04/06/2014 Newsnight


The row between the home secretary and the education secretary, the release of Bowe Bergdahl, Kevin Spacey and Tianamen Square 25 years on. With Jeremy Paxman.

Similar Content

Browse content similar to 04/06/2014. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



demands to know what exactly is going on between the Education


Secretary and the Home Secretary. At the same time s had minions say that


efforts to fight Muslim extremism are co-ordinated and effective. Now


Newsnight has been told how when the Home Office cut funding for an


anti-extremist organisation, Michael Gove's department stepped in to help


the organisation out. Some senior civil servants at the Home Office


says the Department for Education has been running what they call a


parallel security policy. The chairman of that group is here. The


Taliban's media studies department turns a prisoner trade into a


marketing opportunity. And Kevin spacey considers his future. I'm


never going to leave, I not get on plane and BEEP off, I will always be


part of the country. The photographer who caught this moment


tells us the story behind the picture.


There is no, repeat, no feud at the top of the Government. The chairman


of the Conservative Party tells us so, as does the Downing Street


propaganda machine. So the testy exchanges between the Home Secretary


and the Education Secretary, about Muslim extremism, signify nothing


beyond a difference of emphasis? Michael Gove thinks Theresa May is


an excellent Home Secretary, it must be true, an unnamed person close to


him said it! But beneath all this froth is a very serious issue.


Before we talk about it we have this report. My Lords and members of the


House of Commons. This was supposed to be the story of the day. The


Queen's Speech. But instead, the main political event is centered on


schools in a mainly Pakistani neighbourhood in Birmingham. That is


because Theresa May, the Home Secretary, last night sent a rather


aggressive letter to the Department for Education about radicalism and


extremism in schools. And, in doing so, she turned some local


difficulties in Birmingham into a national problem for Michael Gove,


the Education Secretary. And his outriders, in turn, have thrown some


barbes at Miss May. This is also a skirmish in a long turf war on


terror policy. Newsnight can exclusively reveal one key chapter


in that story. In 2011 the Quilliam Foundation, a counter extremism


think-tank close to Mr Gove, appealed to the Home Office for


?150,000, saying it needed it to stay hope, the Home Office refused.


The principle we want to uphold is Quilliam should be free to


contribute to the wider debate, but not depend on Government fund to go


do so. Some Government officials feel the tough decision was


undermined a few weeks later when the Department for Education decided


to give the think-tank ?150,000. Some senior officials at the Home


Office said the Department for Education has been running what they


call a "parallel security policy". The fact the fight has been going on


for so long explains the vitriol on display this week. Next week Ofsted,


the education inspectorate is expected to put five Birmingham


schools into special measure, the culmination of a wave of inspections


across the city, Folauing on from the publication of the so called


Trojan horse documents. A letter, now proved to be a forgery, setting


out details of a plot by Muslim hardliners to take over schools all


across the city. Fears of a broader conspiracy have dissolved. But Miss


May has turned the heat up Mr Michael Gove, in her letter,


referring to concerns about extremism she wrote:


Is that critque fair. Much will concern this school Park View. It


was blocked from opening a free school by the Department for


Education on security grounds. But it wasn't intervened on, nor was it


stopped taking over another two state schools. Still we do not know


precisely what intelligence officials actually had. Michael Gove


is a pretty unlikely person to be accused of being soft on extremism.


