11/09/2014 Newsnight


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

Similar Content

Browse content similar to 11/09/2014. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



By this time just one week from now the polls in Scotland will be closed


and many of the record 97% of those eligible who registered to vote will


have marked their X for independence or the union. Now Scotland is place


where every politician wants to be. Today a trainload of Labour MPs


turned up in Glasgow to preach the goes elf Better Together by every


argument possible. We will be talking to one of the yes campaign's


biggest donors. I am of the view that the accused acted too hastily


and used excessive force. In the second sense it is clear his conduct


was negligent. Negligent but not guilty of premeditated murder. Oscar


Pistorius learns his fate tomorrow. How will South Africa respond.


I made it clear we will hunt down terrorists that threaten our


country, wherever they are. That means I will not hesitate to take


action against ISIS in Syria and Iraq. A new campaign of bombing


against the Islamic State wherever they may be. We will ask the Syrian


Government what they think of that, and hear from the world's most


famous diplomat, Henry Kissinger. This man beat terrifying odds to


beat the Ebola virus, thousands didn't, how did he do it and why is


he going back? Good evening, the day began with


claims and counter claims over the importance of two banks RBS and


Lloyd's considering moving their legal homes to London in the event


of a yes vote. RBS themselves said it would mean neither job cuts nor


move operations away or affect the day-to-day business. Lloyd's already


has its physical headquarters in England. The real excitement was the


concept of a political day trip to Scotland. Not normally a highlight


for MPs of all stripes and types in September. Our political editor


boarded the Hogwarts Express, not from platform nine and


three-quarters at kings correction but at Euston. One week left and it


is the flying Labour Party, the Shadow Cabinet boards the 7. 30 to


Glasgow. Not the 100 MPs touted before, but a sizeable number. These


Labour politicians know they need to get out the pro-union vote. Andy


Burnham does Labour understand Scotland? We are Scotland, that is


our roots, that is where we are from in terms of my own background in the


North West. The SNP has beaten you back recently? Of course, that is


our heritage, our roots it is DNA, so that's, we have been coming up


and down and giving our all in this campaign. And today the Labour


family comes together from all over Britain to say stay with us. Labour


is in trouble from union supporters for allowing the no camp's lead in


the polls to shrink. They know they are not as popular as they once


were. Why no balloons on the train?


Haven't we got any, I'm disappointing. We have eggs, we are


anticipating getting eggs, we have a few to launch back.


They are also getting flack for staying party political. Even though


the Prime Minister fronted up Tory unpopularity in Scotland yesterday,


those aboard the Labour locomotive still refuse to stand


shoulder-to-shoulder with him. Cameron's thing about the "effing


Tories" we willing returning to that.


What do you mean about that? That is what a lot of people think about


them. Cameron has hugged hoodies and huskies, he has never hugged anyone


from north of the border, they are the opposite of "one-nation".


Scotland says no! Labour's luminaries arrived into a tense


Scotland. Overnight the BBC reported that the Royal Bank of Scotland


would relocate its registered headquarters to London in event of


the yes vote. It was confirmed by RBS this morning, but Alex Salmond


was furious and he wrote to Cabinet Secretary demanding an inquiry. This


evening this appeal was rejected. I know that the BBC will want to


co-operate with the inevitable investigation by the Cabinet


Secretary into the briefing of this information. Given the briefing of


information, even if we weren't in a referendum campaign, even if there


weren't rules that are meant to apply to Government. The leaking of


market information is as serious a matter as you can possibly get. RBS


said later no jobs would be lost, but other companies made similar


noise, Lloyd's, Clydesdale, TSB and Tesco Bank. John Lewis, Waitrose and


Asda today said prices might go up in the event of a yes vote. But the


SNP believes the Westminster coalition pressured these groups to


back the Better Together. Aberdeen Asset Manager said today an


independent Scotland would be a success.


Better Together think they have their act to go for three reasons,


more powers to be handed over to Scotland, secondly to protect the


NHS in Scotland, the third is the decision of companies to leave


Scotland. Neither camp is resting on their laurels. The will of the


people one week from today, I believe will be the to restored this


rich ancient nation the opportunity once again to take its responsible


place in the community of nations. This is it. The moment to believe.


