Afghanistan,


and have a low-cost support to a Libyan-led reconstruction, then it


is right, the parallel breaks down. It is different. But coming to this


second point, of Syria. I mean, frankly, President Assad at the


weekend, when he gave a television interview to his domestic TV


station, was using the threat of foreign intervention to try to whip


up a kind of lame loyalty to his regime. I frankly think it is a


very good thing that he knows, and the people of Syria know, there


won't be a western intervention, that is not how this is going to


get solved. How it now looks that it may start to get solved, is Arab


neighbours are coming out against him. Russia and China, who were a


little bit on his side, have flipped over to condemning him. It


will be that kind of diplomatic pressure and economic isolation


which will make change there. just would say, let's not set the


standards for intervention so high that there is never another


humanitarian intervention. It is very nice we had the Arab League


with us, that was accidental, almost, they hate Gaddafi. It is


great to get the UN Security Council, but we didn't have the UN


Security Council in all the cases in the Balkans and Eastern Europe.


If there is a responsibility to protect, it is a moral


responsibility, and it doesn't disappear, if you don't happen to


have the Arab League or Russia and China on your side. We seem to find


ourselves with an unusual sporting phenomenon on our hands, the


England cricket team skitled out the Indians to finish a whitewash.


They are the best Test Match team in the world. They are an England


team that expects to win. Could they be better, could there be a


pool of talent that the people who run English cricket haven't tapped.


This is A Tale of Two Cities. In one part of Birmingham stands


Edgbaston, establishment cricket English-style. The gentile setting


for many an epic cricketing contest. And the Stately Home of


Warwickshire Closed circuit Club. Just a few miles down the road,


cricket Asian-style. A no-frills version of the game, for almost 120


years locals in Birmingham have been playing cricket on these


pitches. 80 teams meet here every week during the summer, to compete


with one of Britain's oldest and biggest Asian leagues. The


facilities are basic, no changing rooms, no toil lets. Last year


things got so tough the league considered folding. Traditionally


English cricket clubs need their own FA tillties if they want ECCB


endorsement. Many are using council sites and are missing out on


support. Some say that support Why do you think there aren't more


Asian players inside the test sites and county cricket? It goes back to


the argument that you used to get about black footballers in the 1970,


they can't cut it and don't have the aptitude and abilities. We need


pioneers to breakthrough the ceiling. The day they are playing


in the team, there is a Muslim who doesn't drink or wear any shirt


that reflects drinking or gambling, the day we have that kind of player


in the English cricket team, we will have a cricket team that


reflects the diverse land we have here. What one misses out on is the


practical approach that football has, where you have scouts at the


lower league games. We have 13 games on, is there anyone from the


ECB he can ching out the players? There are players in the league who


have the quality to make it into the ranks of world cricket. Nobody


is there to spot the players. not? It is a lacking part on behalf


of the clubs, they are not looking in this the right places.


Asians underrepresented? Look at the current English team there is


only one Asian guy there, he's only a fringe player, you telling me


there is no other Asian player in the whole of the system that can


play with the rest of the England team, of course there is.


Talk to the guys here and they will tell thaw English cricket is split


between the middle-class white gentile world and the working-class


Asian grassroots. Over in Edgbaston, the county


Cricket Clbu has been involved in projects to try - Cricket Club has


been involved in project to try and be inclusive. I think it is


inclusive at all levels. facilities the parks league have


are not good, they have no changing rooms? No, that is a big issue. The


teams playing in the partial league are not affiliate today the cricket


- parks league, are not affiliated to the Cricket Board, but we see it


as very important. There are Asian cricket teams in inner cities


across England. These sides are playing in Victoria Park in East


London, many caught the cricket bug from their parents. We felt, I


suppose, for more our parents' country, that is where the passion


came from, our parents, and our heros growing up were Pakistani


cricketers. It was a passion for cricket, but not necessarily the


England team. The ECB recently spent almost �1 million on building


cricket facilities in East London, will the efforts help the England


team look less white in the future. I hope so, I think the first


significant difference will be that we will establish and find good


young spinners, there is a lot of evidence we have found already that


the kids who are around here are very talented, and particularly in


spin bowling. Maybe the real test of success will come, not only when


the England team looks more like England, but when there is no


longer a need or demand for Asian- only leison. With us is the former


editor, and the first British-born Pakistani to play professional


cricket in this country. Why you do you think there are not


more Asians playing for England? The projects such as Chance To


Shine, trying to reignite cricket in state schools. If you look at


the county circuit there are more Asian non-professional cricketers.


Where I grew up 17 professional cricketers have come out of there.


Are you saying it is not a problem? No, over the last five years it has


been addressed. The ECB are invest ago lot of money into grassroots


sport. Do you think it is a real problem? If you go back to the


1950s, when Pakistani immigrants came over, through no fault of


their own, they were not educated, they were not literate, they could


not speak English, because the Government of Pakistan, has spent


most of its money on the military and not on public health and


education. There is an enormous cultural divide when they came over.