Over the past few years he and Miss May have been locked in an argument


about this issue, and it is him who is usually cast as the hardliner. In


fact in 2006 he wrote a book about this issue, in a chapter headed "the


Trojan horse", he wrote "in the struggle against extremism, the


British state has not only dealt effectively with those openly


committed to Jihad, it has also failed to tackle the underlying


idealistic currents that favour extremism". Youngsters can be


brainwashed at a young age and be taught to dislike and dehumanise


others. This may not teach somebody to become a terrorist or Jihadi, but


from there to going and committing a terrorist act is a very, very short


step. It has the potential to drive somebody towards an action in a much


more efficient manner for the recruiters. Miss May and her allies


want the focus to be on more explicitly violent extremism. One of


the things Michael Gove apparently said is we shouldn't be fighting the


crocodiles on the edge of the swamp but drain the swamp. That is a very


black and white approach, and you may find there are a whole bunch of


animals in the swamp you are forcing to choose to be for origins you. If


you force them into that position you may be uncomfortable with the


numbers lining up on the opposite side. Then you have made your


position worse not better. The Prime Minister is now intervening in this


extraordinary spat. But not before one important piece of damage has


been done to the Tories. Miss May has given Labour a hand. Her letter


says that the allegations relating to schools in Birmingham raise


serious questions about the quality of school governance and oversight.


That is rather help offul to the opposition which claims that the


coalition has weakened school supervision. Playground tiffes can


do some real damage to political parties.


We have the chairman of the Quilliam Foundation, and a Lib Dem


parliamentary candidate. With us too is the founder and chairman of


trustees of a private Muslim school in Leicester. Is it possible


gentleman to define what extremism is? I think essentially generally it


is the desire to impose one's opinion on anyone else. Within the


Muslim context we have to accept there is such a thing as extremism,


we are calling it Islamism, and that can be defined as the desire to


impose interpretation of Islam over society by law. How does it manifest


itself? The desire to impose Islam over society by law according to


one's interpretation can impose itself in cases like Sudan this


month, where a lady was sentence for blasphemy. In this country?


Segregation, in public institutions, Sharia patrols walking around in


what they have labelled "Muslim areas", it can define itself in all


sorts of honour killings and FGM. People interpreting the religion, no


sir the religion itself, it is extreme interpretation of the


religion. Would you accept that interpretation of extremism? It is


important fact you mentioned. The definition has never been said by


the Government and it is very flexible. That causes problems by


schools, on the one hand we are told to fight and prevent extremism, but


we are not told what it is. I think you would find that most Muslims


within the community are anti-extremist as well. They don't


see what they do as being extremism? Do you think the Government is


getting it wrong? I think they are using a sledgehammer to crack a nut.


This reaction and response to what is an anonymous letter and denounced


as a fake by most people. To come in like this with anti-Tory and counter


terrorism. Everything that the Muslims are doing these days,


including education, is seen through the lens of antiterrorism and


security. We have to accept in our communities there is a challenge


that we face that, yes, the vast majority of Muslims aren't violent,


but we do have to deal with that vocal minority who have come to


dominate the discourse of our communities, who promote, for


example, in an ideal state they want homosexuals to be killed, they


promote adulters to be stoned to death and call for the amputation of


the hand of the thief. And they believe in these things in principle


and are calling them. They build the mood music to which suicide bombers


dance. There is a reason why we currently have about 400 British


born and raised citizens fighting for groups far more extreme than


Al-Qaeda in Syria. It is not an easy thing to leave your country. That is


another thing, the British Government nearly went to fight in


Syria, but the point is none of this... But they didn't join a group


more extreme than Al-Qaeda, they are beheading people. None of this is


taught in schools. I'm confident that none of this is taught in


schools. It comes from wider community, it comes from other


influences, but in schools I have yet to meet, in 30 years of working


in education in Muslim schools and with majority museum schools. Would


you like to live in a Sharia state? It depends where it is. You wouldn't


like this country to become a Sharia state? I don't think it would. Would


you like it to be? Obviously I would like to live under Sharia. In that


you would condone stoning of adulteresses? Not really, it is a


far bigger issue than that. You can't pick and choose bits and bobs


of the Sharia, it is a broad issue, the social strata and circumstances


have to be in place. What is the Sharia model for stoning to death.


If the stoning conditions were met is that something in principle we


should condone. It is not being taught in schools. Have you evidence


it is taught in schools? I have been personally called by teachers. We


have to wait until the Ofsted report comes out. The allegations are


allegations. Is there any evidence this is being taught in schools?