The moment to win. Thank you very much. Tomorrow UKIP arrived to


campaign for the union. The SNP hit Scotland's seven cities and we have


reached the seven-day countdown. In Dundee is coat founder and


chairman of the Stagecoach group Sir Bryan Souter. Good evening. First of


all we have heard that John Lewis partnership, including Waitrose,


also Asda, following on from the Kingfisher Group have all said


prices will rise if there is a yes vote. You can't say to people they


won't be worse off? Well, I think you have to look at why they are


coming out and saying this. They are not saying prices are going to rise,


they are pointing out that if there is not certainty about currency


union and if costs were to rise in Scotland, these costs would have to


be passed on to their customers. Of course I don't see any reason why


any of these things should happen. The most interesting revelation


today was Robert Peston who is telling us that basically Number Ten


are coraling and co-ordinating this campaign at the moment. And I just


think in Scotland it is seen as more bullying for the big boys. When you


have somebody who has credibility to keep hold of, like John Lewis


Partnership, they wouldn't say that likely, it is hardly likely they


will be bullied into something that is not the correct thing to say as a


business. At the moment any way they say in way they subsidise products


in Scotland by the rest of the UK operation. You don't really think


that serious people would really stretch the credibility of their


shareholders by saying something that is not true. They said prices


might rise in the event of independence. Again I say the


trouble is you cannot tell people in Scotland they won't be worse off?


No. And I think the emphasis is here on what they said. They said prices


"might" rise. They didn't say on what they said. They said prices


might drop and they could have? No, but of course the prices could drop


if the Government in Scotland creates the right environment and I


look at the tax incentives that we have already suggested with


corporation tax. The other incentives for companies, financial


services we could reinstate the tax credit which undermined all our


pension funds and attract more pension funds to locate in


Edinburgh. We could introduce tax regimes for the oil companies to


encourage them to do more exploration. You could do all these


things, you are absolutely right, but we don't know whether or not in


the event of independence all these things will happen. Instead the


situation might be under independence that you have at least


18 months, perhaps two years or more in which as an unstable environment,


so therefore it would be most unlikely that companies would come


to invest in Scotland, set up businesses without knowing what


regime. You could not expect companies to do it in the dark and


therefore Scotland would lose investment? I don't accept that,


because I think companies look at all of the uncertainties and they


have to make assessments and as I understand it people are actually


more concerned about an exit from Europe than what they are about


independence. I think companies have to have these conversations and they


have to look at the risks for shareholders and that is fair enough


that they should do THACHLT think when you read the -- when you read


the statements clearly, they are reasonable statements. And during


the 18-month period it would be in everyone's interest to settle the


currency union issue quickly, that is the main issue people are


unsettled about. In that case, Bryan Souter, can you tell me the name of


a single company who now, with the uncertainty is saying in the event


of an independent country they would move to Scotland for the first time.


The problem is there are no companies saying that? We found that


most of our growth comes from small and medium-sized companies, that is


where most of the support for independence comes from. We have had


a very good record in Scotland over the last few years of attracting


inward investment. In the last few months there has been no sign of


that tailing off. I don't have access to the exact numbers in this,


but the Scottish Government have the numbers on this, and I have heard


that quoted recently. There is no sign at the moment. If there is a


period of 18-months negotiation, I think the biggest issue that comes


out of that is this issue about the currency. And the reason why


sterling is so unsettled at the moment is because the unionist


position is creating a situation where international investors are


very concerned that the oil and gas and whiskey exports would drop from


the balance of payments. There is nothing to do about that uncertainty


because you are in a position to deliver anything, it would be a


process of negotiation. Where there is some certainty is both RBS and


Lloyd's have said their legal headquarters and Lloyd's is already,


would be in England. Therefore people know the share price has gone


up on the basis of that today because people know where they


stand, and they know deposits legally in England would be


guaranteed. That is a certainty you can't offer? Once the negotiations


are through we can offer that certainty. But the union also has


great deal of uncertainty for people. We have no idea whether the


Barnet formula will continue, we have no idea whether we will be in


Europe with an in-out referendum. These uncertainties have to be


balanced up, and actually I believe that during that negotiation period,


if we get the yes vote, and we get the mandate that we need, we could


settle most of these issues very, very quickly and it would be in


everyone's interest to do so. It affects both Scotland and the UK. It


would also perhaps be in your interest because you run one of the


United Kingdom's largest transport groups for bus travel particularly.