Moreover, they are Muslim, generosity and hospitality are


enormous priorities in the cultural values of Islam. They get to this


country, they are given housing but they are not welcomed into the


Cricket Clubs of this country. And although the gap is narrowing, I


don't think it has narrowed quickly enough. Do you think there is, to


some degree, I have to venture on this gingerly, there is a rather


consciousness separateness in Asian cricket? I set a prime example in


Birmingham, a local Cricket Club called Atok Cricket Club, set up in


primarily an Asian area, the club itself reflecting the demographics


of that particular community. There is an assumption that all Asian


cricketers want to play club cricket, or are denied or forced to


set up their own Cricket Clubs because they are not welcomed into


white clubs. I'm not saying that doesn't happen in some case, what


I'm saying is sometimes as local communities, they want to play


together, play with their uncles and brothers, and not play the


formal level of the game that a club environment would expect.


do you make of that point? Because this is Britain, it is not just a


question of race and colour, it is also a question of class. Another


problem is there is hugely successful England team, wonderful


team, presents a cheque for each country, through the broadcasting


deals done, of �1.5 million, goes each county club at the start of


the year. It is so much easier to go to your local private schools


and get your agent in the southern Hemisphere to send you a few


players who have European parentage, and to make your county team out of


that. I'm afraid British Asians are underrepresented, well under 10%.


Although the middle-class Asians have access to cricket, lower,


working-class Asians do not have that same opportunity. You talk


about people from Pakistani and Bangladeshi backgrounds, there are


many different cultural and religious backgrounds from the


continent. Supposing there was a proper representation of the


communities in the English cricket tome, how would it change?


would it change? I think you would find there would be more


wristedness in the batting, you might have better one-day players.


Because of the ability to hit over the top. We might have more of a


chance to win a World Cup, as far as the batting is concerned. You


might have interspinners, although Graeme Swann is fine. You would


have a greater diversity. The English team is almost entirely


private school for batting, and there are only the bowlers come


from the state sector. So a diversity, it has to be healthy.


Who did you want to play for when you were young? England, when I


grew up as 12-year-old, I was spotted in the playground, by


chance, it was through that I ended up at Warwickshire. Many would,


even now I believe, prefer to play for Pakistan or India or Sri Lanka


or wherever s that a correct impression? Yes, I think you're


right. There is still strong ties to families and parents who came


from south Asia, I think a lot of those children have carried that


affinity on. That is self- segregation isn't it? It is, in


some ways. If you look at the England players, or the Asian


players who have played for England. I think they would all say when


they pulled on the England shirt they were proud to play for England.


If they played against Pakistan or India it didn't matter they all


wanted to perform. In just a minute the morning papers. First, with a


story that broke too late for them, is our political correspondent. Who


has the latest on News International and Andy Coulson and


the hacking story. Just give us the details? The top line of the story


is after Andy Coulson left News International, he resigned as


editor of the News of the World in January 2007, he continued to


receive payments from News International, that overlapped the


time at which he started working for David Cameron and the


Conservative Party, in July 2007. These payments were part of his


sevenance package. I'm told, I have been speaking to a member of the


select committee, they want to look into this, and find out whether


there was any conditionality to these. Did they require him to do


anything, or not do anything that might be pertinent to this. Why is


it politically significant? It is polictically significant because


Andy Coulson went to work for David Cameron. Some people on the Labour


side tonight, are suggesting this may have been a disguised donation


to the Conservative Party. But there is another aspect to this as


well, that the select committee on you will culture, media and sport,


is he continued to get his benefits, it appeared, as an ex-employee,


including car and health care, right up to 2009, when he gave


evidence to the select committee. Did he disclose that, that is what


they will want to look at. three front pages we have at


That's all from Newsnight tonight. Colonel Gaddafi told the people of


Libya today he would stay to the end. We have reached our's.


Goodnight. Good evening. Whilst many northern


and western areas stay dry through tonight, heavy rain in the south-


east could produce nasty rush hour tomorrow with a risk of localised


flooding. The storms working off into the North Sea quickly, rain


persistent through the Midland, North West Midland stays fine.


Turning wet through South Yorkshire, Londonshire, rain persists, 14 the


high. Getting better through the day for East Anglia. Maybe brighter


skies across the south coast, Cornwall, Isles of Scilly,


predominantly dry throughout. For Wales brightness through the


afternoon, especially in western most parts, temperatures peeking at


18, 19. In Northern Ireland one or two showers through the day, most


having a dry and bright day. Occasional sunshine, rather than


clear blue skies, that will be the story for Scotland, a bit of cloud


to begin with, some sunshine to begin, equally one or two showers


are possible. For northern and western areas the change comes


Tuesday into Wednesday. We start to drag in some rain. This is coming


in across western parts. Cardiff seeing thundery downpours into the


middle part of the week. Elsewhere in southern and eastern areas, it


will be dry, brighter and warmer. We have a weakening cold front


Download Subtitles