18/09/2012 Newsnight


The latest on the killings in Manchester and our mission in Afghanistan, plus Romney's new gaffe and shocking violence in Kenya. With Jeremy Paxman.

Similar Content

Browse content similar to 18/09/2012. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



Fiona Bone was 32 years old with five years service. The second


officer to die was Nicola Hughes, 26 years old, with three years


service. There has never been a killing like


it in this country. As the body of the second young policewoman was


removed this evening, what lay behind today's appalling events. We


have been hearing the details of what has been a brutal and shocking


end to a violent summer of guns and grenades across Greater Manchester.


NATO steps back from two too close engagment with the Afghan Army. The


decision seems to have caused confusion in London and Washington.


What about the effects on the ground in Afghanistan. Mitt Romney


tries to take his foot out of his Can it be true, one half of America


pays no tax and the other half they live off. In Kenya, elections are


six months away. TRANSLATION: torched the houses, the others


carried off the injured, and the others whose job was just to kill.


Shocking, senseless, inxes henceable, the adjectives catch the


bafflement of police officers and politicians. The shooting dead of


two police officers in Manchester where shock is the dominant feeling.


The questions remain, how can Britain remain one of the few


countries in the world where police are unarmed. And how have guns


become so readily available to the wrong people. We're near the seen


in Hattersley. -- the scene in Hattersley. Guns,


grenades and gangland feuds and a criminal conspiracy to intimidate


witness and protect the guilty. All that was laid out by the Chief


Constable of Greater Manchester, Peter Fahy, in Anne attempt to put


-- in an attempt to put into context what has been happening in


Manchester over the last few week. But nothing to today's


extraordinary circumstances where two young policewomen were killed.


One witness who arrived at the scene after hearing gunshots said


it all seemed unreal, then he saw the abandoned police car with the


blue light still flashing. Sir Peter Fahy likes to quote Sir


Robert Peel, saying "the police are the public and the public the


police", if that is the case, then tonight both are striken. It had


been a normal quiet morning on this Manchester suburb, the violence was


so sudden, unexpected and quite savage. By mid-afternoon the Chief


Constable was in mourning, and trying to make sense of it all.


Clearly this is one of the darkest days in the history of Greater


Manchester Police, if not the police service overall. Because we


have lost two deeply-loved and valued colleagues, because they are


part of our team, policing is very much a family. Fiona Bone was 32,


calm and gentle, she was called, she had been planning her wedding.


Nicola Hughes was 23, bubbly and always smiling. Both were described


as great bobbies, good people. want to look beyond the uniform


here, what we have here are two young girls, who went out this


morning, and they have got an absolute right to come home tonight


to their loved ones. This is cold blooded murder, it is the slaughter


of the innocent. What happened of the two policewomen, unarmed, were


answering what was supposed to be a routine call to a supposed burglary.


Down the road there in Abbey Gardens. Now, one theory is they


were deliberately lured into an ambush. 13 gunshots were fired, and


then, incredibly, a grenade of thrown. A local window cleaner,


Warren Shepherd, heard the whole thing. I was out the front and I


just heard gunshots, it sounded like at least 10, one after each


other, and then a small delay, five seconds and a big bang. So, you


were about 20 yards away, you went around to the front of the house


then? I was cleaning the front of a house, and I went around the back


to see what it were. That is when I saw the police car, just one police


car there, the lights were still going, I think the engine was still


going. And there was quite a few local residents around. And I said


what was that bang, what's happened, one of them said to me they have


been shot. I said who has been shot, the policemen they said, they have


been killed. Dale Cregan is the man the police have been hunting for


months for incidents like this, where a hand grenade was thrown in


Manchester. They offered a �50,000 reward for information. This


followed a shooting in a pub of Mark Short who was in his 20s, and


then the murder and grenade attack of his father, 46-year-old David


Short, at his Manchester home. Short was killed in Droylsden, and


ever since then the residents have been terrified because of the


criminal activities going on in the past weeks. After the shooting in


Droylsden, members of the public were left shaken and scared and


fearful as to what was going on. This was a normal pub where the


attack happened? Working men's pub, people going after work for a drink.