Evidence from the teachers who have called Quilliam directly. I don't


want to conclude from that evidence, evidence doesn't mean conclusions it


is evidence. We are not talking specific schools? Let's wait for the


Ofsted report, we have to recognise that extremism among Muslims and the


far right is a challenge, they feed into each other, it is a challenge


we have to confront. If we can't sit on Newsnight and openly say in


principle we don't condone the chopping of hands and stoning of at


dolters, if Sharia conditions are met anywhere in the world we have a


problem, I wouldn't condone that in principle. But you do condemn the


amputation of hands? If it is not according to a due process of law,


in any situation, in way. If it is by due processes it is OK to stone


people to death? These things are not taught in schools. I have worked


in schools. If by due process is it OK to stone people to death by due


process. This is not taught in schools, that is what we are here to


discuss. You say you have evidence that some extreme views are being


taught. That is not a conclusion. I understand that. Is there any


evidence that promoting extreme views in schools actually leads to


extreme action later of the kind you have already alluded to once? We


have got to treat this debate like racism, it is a no brainer if racism


spreads in society violent racism can merge east merge from it. We can


try to test it scientifically, but most people accept racism spreading


in society, even not to violence is bad thing. Likewise with homophobia,


if extremist racism and homophobia in a museum context, if these ideas


spread through society like stoning people to death. It can't help


social cohesion. That is fair point? We are looking at in schools this


doesn't happen. This comes from the Internet and all sorts of things.


You heard him say that he has had letters from teachers, the


Government is worried enough to be mounting investigations? We were


talking just earlier about disgruntled people, people who lose


their jobs for some sort of reason they can bring vexation and


complaints against schools. Schools are there to educate the children to


get good exam results, the schools in Birmingham. You can't vouch for


every school in the country more than anyone else can? The schools in


Birmingham, the focus of the investigation have gone to


outstanding and have got outstanding exam results. I have a son who is


13. Let me talk, you have had your chance. I'm pleading you for the


sake of my son who is 13, in a museum-only son, I have no choice


over because I don't live with him. If his teacher is unable to condemn


stoning in principle or chopping off the hand, I worry about the future


for my son. You are right to worry. Come out and talk about liberal


values. You are right to worry, these things have no place in


school, because children don't understand these things. You know as


well as I do that it is a very, very complex issue, it is not black and


white. That is where Crispin Blunt mentioned this morning when things


are put in black and white situations those in the grey area


could be pushed towards the black area and the dark arts, we have to


be very airflow about that. Thank you very much. The Yeoman of the


guard, military bands, a guilded coach, it was the State Opening of


Parliament again this morning. In her invisible gilded shackles the


Queen recited how the coalition Government keeps itself occupied


until we get the chance to decide if we are sick of the sight of them.


Here are the highlights. All of them! My Lords, pray be seated.


Coalition's last stand! My Government's legislative programme


will continue to deliver on its long-term plan to build a stronger


economy and a fairer society. So, fair to say it wasn't one of the


most exciting Queen's Speeches of all time. We're here to explain. I


think probably the most unexpected thing that happened was one of the


page boys to the Queen, who was eight years old fainted as she went


on and on and on. That is not to say it was empty, as some of its


crickets would have it. There were pretty decent proposals on pension,


things about childcare that the Government has talked about already,


privately Government sources admit there was nothing new in this. That


has given them and us a problem today. Because the debate ended up


the warm-up which we are well into, the general election. The Tories


saying you can't trust Labour with the economy, and the Labour Party


saying the Tories don't care about ordinary families and the Lib Dems


grinning and bearing it. The next Queen's Speech is after the


election? That may be the more important one. We don't know what


that will be. We do know it is likely to be a coalition Government,


if you believe some of the polls. And what we have discovered is


actually some very senior people in the Lib Dem party and in the Labour


Party have already been having some cosy tete-a-tetes, including


discussing some of their shared concerns, particularly on Europe.


Now there was a dinner that we found out about in April, with four


members of the Clegg and Miliband inner circle, including Nick Clegg's


Chief of Staff and Lord Adonis from Labour, one of the people who led


the failed attempt to have a Labour-Lib Dem coalition in 2010.