A lot of your employees and business is in England. David Cameron was


very misty-eyed at the thought of losing Scotland, surely you have a


huge loyalty and affection for your business in England. It wouldn't


feel the same, would it? Well, I have enormous affection for any


country where I'm making a good living, and I'm invested in many


different countries. Of course we're not going to be separated at all,


we're going to be as in the European Union, most of the customers of the


companies in Holland are in other parts of the European Union. So this


really is not really an argument in my view. Most of our customers are


in other countries, we are a very small country any way and we have


got customers in America, and just be clear that I'm on this programme


in my role as Souter Investments Chairman, not the Chairman of


Stagecoach, but I make the point that most of the companies in


Scotland and internationally have wide bases of customers. I don't


think these arguments really make much difference. In the past few


minutes a new poll has been published and our chief


correspondent is in Edinburgh tonight with the news. What is the


poll saying? Of course you can't judge this whole complicated


volatile situation based on one poll, but there is new significant


numbers tonight. In part because the YouGov poll out tonight, which puts


"no" back ahead at 52% to 48 from the yes campaign has been conducted


by the same company that at the weekend produced the same poll that


stunned Westminster into action by putting yes in the lead for the


first time. There are a couple of interesting things happening


underneath the top layer. The female votes, which the yes campaign still


has to persuade, in fact support for their arguments appears to be on the


slide. And secondly, the number of undecided voters appears to have


gone down to just 4%, really on the way down. Now, for Better Together,


perhaps for them this will feel that their economic arguments about risks


that they suggest appear to be finding more and more resonance. Of


course that has been echoed by the interventions of company bosses in


the last couple of days. At the same time though it has emerged that some


of those bosses met David Cameron in the last 24 hours to discuss this


issue. And for the nationalist side, well that gives fuel to the argument


that Westminster is pulling the strings. By the same token two of


the chief executives who have spoken out in the last couple of days have


expressed to me in the last year exactly that view but privately. It


is only now with seven days they are now willing to go public. As we said


the cavalry rode to Scotland on the rails, but the general is already in


the country. You spoke to him today? Everywhere you go now, everyone you


speak to, this is intense, it is very, very fluid and things have


been difficult for both campaign, apart from anything else it has been


going on for two years. But a hardened political campaigner said


this was like nothing they had seen before, it feels like a war. For the


man who has been leading the campaign for better by-election the


former Chancellor, Alistair Darling, it has been long, it has been tense


and time is running out. There are seven days to go now, the


advantage was yours for more than two years, it appears to have been


squadered, how did you allow that to happen? I always said the polls


would narrow, a year or two people said it was a foregone conclusion, I


said no it won't be. The reason for that is this decision is so


momentous for Scotland. If we decide to leave the UK it is not like a


general election where you can kick the Government of the day out or


kick them in the teeth if that is what you want to do. If we decide to


leave it is forever. There is no going back. It is not surprising


given the magnitude of that decision that you are getting people, even at


this stage of the week to go who are still agonising between the


arguments of the heart and head. But I think we will win. I'm confident


we will win. But your former colleague, Gordon Brown, clearly


felt that the situation was so perilous for your side of the


argument that he had no choice but to step in. Almost unilaterally it


seems? Gordon has been speaking for us for over a year now. But in


relation to the more powers for the Scottish Parliament which the party


has set out their actual proposals some time ago, I have been asking on


numerous occasions how do you bring things together to make sure you


have a precise single set of proposals, what is the timetable,


and yet we have announced that. What I would say to you is this, for most


people in Scotland and if you look at the poll published today, what


they are more interested in is what would this mean, rather than the


process. In terms of the campaign, the lead was yours to hold on to,


and it was slipping away, and your former colleague, Gordon Brown,


clearly felt he had no choice but to step in, even David Cameron and the


Westminster leaders feel they have had to step in? Both Both Gordon


Brown and the leaders of the parties have been campaigning for several


months now actually. It doesn't look like it to many people, these


interventions in the last ten days of the campaign, doesn't it look


rather desperate and panicked? In any election campaign and


referendums are pretty rare, it is not surprising that activity gets


ramped up as you get towards the actual polling day. I know from you


know meeting people, being out on the streets the level of interest in


Scotland and in this campaign is immense. The tension, the arguments


I have never seen anything like it in the last 30 years. Do you see the


strategy in the last few days from David Cameron, Nick Clegg and Ed


Miliband as having been patronising? No I don't. I think there is nothing


wrong with people outside the UK expressing their views. Come on, the


other side have got American actors, or actors living in America


expressing their views. There is nothing wrong with people not living


in Scotland expressing a view. The most important thing to remember is


those in Scotland have the vote. And people are focussing on what this


means to them rather than on particular politician Is think. But