His father was killed in August? was, he was killed at a home in


Clayton, in quite a brutal, targeted attack, so the GMP have


said. Using hand grenades? Yes, it is not every day a hand grenade is


launched in England. In the past six weeks there has been four cases


of grenade explosions. We believe he has been protected by criminal


conspiracy to harbour him, we are absolutely determined to fully


investigate that conspiracy, and bring the people involved to book.


This case tells us something about the nature of organised crime, the


web of intimidation that it creates. And the fact that people then


sometimes see others as folk heros. Dale Cregan gave himself up,


walking into a police station in Hyde this afternoon. The Prime


Minister was, meanwhile, expressing his horror at the day's events.


What we have seen is just an absolutely despicable act, one of


pure evil, the cold-blooded murder of two female police officers doing


their job, out there, protecting the public. Another reminder of the


incredible risks and great work our police service does. As the Chief


Constable said, two policewomen killed in cold blood. He called it


one of the darkest days in the had history of the Greater Manchester


force. In fact, few forces anywhere in the land have had worse than


this. The local MP Jonathan Reynolds, and inspector Ian Hanson,


chairman of the Greater Manchester Police Federation are joining us


from Manchester. Jonathan Reynolds, can you tell us what sort of an


area is this where the crime took place? It is a strong community, it


is a good area, good people here. A mixed area, as you would expect,


like most parts of Greater Manchester. There is a profound


sense of shock and disbelief here tonight. It is very hard to


comprehend what has gone on here, it is not an area with a


particularly high crime rate to neighbouring areas, it has a good


relationship with the neighbourhood police. It is an absolute shock


something has happened like this today. There is clearly an on going


problem with organised crime in the Greater Manchester area, the Chief


Constable talked today. It was striking, he talked about the


nature of organised crime, the level of intimidation it create,


the fact that people sometimes see others as folk heros for being


involved in that sort of activity. What is he talking about? Well, I


think the high-profile nature of the crimes associated with this


individual does attract, sometimes, negative publicity. I would say


that actually Greater Manchester Police have a very good record of


reducing violent crime, particularly gun-related incidents


in Greater Manchester. They have done a tremendous job over the last


ten years in particular. It would be among to malign Manchester with


gun crime again. The Chief Constable, I think, spoke correctly,


when he said you have to alienate, or certainly tackle anyone who


voices any kind of support for these actions. Nobody wants this


kind of thing to happen in their community. It is absolutely


dreadful, and no-one should at all celebrate or look to admire people


involved in this kind of thing. is very unusual, in this country,


for a man to commit a double murder, then to be on the run for as many


week as this man was, for there to be a �50,000 reward, which illicits


no information, it is odd, isn't it? It is, there was a huge manhunt


for this individual, it had taken over 40 days, but there was a huge


amount of police resources into it. A great many properties already


searched and firearms warrants executed. It was their number one


priority, I certainly got the impression they were doing


everything they could, but Greater Manchester is a big area, there was


obviously no intelligence linking him to this address here, and no


reason to believe this was something other than a routine


callout when this occurred. That is the result of the tragedy we have


seen today. Do you happen to know if any more information has been


forth coming since the tragedy occurred? There was no information


that this address had any link to the person wanted for the original


murders. Had there been, a risk assessment would have been done,


and unarmed officers wouldn't have been deployed. From the information


we have got, there is no criticism in that respect. Can you help us in


a point of information, if a couple of officers are sent out to inquire


into a burglary, as this was said to be, what protection do they


carry with them? Well, what we have to do really is look at the facts


of the incident, GMP handles thousands of incidents a day, the


Tameside division, a busy division, handles several hundred incidents


per day. We can't deploy armed police officers to every incident


in Tameside, whatever the specter in the background is. The price of


these officers being deployed, there would have been a risk


assessment, hindsight is a wonderful thing. There is no words


to express theoror -- horrors that has descended on Greater Manchester,


I don't think it is the time to be pointing fingers. I wasn't dreaming


of pointing a finger, I don't think anybody is. You raise the question


of armed officers, why is it that within the police there is such


opposition to the idea of carrying weapons? I think it is something of


a cultural thing. We in the British police service are proud of


policing with consent. We are born out of communities, we police


communities and we are part of those communities. Today is making


us take a cold, hard look at ourselves. I know the media today


have been asking questions about an armed Police Service, today isn't


the day for that debate. It is time to grieve and move the force on, we


have to police the city tomorrow. There will be a tribute to the


officers today who paid the ultimate price, if we pick


ourselves up and a move on in on their behalf. There is still


considerable shock? This is unprecedented. Sadly the British


Police Service does see officers pay the ultimate sacrifice with an


unfortunate regularity, something like this, is completely off the


scale. There is no script for this. Greater Manchester police officers,


and everyone part of GMP is numb. We don't know how to deal with it.