They say, members of the group say it was an informal catch-up between


old friends. They it was an informal catch-up between


discussed Europe as a shared issue, I understand they did absolutely


discuss a wider range of issues. I understand they did absolutely


really interestingly, when I have been talking to people about this, a


very senior Labour source said to me there are all sorts of contacts


going on all the time. Some of them through vain, Vince Cable, and also


conversations going on between Ed Miliband and Nick Clegg himself. Up


until now those two parties have tried very hard to keep these kinds


of contacts under wraps, as we hurtle towards the general election,


on both sides that will become harder and harder. In the meantime


this spat at the top of the Tory Party between Theresa May and


Michael Gove, what's happening on that? There is a very serious issue


of substance, there is an awful lot of politicking going on here too, it


is getting very bitter. David Cameron has summoned the facts in


this, trying to crack heads together, in terms of who said what


to who when and who is the one who has been stirring the pot, it has


become a very bitter row between Theresa May and Michael Gove, who


frankly have never got on with each other at all. But the context that


we had to see this in is whether or not it sound fair the politics are


also, just a couple of weeks ago Theresa May gave a speech that was


lauded by people right across the Tory Party. Her potential chances of


becoming a lead, should David Cameron exit after the general


election have gone up in the last couple of weeks. That is part of


what is at play here. She feels strong enough to take the


extraordinary step of releasing a letter to the public, containing


very damaging criticisms about a rival's department. This isn't


something that happened in private. This letter was put into the public


domain, which shows you really that she's willing to give a pretty


public dressing down to one of her colleagues. David Cameron is not


amused. This is what's on the front pages of the papers tomorrow. Not


those proposals in the Queen's Speech, although there are the odd


couple of photographs of the little page boy who fainted after what he


heard the Queen say. Poor kid. Good outfit though! Whoever has the


public relations account for the Taliban played a bit of a blinder


today, after getting the United States to bane done its trumpeted


refusal to negotiate with terrorists, then to get five of its


most senior figures released in exchange for one American soldier,


it is now released its own video of how the handover happened. In the


United States, while there is continuing joy at the family


reunification, there is unease about what's happened, and it seems to be


growing. On Saturday, somewhere in host province in Afghanistan and


overseen by a dozen Taliban affiliated soldiers, Sergeant


Bergdahl's five-year captivity came to an end. While being handed over,


a Taliban commander can be heard telling the American soldiers not to


return to Afghanistan. Warning that if they do, they will be killed.