many voters we have spoken to have felt it is patronising for people to


jump on a plane from London and come up at the very last minute. Is it a


problem you don't see that? You will find people, especially people who


take the opposite view to me, nationalist who will say that, you


will also find if they hadn't come up the same nationalists would have


said actually isn't it terrible they are not coming up. Frankly though, I


think most people in Scotland will look at that sort of political


squabbling and say, come on, it is more important than that. But you


have staked this campaign on economic potential, potential


economic risks, was it wrong to gamble that voters wouldn't believe


Alex Salmond on the economy. Because clearly people do believe him, and


frankly some people have had enough of the economic arguments against


that you put forward? My argument has been based, yes on the brass


tacks, if you like. And that matters because it matters our ability to


generate jobs, to generate employment, wealth, to pay for the


health service. It is also an emotional argument as well. In the


last few days you have seen Alex Salmond, you know, it is really


unpleasant stuff that some how he represents Scotland and the rest of


us and those of us who oppose him, some how we are not entitled to have


our say. I'm proud to be Scottish, I'm also proud to be British as


well. I don't see why he should force me to choose between the two.


The emotional argument is just as strong as the economic argument, but


bread and butter, brass tacks, they matter to people as well. But that


is not the perception that many voters have had, and that suggests,


surely, that there have been mistakes in this campaign, and what


has come across is the issue of what is on the balance sheet not what is


in people's guts? If you take a decision to live with someone or get


married or where you live, if you had done the sums on the emotional


side you wouldn't do that, no thanks to that. What we have heard time and


again in the last few days is people want something different, they want


something else, and many voters in Scotland have come to see the yes


campaign as the one who is hold out the offer of a fairer country of


social justice. Labour, traditionally started in this


country, and began that argument? The SNP Government in Edinburgh has


cut 130,000 college place, 90,000 of them would have gone to young women,


most of these people going to the college, young students come from


backgrounds where they don't have the qualification, they need the


skills to get on. They have taken a billion pounds out of their


antipoverty programme, don't tell me that is progressive socialism or


anything like it. It is a completely different thing. There are


significant swathes of voters in Scotland who believe the other side


offers more social justice. They are beating you at your own game? But


they are not. And again if you look at what they do, rather than what


they say, the picture is rather different. There is a lot of Labour


voters who are looking and asking themselves what is best, most every


type of voter won't change, but I think we can deliver change within


months. You say there could be change within months, why did it


take so long for your side to offer a timetable for extra powers for


Scotland? Look, we have offered a timetable, and frankly, most people


are less concerned about process and all that, but rather... This calm


mains been going for two years, more than that, and it wasn't until ten


days before the vote, suddenly there is a timetable? There is a timetable


that shows how we can implement the legislation to strengthen the


Scottish Parliament. We are now seven days before polling day and I


don't know what money we will be using, what currency we will be


using, I don't know who will pay pensions in Scotland. I don't know


how well fare will work. Would it have been better if this timetable


for extra powers, that change you are now promising, had been coming


up much earlier in the campaign? I think actually if you look, the


thing that we need to explain is the extra powers that will come, which


we have been doing, and the timetable actually has helped us do


that. Regardless what happens, do you believe that we are heading for


some kind of constitutional crisis, or breakdown? If Scotland votes to


go next week that's it. There is no question it will become independent.


There is no question of it, there is no second chance if you like. And of


course that will have profound implications for the rest of the UK


as well. If the vote is no, ought England to get the extra powers


Scotland will get? There is a big issue in England if you look at


particularly cities like Birmingham, Manchester, Leeds, Newcastle, they


in my view need more powers to try to shift some of the economic


balance to the northern part of England way from the south-east. You


do believe then that other parts of the UK should get the same kind of


extra powers too? Well, look up to a point in the sense that the law in


Scotland is different. The education system is different, and you know


health has always been organised differently, that is not the case in


different parts of England. Next Friday morning f yes win, would you


be willing to be part of Alex Salmond's negotiating team? He keeps


going on about this, Alex Salmond and team work, come on. But would


you be willing to do it? I'm Scottish, I'm staying here, I'm


democrat, I will abide by the result. But, you know, if you look


at his prospectus, some of the stuff he's arguing in the White Paper,


some of it just doesn't stack up. You must have considered how would


you feel about living in an independent Scotland with Alex


Salmond as the leader of the country? You know if Scotland became


independent presumably we would have elections like everybody else and


decide which party was going to do that. What I'm more worried about


now in a way I wasn't six months ago is how to bring together the


divisions in Scotland at the moment. When I hear Alex Salmond saying


yesterday, he was going on about Team Scotland, what he's saying in


an undertone that those of you not with me are doing something wrong.