We will pick ourselves up and move on. Mr Reynolds, in the broader


community? The community is in absolute shock here, I agree, I


don't think today is the debate for the wider implications of this. I


think nothing can provide an answer to why something like this happens.


No-one can explain why someone would be driven to do this. But I


just hope there is some comfort for the families of these two officers,


knowing the whole nation is thinking of them tonight and


standing alongside them. What they are facing at this minute is


absolutely horrendous.. Thank you very much. If you were watching


last night, you would have seen the Defence Secretary defend the


continuing British commitment of British troops in Afghanistan. So


far this year over 50 international soldiers have been murdered by


members of the Afghan military, or people pretending to be members of


the Afghan military. So today NATO announced it was scaling back joint


operations with the Afghan Army. If the plan to hand over to them is


supposed to be still on course, one for Mark Urban to work out. This i


ZAF decision today? The decision was d ISAF decision today? This


decision was made at the weekend, to scale back work between the two


forces. It seems to be temporary. It was briefed to the American


press that this was quite a significant change in policy, from


one two years ago, when General McChris kal was there and he said


they would fight shoulder-to- shoulder with the Afghans. Then the


British got on and said they don't do as much as we do, and we have


our ways as well. And the emergency statement today stressed that the


American commander of regional command south-west, had said it was


all right for the British to carry on pretty much as they have been


doing. He has endorsed the approach currently being taken by the UK-led


task force, Helmand, including mentoring at below, mentoring and


parting at below Ka nark dak level. That means the UK partnering


operations will continue substantially unchanged by the


order. How does this change things on the ground? It seems to be one


more incremental step, both in terms of disengaging those forces


and trying to minimise these called green-on-blue incidents. Going to


patrol bases even a couple of years ago, I could see there was a line


in the base where it was shared with the Afghans, where they were


told not to cross the line without permission from NATO forces. This


all started happening in the British area, after an incident


called Blue 25, and five British soldiers were killed off duty.


Those changes happened a few years ago and they have been increasing.


And the places where the troops can be cheek-by-jowl have been


transferred to entire Afghan control over the summer, they have


been trying to mitigate risk then. But there will still be meetings


and communities if people want to carry out a crime of this kind.


does it affect the exit strategy? You can argue that cutting the


apron strings with the Afghan forces is a good thing. It


encourages them to take more responsibility, and reduces the


chance of friction with American and British soldiers who are not


always the kindest in pointing out the error of their ways. It could


have a positive effect, or it could leave them floundering.


Thank you. Joining us from Washington to discuss the


significance of today's announcement is the former US


Ambassador to NATO, Kurt Volker, here in the studio is the former


Military Intelligence Officer, Frank Ledwidge, who served in the


Balkans, Iraq and Afghanistan, his book, Losing Small Wars, is his


account of why he thinks Britain has fared so badly.


How do you imagine the Taliban will see this announcement? I think they


will see it as a success for their strategy. I think that when we look


at the bulk of the Afghan national security forces, they are very


patriotic, they are fighting for their country, working together


with us. A small number of Taliban can infiltrate that, and attack


with green-on-blue attacks, some international fores, that causes a


shift or halt in the way we execute our strategy. They will see this as


something of a success. How do you think they will see it? I agree,


over the last few years we have had a rowing back of an extended


involvement up to 30 years, it was to finish at the end of 2014, now


we are looking at even a moderation of that. From the Taliban's


perspective, they will see and preach it. It will seem a


demonstration of continuing success on their part. That's wait they


will play it. In other circumstances, you might have, if


this is a perceived success, or a reverse for western strategy in


Afghanistan, you might see that as shifting the timetable, but the


timetable apparently is not going to shift, all the forces are going


to be out by the end of 2014? see, time will tell. I think what


we can do today, and we can used to's or yesterday's announcement as


an opportunity, as an -- today or yesterday's announcement as an


opportunity to say it is time the Afghans cut away on their own,


another two years alongside them will not make any strategic or


operational difference, or any major difference. And the


difference for us, of course, of hanging on, continuing in combat


over the next few years, 40, 50, 60 more families without sons. What do


you think is going to be the long- term impact of these attacks?