They boast that the Americans were too frightened to remain, and they


talked during the handover. President Obama has been sorely


criticised for the terms of the handover by Republicans in


Washington. Does putting these Taliban fighters back into the


fight, endanger the west's security? Even Hillary Clinton, the former


Secretary of State, has refused to say that she would have made the


same deal. In trading one slowly Sergeant for five senior commanders


the Taliban clearly feel they have scored a victory. One American is


now free, but could some future President rue the day this deal was


done. The author and journalist Charles Glass was himself held


hostage by Islamic militants in the 1980s in Lebanon. And the Lieutenant


was a counter intelligence officer for 30 years and served in


Afghanistan in our Washington studio. What do you make of the


Taliban video? It is clearly in their interests to put as good a


spin for their side as they can. It was interesting though that they


said to him, don't come back, or you will be killed. When the spin from


Washington was that he had gone over to them and had Stockholm syndrome


and was taking their side. If they were going to kill him it doesn't


seem as if that was the case. What did you make of it? I think the


Taliban today is not the Taliban that was there in 2001 when we


invaded. They are a sophisticated organisation that understands social


media and manipulating messages. There is an American reporter from


major network that said publicly on national American TV that the


Taliban is more co-operative than the White House. This was from a


friendly network to the President. The Taliban is trying to get the


most out of this event, they are, and as you in your introduction you


are talking about the fact they are getting back five very senior


commanders, for one individual who essentially left our side under


question questionable circumstances. The Taliban is reaping the benefit


of how they played this. Do you read it as a Taliban gain? It is a gain


for Bowe Bergdahl, he gets to go free, as a former hostage there is


nothing better than those first steps of freedom. The second,


President Obama initially had a bit of a propaganda victory having done


the trade-off saying he wouldn't leave anyone behind. That seems to


have back fired on him because of the approbium attached to the


exchange and he didn't inform Congress about it. The Republicans


criticising him most severely knows that the Regan administration did


the same with the hostages in Lebanon. The Iran scandal was all


about selling Iran weapons, giving Iran weapons in exchange for


hostages in Lebanon against American rule. Do you have Anwar site that


this -- an Anxiety this will come back and haunt American Presidents,


Lieutenant? I'm Tony too, sorry. The issue here for the American


Presidents in the future, they have to consider how that plays out. The


Iran issue was about material not individuals. In this case based on


my own direct knowledge there were other options on the table. Not only


military option that is related to finding a way to leverage other


folks to get Bergdahl back. He was held by the network in Pakistan.


That is very critical to the ecautious which has -- equation,


which hasn't been fully explored by anyone in that point in time. Go on


about the principle, the principle of doing deals with terrorists and


swapping prisoners? In the case of the Taliban there is a real issue by


these individuals, let's remember in Afghanistan there has always been a


retrenchment and allowing the Taliban to be reintegrated into


society. We have been allowing them to go back into society. With that


said it is these five individuals who were captured under the original


authorisation to military force, and these five individuals had direct


links to the Al-Qaeda folks who conducted the 9/11 attacks. That is


what the problem is with members of Congress and staff. I was over on


the hill talking to them yesterday and today, there are real issues


regarding these five more than other elements of the Taliban already


released. Do you think then there was a miscalculation of what the


effect of the exchange would be? Absolutely. I have been monitoring


this from day one, literally, and the issue regarding Bergdahl is


becoming clear, that he was not a pristine individual, there are


issues about how he left his post. That has become a very hard pill for


the American public and military to swallow. On top of that the


violation of law. All the lawyers I spoke to said there was a clear


violation by the President to allow the Taliban to go without


consultations to Congress, and most importantly, when you look at the


overall President press sent set by the President, will -- precedent set


about gaining leverage with hostages. What do you think the


legacy of the transaction will be? If the United States leaves


Afghanistan then its soldiers won't be vulnerable to being captured by


the Taliban or anyone else, perhaps in future wars,


the Taliban or anyone else, perhaps war are always taken by both sides


in war. It is nothing new, and prisoner exchanges are nothing new.


This is something that is occurring just before the withdrawal of combat


troops from Afghanistan, and in that context it looks different, doesn't


it? Not if you think of Vietnam. Remember the first thing that


happened as American troops pulled out, was the American prisoners came


back too. That was a defeat? At that time it wasn't being sold as a


defeat. And this time it isn't sold as a defeat either. In both cases it


probably is a defeat. Time to hear from Kevin Spacey, not only is he


one of the most famous actors in the world, but almost at the end of the


time as Artistic Director at the Old Vic. In the House of Cards he place


a snake making his way in American politics, is nothing like his real


incarnation, as some sort of demigod, but also an actor revered


for his devotion to British drama. We met him earlier today, be warned


he likes the odd Anglo-Saxonism. Here is the head of that ignoble


traitor, the dangerous and unsuspected Hastings. It is not


every day Newsnight is in the presence of Hollywood royalty. So


dear I loved the man (laughter) It is the Queen's Speech this morning.