That is offensive stuff. Both sides of the argument hold passionate


views on the country, all of us are as Scottish as it is desperately


keen to sort out our country. I have not seen tensions like this in 30


years of campaigning. When I find people who are frightened to speak


out and put posters up, we don't want to live in a country like that.


On the 19th there is a lot of healing to be done. This has been


fierce and deeply personal, probably for every single Scott. But what


kind of toll has it taken on you? I volunteered to do this. Are you


still glad you did? Yes, I am. I would never have forgiven myself to


sit on the sidelines and hope somebody else would do it. This is


an argument we need to settle in Scotland, and we will in just over


six days time. Oscar Pistorius has been cleared of the murder of his


girlfriend, Reeva Steenkamp, however, he still faces the


possibility of a number of years in prison for cupable homicide, the


South African equivalent of manslaughter, with a maximum 15-year


sentence on the table. The trial has been noted for black woman judging a


white man without a jury, in front of the glare of the entire South


Africa nation. How much is the trial a mirror of South African society,


and how far has it come since apartheid.


Oscar Pistorius was a star, one of South Africa's biggest and most


severed athletes. He changed the image of the Paralympics, and


becamen the first amputee runner to compete in an Olympic Games. I train


harder than any of the other guys do, I put in more hours, I eat


better, sleep better and rest better, I'm more diligent and train


better than other guys. The image was completed with his glamorous


model girlfriend, Reeva Steenkamp. But on Valentine's Day last year he


killed her, firing four shots through a bathroom door at his home


in Pretoria. There is no way you can convince a court that she stood


there saying nothing, why, why would she not say a thing? Oscar Pistorius


has always maintained he thought there was an intruder. It was the


first trial to be televised in South Africa, and was watched around the


world. Casting a spotlight on the country's justice system. Where one


judge and no jury presided in court. A legacy of apartheid. It has been a


trial with drama, as a darker side to Pistorius came out, including his


liking for guns. Screams of delight, but listen to the voice of man who


sounds very much like Oscar Pistorius.


The prosecution said it was premeditated murder, a charge which


the judge rejected. It follows that the accused's erroneous belief that


his life was in danger, the accused cannot be found guilty of murder.


That, however, is not the end of the matter. As culpable homicide is a


competent verdict. But she still suggested he was guilty of


negligence, and that is an accusation which tomorrow could


still see Oscar Pistorius end his career in jail. With me in the


studio to discuss all this is The Orange Prize nominated South


African-born author, Gillian Slovo, and from Johannesburg, author and


broadcaster, Eric Miyeni. What did you make of this part of the


verdict, not guilty of murder, do you think he benefitted from a lack


of a jury? I don't think it is a lack of a jury, I think it is a very


difficult thing to prove what is in a man's mind. He's the only living


witness to tell you what's there, how do you prove that what he's


saying and in his mind is wrong. I don't think it has anything to do


with the jury. It was a very difficult thing for the state to


prove. Tell me, Gillian Slovo, what does this say about South Africa,


how does it play out in South Africa the idea that there was somebody


else in the room and chances are Oscar Pistorius thought it was black


man invading his house? I think it is an extraordinary thought for him.


Afterall Oscar Pistorius lived in a port trees. -- for -- fortress. He


had security guards, that fear is not founded on reality, but on a


fear, I think, of the privileged that there will be the mass of the


impoverished to come and try to get their money and actually come and


get their guns. Do you think that this speaks to a chasam between


black and white in South Africa? I'm not even sure it is between black


and white, it is a chasam of class. It is about the fact that there are


a small number of very rich and entitled people in that country.


Many of them are white, but increasingly more of them are black


and a huge bulk of impoverished people. Eric what do you think of


that? I do not think the way it has gone proves any chasam in the


society, it proves no matter how privileged, no matter how famous, if


you do something wrong you will be held to account. And secondly I


think we should correct this. Oscar never, ever said there was a black


intruder, not once did he say that, not once was it mentioned in court.