think attacks themselves are not all that difficult, we have lost


forces because of the attacks and other situations too. The issue is


what are we trying to achieve in Afghanistan, if we are trying to


get out we are on that track any way, the attack won't help that. If


the effort is really to try to bring about a stable state, to


bring about some security, to give the Afghan people a chance to


pursue their own development, and make sure extremist groups, such as


the Taliban, or those they have given access to, don't get control


of Afghanistan again, then we need to take the attacks as a signal,


and say we need to re-think the strategy. Transitioning in two


years to Afghan leadership looks less and less convincing that this


will be an effective way to ensure we deliver the kind of Afghanistan


we said we seek to do. We need to think about the deadline and our


commitment, we need to renew our engagment with supporting the


Afghan, the vast majority of which do want to build their own country.


You are saying the deadline is integral to successful completion


of the strategy? Yes, it signals to the Taliban when they will know we


will be gone, and to the population in the middle, we won't be there,


but the Taliban will. It is very important we don't inflate the


Taliban, they are a southern resistance movement, and Al-Qaeda


are an international terrorist movement. We can talk to the


Taliban, Al-Qaeda is a different thing. We have essentially beaten


off Al-Qaeda to the front end of 2002, since then they haven't been


in Afghanistan. We must draw that distinction. As for a viable state,


something of 95% of Afghan regard their Government as a bunch of


thieves, robbers, rapists and war criminals. There is aepblment of


truth in those accusations -- an element of truth in those


accusations? There is. Given that both these countries and many


others are committed to getting out as quickly as possible, by the end


of 2014, can they do so and loaf a credible Afghan security structure


in place? Time will tell, the problem is, our perspective is very


different from that of many senior Afghan officers, who realise that


3% of their force is of southern Pashtun origin, which is the


heartland of the Taliban. How that plays out in future is unclear. One


thing we can be sure, most of the Afghan Army is as foreign to


southern Pashtuns as the British army is. How do you see it, is it


possible that the western countries are going to leave a credible


security system in place in Afghanistan? It is certainly


possible.S if certainly possible. We are making the effort -- it is


certainly possible. We are making the effort to train Afghan forces,


support governance, it is possible. It is a very risk strategy, we have


to think about what if it doesn't work out that way. It is credible


to believe an alternative scenario would have the Taliban taking


control of the south. The Afghan security forces essentially


controlling the north. One of the warlords in the west re-


establishing control there. And then you have a question of does


the Taliban retry to take the entire country, as before. Or do


the Afghan national security forces try to fight back against them. You


may see something of a civil war emerge a few years from now. No-one


wants that, we need to think about the strategy we pursue today to try


to make that scenario much less likely than it now may appear.


Now, a President for all Americans, we have heard that promise time


after time, as someone or other runs for election for the White


House. Astonishing to hear Mitt Romney, the Republican challenger,


say he isn't much bothered about representing half of the electorate.


He spent most of today not trying to unsay what he said, but to


apologise, without apologising. He fell victim to every phone being a


camera, and declaring to a room full of private donors that half


the electorate are a bunch of scroungers, is up there with


playing strip poker with Las Vegas In internet gaming slang, the exact


moment of defeat is called "getting owned". For some reason it is spelt


like that. It was the Internet that turned up Mitt Romney's potential


faux pas, made at a private donors dinner in bok ka ratten to.


understand there has been a video on the Internet. Cue some artful


rephrasing from the candidate today. I believe the point I made is the


President starts out with a large number of the voters, 49%, these


are people in his camp. And they will vote for him, almost no matter


what, I have also a large number of people who will vote for me almost


no matter what, at least I hope so. And that my campaign effort is to


focus on the people in the middle. Owning a presidential candidate is


a tough proposition, in 1980 Ronald Reagan owned Jimmy Carter like this.