It was all a bit of a nightmare getting here. But we're here. Kevin


Spacey has a film to promote, a behind the scenes documentary of


taking his production of Richard II I around the world. What do you


think the state of British theatre is now? There is lots of places


where there is tremendous growth, really interesting ideas, really,


you know, even if shows don't work the ideas behind shows, why people


are trying to work on certain issues and tackle certain kinds of theatre


is very exciting. I think it is in an incredibly healthy place. It is


exciting to be a part of it. Will you be sad to leave? I'm never going


to leave, it is not like I'm going to get on a plane and lock off. I


will always be a part of this country and always have a place in


London, and it is a huge part of my life. Back in the 90s when he won an


Oscar for American Beauty, you might have thought Spacey would have opted


for Hollywood more than anything else. It is the oddest thing, I feel


like I'm in a coma for 20 years and just now waking up. Instead he chose


a ten-year stint running London's Old Vic theatre. I was at a point in


my life where I didn't want to pursue the same dream, and everyone


wanted me to pursue the same dream because that is what people are


supposed to do. I was like I did it, I had this unbelievable run of


making movies and films that I'm unbelievably grateful. Some will


stand the test of time, and others will thankfully be forgotten. My job


is to clear the pipes and keep the sludge moving. Now he's better known


on the small green for the American political -- screen for the American


political drama House of Cards, a stand-out on Netflix. Why do you


think the best writing at the moment is on TV? Because movies stopped


making drama. What do you mean? The ground dried up. Somewhere at the


end, right into the 2000, the motion picture studios for the most part


started to focus on comic book characters, and that is what they


are driven by. And real, incredible, brilliantly written, directed, acted


character drama moved to a very fertile ground which, is television.


Because creative people will go where they can work. And where they


can create. It hasn't surprised me at all. With a third series in the


pipeline, the work on House of Cards, where Spacey's Democrat,


constantly moves for power in Washington, while teasing the


audience. I pity him. If the West Wing is an idealised look at


politicians and House of Cards is the other side, which is closer to


the truth? We are closer to the truth. I make a joke now and make it


sound like President Clinton said it and he didn't, but I like pretending


he did. What do they do on the House of Cardses, 99% is true, and the 1%


wrong is you could never get an education bill get passed that fast.


Some have said it is cynical a other politicians have said it is closer


than you would like to imagine. Does that depress you? Yes. It doesn't


depress me because you know in the sense that wow that is shocking


news, it depresses me because it makes me think that people don't


want to go into public service because what is the point. And


public service is an unbelievably important thing. People say to me


would you run for politics and office, I'm like, are you kidding


mement I like to get things done. Despite the programme's cynicism


about the political cynicism, we know President Obama likes it. I


wish things were that ruthless! Has Obama disappointed you? No. I think


it is incredibly difficult to get anything done when people who are


basically in control of the house of representatives have made a


declaration that they will stop everything you wanted to try to


achieve. You know you can only play ball if everyone is playing


together. It doesn't surprise me. Do you think Frank Underwood have any


advice for him? He would kill a lot of them! When you finish at the Old


Vic, what else, back to shoe salesman, stand-up? I don't know


what's next, that is one of the most exciting things. Obviously I'm


enjoying House of Cards and that may continue beyond a third season. I


don't know. That is actually thrilling not knowing. It is


thrilling. Don't know yet. Now the 25th anniversary of the most


notorious demonstration of the brutality of the Chinese state


passed today in Beijing with hardly a mum merit. That was because the --


mummur, that is because the police and associated thugs saw to it there


was no more than a mummur. Thousands of pro-democracy were demonstrators


were killed and the Government maintain it was no more than a few


hundred. One photo remains the great image of the uprising. Tank Man


depicts a man holding his shopping bags confronting an immpossibly


menacing row of armoured vehicles. The photographer was Jeff Widener.