He said he thought there was an intruder, and everybody else who


says black is putting that into the picture, Oscar didn't. Yeah, Oscar


never said it was a black intruder, but I think the assumption that it


would be black intruder is a valid one to make. In the past during the


years of party there was something they called the "black peril". I


think that still runs in the consciousness of people in that


country. That there is something very scary and something out to get


them. And certainly Oscar Pistorius talked about how in his childhood


this was something he and his mother often did discuss. Eric? Yeah, but I


think we should take Judge Masipa's lead, it is important to do that. We


can't put words in someone's mouth. The fact people used prejudice to


assume things is incorrect, that is not how to run a justice system


either. If we use these volatile terms that were not mentioned at


all, we would not get justice. This judge would havered in erred in what


she was doing and we should do the same. It is interesting to see after


all these years after apartheid that Judge Masipa is one of two female


judge, this is progress, and the racist assumption is she would have


been tough on Oscar Pistorius, where as she took her legal training very


seriously indeed, and delivered a very long verdict on part of it.


What will be the impact if he's found guilty of culpable homicide?


It will be an incredible impact. I mean either way as a nation we will


have to look at everything she says to justify her judgment, whether we


agree with it or not, we will have to stay with the facts. Right now I


think she's incredibly correct in saying that the state just couldn't,


it is almost an impossible thing to prove that this is what the man


intended when he's the only witness. Whatever she comes up with, all we


are left with is how she gets to the conclusion. And so far I think she's


doing an incredible job. And precisely because everyone is


pudding the raciadivide -- putting the racial divide and she's a black


woman and she should do this and the fact that she is not is an


incredible sign of our justice system. It is a sign of the justice


system working, the South African justice system doesn't always work


like this, but she is taking it incredibly serious. It is the first


televised trial with an affect on everyone. One place there is a


divide is relations between men and women in South African, the Women's


League was there as well. There is a real worry about sexism in South


Africa? Not only sexism but violence against women. That was never


proved? The situation has improved in South Africa in the sense that


since 2009 less women are getting killed by their partners. I think it


is now rate of one every eight hours rather than 2009 when it was one


every six hours. There is a real problem within South Africa, not


only about violence in general, but yes, violence again women. Thank you


very much indeed. If we are now clear that President


Obama will begin open-ended air strikes against IS in Syria, the


British Government sent confusing signals over British involvement.


First Alex Hammond insisted Britain would not take part in any air


strike, only to be corrected by Downing Street which said in terms


of air power the Prime Minister has not ruled anything out. For one


former US Secretary of State, Henry Kissinger, the US President's moment


of clarity has not come too soon. He had accused the US of being


bystanders and encouraged an all-out attack on IS. In his book, World


Order has just come out. President Obama has said he wants to


destroy the Islamic State and there will be US air strikes against them


in Syria, can he achieve his goal? We should be very careful in stating


objectives that are related to what the American political process will


support. In this case we are dealing with 20,000 fanatics that started


Anwar offshoot of Al Qaeda. I think it is an objective that can be


reached and defined in that manner. I do not believe that will bring


piece to the Middle East. It means that the challenges will change and


that's important for America to understand.


You have always been an advocate of realisim in foreign policy rather


than idealism. This is a standard argument, I believe that you have to


begin argument, I believe that you have to begin I think you have to


begin with a realistic assessment of the forces at work, they include


values and ideals. So in that sense you are a realist, should the US be


co-operating with President Assad in Syria, the sworn enemy of a year ago


in order to combat the Islamic State? I think we should settle our


disagreement with Assad aside for the moment. Not co-operate with him


in any formal way. But then when we succeed in destroying ISIS we could


then reconsider our views of our relationship with Assad, or we could


address the situation, which I think is more important, even more


important, what kind of structure should emerge there. Because the


notion that Syria is a coherent state is a figment of the 1920s. And


so that it would have to be reconstructed in some fashion. It is


in that context that we should then look at the Assad question again.