There you go again. Bill Clinton did it to George Bush


senior. While Bush junior, infamously owned


Ronan Kerr with this one. I served with Ronan Kerr. -- John Kerry.


served with John Kerry. John Kerry has not been honest about what


happened in Vietnam. Senator Kerry almost owned himself when he


dismissed the pence vainals in his So, is this one a terminal cock-up,


or just another thing. Here is what some voters in the swing state of


Florida told us this morning. It's not surprising. It's not


surprising that he would say something like. That I think he


should pay more attention, but that's the Republican state, that


they care only about themselves and a certain class of people. If


you're not like me, if you don't look like me or have as much money


as I, then I really don't want to have anything to do with you.


I support him? I'm a registered Republican and he makes me ashamed


at times. Why is that Because of his comments and his fill loss fees.


He should be appeal -- Philosophys. He should be appealing to the


country, elections are not one by one demographic but the entire


country. I think the comments were aimed at the target audience, but


probably reveals his true nature about how he feels about the


different classes in America. Lost in all this was another Romney


comment, made at the same event, also leaked to the Internet,


suggesting his administration would see no point in pursuing the


Palestinian peace process with any vigour. But some political


commentators now think a Romney administration looks a lot less


likely. Paul Mason is here with us now. This claim that 47 perof


Americans don't pay income tax, is it true? Amazingly it is true.


Although it is complicated. If we run this graph, it shows that over


the past few decades, large numbers of people have become exempted from


paying this one tax, income tax. You can see the crucial decades of


the last two, are free market economics where Democrats and


Republicans have done this, given tax breaks to the upper echelon,


and sweetened the pill with tax emsems of the middle-classes and


47% don't pay income tax. It seems a big number? Here is where the


complication of the tax service get politically complicated for Romney.


It is true half of those who fall through the tax net on income tax


are on benefits. The other half are really, what's happening, is they


are getting tax credits that offset their tax bill, it is called tax


units, if we break that down, 44% of them are elderly. Immediate


problem, because there is a lot of elderly Republicans who don't pay


tax, therefore. The other 25%, 33%, are working poor with family. And


there is this is just income tax. Even the poor can be paying sales


tax, property tax, local taxes. The idea that they don't have a stake


in the system because they don't pay this one tax is something that


you can only really believe if you don't study the graphs. It is not


true, if it is true it is the run cans' fault? -- Republicans' fault?


The politics have been spinning around in the last 24 hours. The


balance sheet looks something like this H the first problem he has got


is judgment, if you want to be President, do you want to go around


making speeches like this, even in private. The second is the idea


that Democrats are people who don't have a stake in the American dream,


and Republicans are. It is quite simplistic one, and if you are


trying to win a small number of swing voters, which he says he's


trying to do. Some of them have been caught in the misunderstanding


of what who pays this. The final thing is the demeanor, throughout


the campaign Romney has looked like a waxwork dummy, uncomfortable in


speeches, quite stiff. In that video, it has been well noted on


the American media, he's completely fluent, he's happy, comfortable in


his skin. It doesn't take much psychology to work out that is


probably what he believes. Some of the other stuff he's saying he's


not so on top of. He's among his own people there? It was a private


speech, there will be a certain part of the Republican Party it


won't damage him W but you could hear there, in the swing state of


Florida, among middle-class voters, including Republicans, they are not


comfortable with the idea that if you don't pay tax you don't have a


stake in the system. To discuss Mitt Romney's comments,


and what they can tell us about the philosophical conflict at the heart


of this year's presidential election, we have from Washington,


Matt Lewis, conlumist for the daily website, -- columnist for the daily


website Daily Caller, and my other guest.