This is his story. I got there a week before the crackdown, and it


was a very lively event, almost a carnival atmosphere. You had


children dancing and people were singing. Even policemen were singing


together with the protestors. It was well organised and I think everybody


knew this couldn't keep going on forever. I didn't think it was going


on forever. We were all sort of wondering what the Chinese


Government was going to do to the protesters. One picture that I


photographed of a woman being caught in the middle of many soldiers near


the Great Hall of the People in my mind is where it started. The


evening of June #rd was the time when things started heating up and


so all the protesters started bringing steel barricades and


putting them in the middle of the street to block the advances of the


soldiers who might come that night. I was talking to my reporter and


then we heard this noise of metal crashing on the ground. And we're


all thinking what's going on. What's happening. Then this armoured


personnel carrier comes around the corner so fast there is sparks


coming off the threads, everyone is running and screaming and I jumped


into the ivy, I had to pull myself up and go running after this


armoured car and I wanted to run in the opposite directionment when I


got there my battery power and my flash was almost zero, I could take


one picture every 60 seconds. So imagine on one of the largest


stories in the 20th century and you can only take one picture every


minute and all hell is breaking loose. One man was on the ground on


fire, rolling around, another man was helping him, and I'm going come


on, come on, come on, and the flash would not recycle, and I'm waiting


what seemed to be an eternity, I lifted it to my eye and the minute I


lifted it me-to-my eye, I look down and blood is all over me I had a


massive concussion from a brick, from a protestor. I looked at the


back of the armoured car on fire and this is now getting very close to


midnight, and then out came a soldier to surrender, he has his


hands up in the air and I still remember that pristine look of his


uniform, how pressed it was, as clear as day in my mind, I


remembered so clearly, and the mob looked at him for a second, and then


they slowly moved in and they had pipes and weapons of all kind, and


they started beating on him. And I looked at that and I couldn't take a


picture. And I thought to myself, I'm going to lose the Pulitzer


Prize, and then I thought I should be ashamed for thinking something


like that because he's about to die. I was not staying Tebay engining


Hotel, but the Beijing Hotel was the location closest to the Tiananmen


Square. This is where journalists were going to try to get some kind


of an idea about what was going on. And everybody was scared. I have


never been so scared of all the assignments I have never been so


scared as this story. Fortunately I managed to get to the Beijing hotel.


And we made it to the roof. I went out to the balcony, and I kept


looking at the bullet hole over my head. There was one bullet hole it


kept reminding me I could easily get picked off by a sniper, it was very


unsettling to be leaning over a balcony and trying to shoot over a


wall. The man walks out in the middle of the street with his


shopping bag and I told Kirk he's screwing up my composition, and he's


saying they will shoot him. I'm focussing for the man to be shot,


I'm waiting and waiting, I know it is going to happen, I'm waiting and


focussing and nothing happens. And then I'm thinking this picture is


too far away, it is too far away, I'm looking at the bed and thinking


do I take a gamble and get the teleconverter. I gamble and I put it


on the lens I go 1-2-3 (click) I wonder what happened to him like


anyone, the big question is, it is shocking after a quarter of a


century, not only do we not know where he is or his relative, you


would think a relative would come forward and what happened to the


tank crew, what happened to the driver, what happened to the crew,


they disappeared off the face of the planet. Those guys have lives. They


have got families, where are they? Where is everybody? It is like the


twilight zone, they just disappeared. Speaking to us from


Taiwan is the Tiananmen Square protest leader. With me here in the


studio is the economist and lecturer at the LSE, and the author of When


China Rules The World, Martin Jakes. Can we come to you in Taiwan first.


You intervened and spoke to the premier, what do you think you


achieved in that protest? Any protest has the same logic, you


apply pressure and hope your opponent or Government can maybe


come up to make the right choice. And then in this case the Chinese


Communist Party have failed to do that. They chose the most unlike but


actually the worst of all the options. And then when the meeting,


when we were summoned to the Great Hall of the People to meet with one


of the leaders, we don't know home, and then he came to meet with us,


and I thought we are meeting the premier. Maybe this is the moment we


can make that pressure work, you know, finally the pressure brought


the supreme leaders, so we can tell them what we really want. What we


wanted was dialogue, and hopefully from that dialogue something can


emerge, something like freedom of expression and then maybe freedom of


assembly. And then he gave us this monolougue and then there were going


on and gone, and he's saying he's late. I thought, wow, OK, premier


being a gentleman, but then he immediately turned that to us, and


said because he's late for 20 minutes because Beijing is in such


chaos, then he blamed the students for the chaos. So the monologue


going on, the TV cameras are shooting, we don't know if it is


live broadcasting, but we know this doesn't look good, this is not what


we hoped for, this is not the dialogue we are asking for. So with


a brief exchange with the students sitting next to me, and then we


decided to interrupt him. And I did it. So I think that will at least


show the people in front of the TV a clear message that we are not here


to be talked down at. We're here to give the Government a lecture. So we


told, I told the premier that yes, you are late, but you are not 20


minutes late, we called upon you a month ago. You are a month late. So


I guess he' never prepared for being electured by a 21-year-old. So he


was stung, and that has been broadcast nationwide that evening.