You say the US failed in Iraq because it was trying to implement


American values in the part of a world where there were no historical


roots. Is the US doom today fail again as it tries to take on the


Islamic state in Iraq and Syria? We have to understand that it is not in


our capability to bring about western-style democracy in these


societies in the process of a military conflict. And it is


probably not sustainable in American domestic opinion to engage in such


an enterprise. When you look at the chaos in Iraq today, do you regret


your support for the US-led invasion? If I had known then what I


know now, and if I had been as aware of the schisms between the Shia and


the Sunni, as I was not then, as most briefings suggested was not


relevant to the Iraqi case. Had I known all of this I would not


recommend it today. This is what I think today. In your book you argue


that because the world is so volatile it is more important than


ever for America to remain engaged. Is Barack Obama as engaged as he


should be? There are two levels of engagment, there are things you


proclaim you will do and the commitment you indicate behind the


things that you will do. And it seems to me that the first part of


that has been met more fully than the second part. Meaning? Meaning


that the personal belief in what is being done and the ability to


inspire your people to go on an as yet unchartered road, that part of


needs another speed. You talk about the breakdown of legit my macy and


trust in Government. Could that theory explain the rise in support


for Scottish independence? Yes. A lot of faith in established


institutions. If Scotland voted for independence would the United


Kingdom without Scotland be diminished as a world power? That


would depend in part on how it conducts itself. I don't think


necessarily. Because not everybody will fully understand what has


happened. And then for some it might still be thought of as the United


Kingdom. For you who has, in your academic life, seen the nation state


and the peace fail. Would it sadden you to see an independent Scotland?


It wouldn't sadden me. But if it happens, America can live it with


it, Britain will find way to get through it but it will be an


emotional drama for Britain. It must have some impact. Thank you very


much for joining us. A little earlier I spoke to Bouthaina


Shaaban, political and media adviser for President Assad from Damascus.


President Obama says there will be air strikes in Syria against IS, do


you welcome that? I think what President Obama said is quite


confusing because the Security Council resolution 217 spoke about


fighting terrorism, and they spoke about the world community standing


against terrorism, while the speech of President Obama dropped the


co-ordination with Russia and China, invented some opposition that he


wanted to support. I think it has many problems what President Obama


has announced and I think the west again is making mistakes in our


region. They should we view their strategy before taking any action in


that region if they truly want to stop terrorism. We know there are


ten Arab states rallying to the United States, surely that is your


best chance of defeating IS? Terrorism did not start with I SFOR


a start. In Syria we have been facing the same kind of terrorism


for the last four years. The same kind of killing, slaughtering, you


know displacing Christians and other people, and therefore I think what


President Obama is talking about is not going to solve any problem


anywhere because's not taking the right decision now. If he is going


to stand by what he said today. What he said today needs a lot of


clarification. Let's clarify something now. If President Obama


mounts air strikes near Raqa, will Syria attack American airplanes? Our


Foreign Minister has announced if there is an inter-National Coalition


against terrorism, Syria will be ready to be part of it. We have been


fighting terrorism for the last 30 years, but certainly nobody will be


able to fight terrorism on our land without our co-ordination and


without our role in fighting terrorism. If President Obama


launches air strikes backed by ten Arab states in Syria, will there be


a counter-attack by Syria, or will you see it as President Obama doing


your job for you and combatting IS? You see now I think there is a lot


of talk that is going on, I think Russia and China are not accepting


what President Obama is saying. He is not abiding by Security Council


resolution, even though the statement he did today, speaking


about hunting terrorists is easier said than done, speaking about not


allowing Christians and minorities to be removed from their original


land. I would like to tell you... What does President Assad want, what


are you doing to combat IS? What are you doing to take on IS? We have


been fighting terrorism, IS and other kinds of terrorism, there are


over 1,000 branches of terrorism here, for the last four years. They


have been slaughtering our people, they have been killing our army, the


west unfortunately only noticed when a western person was slaughtered and


we condemn killing anybody, but our people have been killed for the last


four years, and nobody even condemned the killing of our people


and the people of our army. If President Obama strikes near Raqa,


not all over Syria, but in the east, along a line, will the Syrians


welcome that help to defeat IS? Syria would welcome to be part of


the discussion and the decision, because fighting terrorism is not an


easy thing, and we are the people who have been facing terrorism in


the region. Will you talk to President Obama? I said to President


Obama that he should truly get the opinion and the help of all people


in the region, not only the countries who have been very handy


in helping terrorists, who have been financing terrorism. Raqa is an


ungoverned space and the American commandos went in to try to get


James Foley, there is a British hostage among other hostages, surely


we must make every effort in that area to combat IS? You know why the


west now suddenly started to talk only about IS, talk about terrorism,


what did they do since 9/11, since 2001, what are the achievements in


Pakistan, in upper Afghanistan and in Libya. They have to believe that


they have to listen to consult with people who have been truly victims


of terrorism, not to meet with countries who have been financing


arming and facilitating terrorism. But the problem is that President


Assad is not in control of the whole of his country. President Assad is


not control of the situation, therefore it is impossible for those


standing by in other countries not to do anything. Other people have to


take on IS if President Assad can't do it? At least the army of Syria is


fighting terrorism everywhere, and if there areas that are taken by the


terrorists, it is thanks to the people who have been financing and


arming and facilitating terrorism, therefore the least thing that Obama


could do is stand with Syria, with the Government of Syria against


terrorism and with the Government of the region who truly are against


terrorism. You know that IS represents a very particular threat,


this is not like the opposition that stood up to President Assad four


years ago, this is quite different. You know it is a different kettle of


fish and they have to be taken on separately. You know that?