Can you tell us on this side of the Atlantic who are always being told


about the wonderful dynamic capitalist economy you have, this


is astonishing that half of your people don't pay income tax? As was


mentioned they pay taxes, property tax, sales tax, but about half of


Americans don't pay federal income tax. On top of that about 49% of


Americans get some form of benefit. This is not widely known. It is a


legitimate issue. Romney would have probably preferred it didn't come


out in the sort of "gotcha" way. But it is a debate to have. It is


also true, isn't it, as Paul, my colleague, mentioned, that a lot of


people who don't pay federal income tax are Republicans? That is


absolutely true. Although, I would say, if you listen closely to Mitt


Romney's comments, he wasn't just talking, he was talking about


people not vested in paying income tax, but he also talked about the


entitlement philosophy. And Romney actually said, who think they are


entitled to a house, and to food, and to healthcare. I think we can


all agree where he all need those things, the question is, should


Government be providing from cradle to grave, everything that we need,


or should we as individuals take responsibility for that. That's the


big debate that I hope we have in the next 50 days. He has tapped


into something, hasn't he. The state has been growing, hugely in


the United States? I'm not so sure I would agree with that. The point


your commentator made earlier, to the extend a large number of


Americans aren't paying taxes or are getting credits or benefits,


like increased food stamps, or Medicare to get drugs. They were


two initiatives that game under George Bush, whether or not the


state is growing in the US, there is a debate going forward about how


much the state should be helping. I think Romney has positioned himself


very badly in that debate. We have a methology, or we have had -- a


mythology in this country that we can make it up the ladder by


ourselves, we don't need any help at all. I think post 2008 we


realise that is not right. I think Romney is on the wrong side of that


debate. And you pointed out earlier, he was sitting and making these


comments at a $50,000 a plate dinner with his own people. There


is a portion of the Republican Party that buys into this mythology,


the rest of America doesn't. says something about the state of


politics in your country, that somebody, and frankly, it must be


true to some degree on both sides, that effectively you can write off


a huge chunk of the electorate, as people who you are never going to


be able to reach out to? Absolutely. Mitt Romney is guilty of talking


like a strategist. And there is a famous saying here in the United


States that politics is like making sausage, you don't want to see it


being done. That was what Mitt Romney was doing. The truth is, we


live in a world of limited resores, if you are going to run --


resources, if you are going to run a campaign, you have three people,


the people for you, the people against and you the undecideds. The


people who are for you turn out on election day, the people undecided


you persuade. The people against, you frankly, ignore. It should be


noted that there was a gap will you please tracking poll that came out


today that showed Barack Obama has, you guessed it, 47% of the vote.


The exact per cent that Mitt Romney said he had. He was right about


that. Go on? Sorry, I lost you for a


minute. I think that going to your point


earlier about how this is going to affect the election, this is a huge


turning point. I think this week will be remembered unless there is


some major change that we can't foresee right now, as the week that


Mitt Romney lost the election. And I think it is going to start a


bigger debate in this country about what kind of country we want to


have, what kind of role we want Government to play, how big or how


small we want it to be, and how easy it is to work your way up the


ladder in this country. There are big questions about this. You say


this will be going down as the week he lost the election because of


these comments? I think this is one of a number of mistakes he has made.


I see a mood change. I think that you really can't write off 47% of


the population. I think that the comment that you played earlier


from the voters in swing states like Ohio, are very apropo, what is


interesting is Republicans are no longer the party of optimisim. I


think this plays to that. I think Democrats have grabbed that, they


are the party of optimisim. Obama's speech to the convention was a can-


do speech, we we are all in this together, we will reach back to


those behind us and pull them up. Republicans sound like they are


complaining about half of the population, that is not a message


that will go down in November, I don't think. I would like to be


optimistic, but we have very serious problems, a $16 trillion


debt that we have to bring down and make changes. There are three


debates between now and the election, anything could change. I


agree, I hope there is this national Conservatives, I think


there is a real question about whether or not we want to have an


entitlement society, or opportunity society. Whether or not we want to


have the American dream, or a welfare state. I think Mitt Romney


should welcome that debate, and vigorously be at the forefront of


challenging President Obama to have that discussion. Thank you very


much. If you look up the description of the former British


colony of Kenya in Wikipedia, you will find the country described as


having maintained a remarkable stability, despite changes in its


political system. Looking up anything in Wikipedia is a risky


thing at the best of times. Tell that to the police who today found


two mass graves in the Tana Delta region, in the east of the country.