Do you think you achieved anything in this protest? It is a big


question, we all know the result of that, bloodshed in China. But if the


20th century, to be recorded, I'm sure, antifascism, and the


anticommunist aggression will be the two major campaigns to record, and


then China, the Chinese students, we took on the streets, basically


started the decisive battle of the second campaign, and then that


campaign has reached victory in Eastern Europe, in Soviet European,


did we achieve that? I think in part, yes, we contributed to that.


But unfortunately we are left out, although in the last 25 years the


Chinese Government have to give in to some of the demands we made.


Never really what we wanted. But we are, yes. How live an issue is this,


if the events of Tiananmen Square, so long ago, how live an issue is it


still in China? Today it is you know, it is not a topic that


everyone discusses in society. We don't really talk about it we don't


feel t but I think what is important is the tremendous economic


development did to an extent dwarf the event itself. What about the


claim that the Chinese Government acted as it did that it suppressed


the protest and made it possible for the Chinese economy to boom along in


the way it has done since, is that true? I think that instability,


major instability is an enemy of economic development, particularly


for a developing country. Not just in China and what you can think of.


The problem for the leader of China then was unity was fundamental in


his view for economic development. The reason in way things got


completely out of control in the way they did, is the leadership became


divided and eventually it let to this tragedy, it was a tragedy that


so many people died. But what is fascinating is within extremely


short space of time, historically speaking, the country began to


resume its very rapid growth. Are the two things connected?


Absolutely, stability is critical. The fact is China lifted 800 million


people out of poverty. That is also a fundamental human right. And we


could not have achieved it without stability. You can query about the


measures and the means by which we got there, but stability,


absolutely. It comes from democracy, communism has been the major factor


for Chinese instability. What do you, as a matter of interest, what


do you do now? What do you do now? I'm a determined activist, I'm a


determined dissident. What do you do for a living? Just like other fellow


dissidents in China, for a living, of course being a dissident doesn't


put the bread on the table, I'm an investment banker! I think QEDeh!


That is the point isn't it? Was it really, would it really have been


impossible for China to have married economic freedom with political


freedom do you think? It is really easy to talk about the counter


faction, we don't know what would have happened, but what I think


against gets not emphasised enough is the major improvement of the last


20 years, and democratic elements have been introduced in society, we


see through the microblogs and the Government responding more to


people's demands. Why is it is not a live issue, this was a very, very


powerfully emotional story, that went right around the world of


people trying to demand freedom and being, and having their protests


suppressed? Why is it not resonating in China? Clearly it was an


important moment, but in terms of China as a whole, I think in the


west we probably greatly exaggerated its significance. It wasn't a


China-wide movement that drew in large numbers of people. The


extraordinary thing if you look back now, 1989, how did we interpret


1989, Tiananmen Square first, Folaued by the fall of the Berlin


wall and the collapse of the Soviet Union, the end of communism, that is


how we interpret it in the west. We were right about the Soviet Union


and Eastern Europe but wrong about China. What happened was very


quickly China's growth was resumed and the Chinese Communist Party has


presided over the greatest economic transformation in history. History,


the world does not look the same now as it did then. In China, that


image, t photograph, Tank Man, the young man stopping the prosession of


tanks, is that known or resonated in China? Plenty of people, a lot of


people are travelling abroad, students are educated abroad and see


this picture, while it is officially not present. The knowledge of that


existence of that photo is very much in the society. Thank you all very


much. That's unfortunately all we are allowed to have time for