Unfortunately you know things that are not real. IS is like the


terrorist like other organisation, I can count 100 organisations that


have been slaughtering people, killing women and have been


criminals all over the country. I'm not underestimating the horrid


presence of IS, but I'm saying to the west you have to get real. You


have to see what's happening on the ground. What President Obama is


saying he's going to support and finance and arm, they are the same


people like IS, they have the same ideology, extremist, terrorist


ideology. Thank you very much. To survive the deadly Ebola virus is


one thing, but to return to the centre of the epidemic to play a


part again to control the outbreak is quite near. William Pooley, the


British nurse who was the first Britain to contract the virus in


Sierra Leone, was desperately ill when the RAF evacuated him from a


Government base in Kenema three weeks ago. The odds of him surviving


were poor, with expert demand in the Royal Free Hospital, under Stephen


Mepham in a microbiology consultant who flew to Sierra Leone to


accompany him home. Charities such as medicines sans front tears


turning patients away, he's going back. Only worked in the hospital


six weeks when he became infected, he believes he has work to do in


Sierra Leone. It is good to see you looking well. You went to work in


that hospital, you were already working for a charity in the area.


Then you went to hospital because of Ebola, did you know what you were


facing? Not before I went. After a few weeks there it became apparent


that people were, nursing were getting infected, there were


certainly a risky place to work that did become apparent after a few


weeks, but there was also improvement happening all the time.


It felt like things were becoming safer. And indeed you lost friends


you had made there? In the time I was there eight or so colleagues


died that I was working with. And then when you became ill, did you


realise quickly just how ill you were? It was overnight really, I


started to feel sick and then the next day he was tested. I had the


feeling it was going to be bad news. And the test to prove that I had


Ebola, it happened very quickly. I always wondered it did you tell your


parents at that point? I wanted to hold off until the evacuation was


confirmed. Once all of that was put into place I was able to tell my


parents. It must have been extraordinary, but you understand


infectious diseases and you work with them, to be in the isolation


tent and to be treated at the Royal Free, what did you make of it, it


must have been extraordinary? It was extraordinary, and the contrast


between the care that I was providing in Sierra Leone with the


care that I received, I was outnumbered by healthcare work


erstwhile the patients were outnumbing me. A Third World disease


treated in a first world country, as compared what happens in the third


world company? That changes outcomes, I had that treatment and


care. What do you think about that f this was a disease that broadly


affected a white western population we would have found a vaccine


quicker? Money has to be made out of these things, it was easy to ignore


the problem while there were small pockets of disease in place, I don't


think it can be ignored any longer. Medicines sans frontier in like


beeria are saying it is out of control what -- in Liberia are


saying it is out of control what are you saying about that? They said


they needed an 800 bed hospital and it is getting out of control in


Liberia and Sierra Leone as well, you can see the rate of new


infections going up exponentially. And that means more deaths? We are


moving away from the time when we can contain this towards a point


where it is a lost cause. What do you want David Cameron to do? I


would love to see him take global leadership on this and dedicate a


good amount of resources for establishing treatment centres and a


number of treatment services for Sierra Leone and Liberia, where they


can give decent care for international staff, well resourced,


they will be safe for staff to work in. And better outcomes. You have


had the disease and treated, can you ever get it again, there is some


dispute about this? Almost all of the evidence points towards


immunity, we don't know for how long, whether it is lifelong. But it


seems very likely that I would be protected against this strain of


Ebola at least. How quickly are you going back? It will be a few weeks.


You don't have your passport yet because it was incinerated? That is


in the post. Your family are OK with you going back? They support me all


the way. The front papers tomorrow:


Nothing unusual about a holiday and nothing unusual about recording


every single event, adventure, meal, drinking marathon, with some


impressive Photoshop skills a Dutch student found she could do it all


without moving a muscle. She faked a trip from her home in Amsterdam to


satire the media management. The quiet settled spell of weather


conditions. No sign of rain in the near future.


Download Subtitles