The graves are believed to hold the remains of a hundred people, killed


in the last month, as Kenya prepares to hold a general election,


which is still six months away. After the last election violence


claimed over 1,000 lives. The BBC East Africa correspondent


investigates the links between the latest massacre and the upcoming


vote. By the time we got to the village


of Gillows, there was no-one left. Most of the -- most of the houses


had been torched, not a home remained untouched. The only living


things were the flies and the remains of butchered animals in


silence. The attackers had had come in the early morning. Several


hundred men, some armed with guns, most carried spheres, clubs or bows


and arrow, they set fire to the villagers' hut. Some ran for


shelter in the mosque, but 38 people were hacked to death. Men,


women and children, indiscriminately. This was a


massacre. TRANSLATION: All of a sudden the village was under siege,


there were so many of them. They were wearing red bandanas and white


shoes, they didn't speak. They just shouted "kill, kill, kill". At a


hospital nearby we met Jamila, she's eight years old, her face was


slashed open with a machete, she's still too traumatised to speak. The


doctors say she will pull through. She was fortunate to survive. In


the abandoned village, a square patch of freshly-dug earth, marks


the spot where some of the victims lie buried in a mass grave. It will


be a long time before people venture back here. The stench is


pretty strong here, still. Even all these days later, because of the


crack cusses of slaughtered livestock that -- crack kass of


slaughtered livestock that - crack cusses of slaughtered livestock. It


looks like this was more than a spontaneous outburst of anger, you


have to wonder if it was more well planned or premeditated.


TRANSLATION: The attackers were divided into three groups, one


torched the houses, others carried off the injured, there was a third


group whose job it was to just kill. On the surface, this is a conflict


over access to land and water. On one side are the pokomo people,


armers, small holdings, who eek out a living growing groups by the


banks of the river. On the other side are the Orma, semi-onadmic


cattle drovers who roam the land in search of grazing grounds for their


herds. The farmers complain the herds trample their crops. In the


past the difficulties have been resolved peacefully, but things


have changed. This herder says he's afraid, showing us his newly-


acquired dagger, he says if anything happens they will


retaliate and defend themselves. Five years ago Kenya shocked itself


and the world. Violence erupted, following a disputed general


election. The clashes were centered on the Rift Valley and in the


capital Nairobi. Communities turned on each other, killing and maiming,


with apparent abandon. In their fury, those who believed


victory had been stolen from them, lashed out at those they saw as


benefiting from the outcome. Attacks provoked counter-attacks,


and the bloodshed continued for months. At the end of it 1,200


people were dead, over half a million homeless.


But the killings were not entirely spontaneous. Four men are due to


stand trial at the International Criminal Court in the Hague,


accused of orchestrating the violence. Two of those men are also


running for President in the next election. The long shadow of 2008


now hangs over Kenya, as it prepares to go to the polls next


March. Election season has already begun, there was by-elections in


three constituencies on Monday, and tensions between the main


candidates are simmering. When people go to the polls in Kenya,


they are generally not thinking about manifestos or political


platforms, it is all about getting your candidate elected to office.


And your candidate generally means somebody from your tribe or


community. Your candidate's success or failure can mean the difference


between you getting a job or becoming unemployed. And the


success or failure of your political block can mean the


difference, say, between a road being built to your area or not. So


in Kenya elections are a matter of poverty or prosperity. They can


even be a matter of life and death. In the tan da delta, religious


leaders and politicians are preaching piece to their


constituents. Many don't believe these massacres were caused by


small, local land disputes. Someone local MP has been sacked from the


cabinet, on suspicion of inciting violence, others are suspected.


fits the pattern that before an election you have violence, the


motive is to affect the way people vote. To gerrymander violence. To


create fear and terror. Political income bancy, means free --


incumbanc means freedom to steal, you become rich in Government,


people areing will to kill for that. Land is a valuable commodity, not


just for those who live on it. Big investors, local and national, are


becoming interested in the region's potential. What is happening on the


other side of this electric fence is a pilot project. They are


growing crops to be converted into biofuels, if the experiment is


successful, it will be repeated across vast situates of land here,


currently used -- swathes of land here, currently used for cattle.


The potential conflict over land takes place on various different


levels, there is the individual herdsman versus the individual


farmer, but there is potentially bigger business at stake here.


There is a lot of external interest in the area. People want to set up


large farms. They always do that with local partners, the local


partners are always politically connected. And you know, moving


people off land that you may want, can be done in various ways.


As you drive through the Tana Delta now, you come across abandoned


village after abandoned village. Many residents have fled in


anticipation of trouble to come. Thousands have ended up in camp


like this one, sometimes far away from home. Whether they return in


time to register to vote, will depend on whether they feel


confident enough in the security forces to guarantee their safety.


After four weeks of violence and more than a hundred deaths, the


Government has, belatedly, sent in the paramilitary police, to try to


disarm and protect the area. The fear is, as the scramble for vote


intensifies, and spreads across the country, these killings may mark


the start of another bloody Kenyan election.


That's all tonight. It was announced today that the film


producer John Coates has died, his best loved him of the animated


Download Subtitles