21/02/2018 Newsnight

The brutal attack on Syrian

civilans in Ghouta seems

like bloodthirsty madness.

But is there a method behind it?

Unicef issued a blank press

release today to describe

what's happening in Syria because,

they say, there are no

words to describe it.

And yet there are.

What Assad wants is to repeat

what happened last March in Homs,

when the rebels agreed to evacuate

rather than further harm

the local population.

Closing out this opposition

stronghold in East Ghouta would

effectively represent an opposition

strategic defeat, and the effective

or de facto victory

of the regime in Syria.

We'll ask the UN's

man in Syria what,

if anything, the outside

world can do.

Also tonight...

We go to the airport, I cannot get

on the plane with bottled water, but

we leave it to some animal to walk

into a school and shoot our

children.

Silence from the President

as he hears from the families

and the survivors of Florida.

But is he listening?

And this is what Egypt

looks like in the years

after the Tahrir Square uprising.

A military regime more violent

and repressive than ever.

And far quicker

to resort to torture.

Good evening.

The UN has described the situation

in Syria's Eastern Ghoutta

as "hell on earth".

In the face of so much bloodshed,

it seems crazy, unthinking perhaps,

to talk about strategy.

But as the world is forced -

by the sheer level of inhumanity -

to look up, tonight we try

to explain to you what

the Assad plan is.

The answer could lie in looking

at what has happened

elsewhere in Syria -

sustained attacks and bombing

of civilians that raises

the pain-level of the local

population to a point

where they are ready to turn

on the rebels in their midst

and agree an evacuation.

It worked for Assad

in Homs, and in Aleppo.

Rebels eventually agreed to be

bussed out en masse.

Here's our diplomatic

editor, Mark Urban.

Take in the local media

outlets covering Syria,

and you'll learn much

about the objectives and tactics

in this latest offensive.

Syria's own new agency emphasises

the role of East Ghoutta as a haven

for terrorists who've been shelling

areas of the capital for years,

and indeed, in recent days.

TRANSLATION:

The city

of Damascus is full of good

people who face terrorism

and are living their normal lives

despite all the mortars

that are fired at them.

We call on the Syrian Army to hit

them with an iron fist.

TRANSLATION:

If we had evacuated

and stayed at home every

time the mortars fell,

we definitely would not have

remained steadfast at this stage.

School exams will continue,

as postponing them

wouldn't be of any use.

Syrian Army video also portrays

operations against East

Ghouta as a war on terror,

setting it to suitably heroic music.

With rebel groups mopped up

in the east and other major

centres like Aleppo,

the Army is now free to bring more

firepower to bear against the last

major centre of resistance

near the capital.

Closing out this opposition

stronghold in East Ghoutta

would effectively represent

an opposition strategic defeat,

and the effective or de facto

victory of the regime in Syria,

so the significance is huge,

which I guess is why many of us

would be questioning why

the international community

is paying relatively little

attention to what is happening.

Pro-regime media has this week shown

armoured units being moved up

in preparation for ground attacks

on the rebel enclave.

In the meantime, air strikes

are setting the stage.

What's happening in Eastern

Ghouta, essentially, is,

with the backing of Russia,

the Syrian government

has been deliberately

targeting its own people.

This is part of a wider pattern,

a wider strategy, that we have been

documenting for quite some time now.

It's essentially the ugly face

of the Syrian government's strategy,

known as "surrender or starve".

Given the heavy casualties that

would be taken in storming Ghouta,

it's likely the regime will use

a playbook it's already applied

in Homs, Aleppo and elsewhere,

raising the pain level

of the civilian community

to such a level that they

ask rebels to leave.

That leads to evacuations,

often facilitated by humanitarian

organisations, taking buses out

to safe havens elsewhere.

And, indeed, in this report last

month by Iran's Press TV,

a Syrian soldier fighting in Ghoutta

talked about the evacuation option.

TRANSLATION:

We gave

the terrorists the chance

to leave to Idlib in green buses.

Now I tell them there

are no more green buses.

Now this is their fate.

But now the evacuation buses

could come back on the agenda,

as the government seeks

to add Ghouta to the list

of conquered places.

With the heavier costs they can

impose on the civilian

population to pivot that pressure

on the armed opposition,

to basically give up or surrender,

exactly represents their best case

scenario, but as I say,

East Ghouta in particular has been

besieged de facto for over five

years, and still it has consistently

presented that kind of stalwart,

stubborn opposition

to regime control.

So I would suggest that,

like in Aleppo, we will continue

to see a steady escalation

in the bombing campaign,

and then an eventual ground

incursion that, yes,

probably will eventually lead

to that same result.

After more heavy bombing today,

a rebel spokesman in Ghouta said

ceasefire talks had broken down.

But the government has

capitulation in mind,

and many more people may have to die

before those holding out

in the enclave could agree to that.

Joining me now is Panos

Moumtzis, the UN's

humanitarian coordinator

for the Syria crisis.

And in the studio Dr Lina Khatib

from the Chatham House think-tank.

Until that point of evacuation, it

is presumably impossible for the UN

to go in and do its job?

At the

moment it is impossible, we have no

or for organisations to go inside

although assistance and everything

we have needed is within ten miles

distance. It is often Damascus where

there is a

there is a urgent need for food. But

more important to protect civilians

in the enclave where there are

thousands of people living at the

moment. Our only hope at the moment

I would say is the Security Council

resolution being discussed to bring

an immediate ceasefire. The ongoing

discussions I hope will bring

results. There is an agreement that

comes to place for cessation of

hostilities that is desperately

needed.

Without the UN Security

Council 's, the best way out for

civilians is a deal.

They have to

let the rebels giving? At the moment

it is an extreme situation.

Spiralling out of control, because

it has been heavy bombing that has

taken place for three continuous

days are reports of hundreds killed

and many more injured. Health

facilities have been attacked, water

cut, food is low. Electricity, there

is no electricity in place. People

are afraid to go out, most hiding in

basements. A grim situation. We

think of children, families living

under this.

This is a cycle, as we

have heard. Each time the evacuation

happens means that Assad has gained

ground. You understand, I guess, how

involved you are in that cycle?

We

hope it will not be a repetition of

what happened in Aleppo, that

extreme level where a city or area

is destroyed and more importantly

lives are lost. This is why we are

calling for a ceasefire. A cessation

of hostilities and something needs

to change. The situation is not

business as usual, it is extreme.

Everybody needs to put pressure on

to bring a change.

Could you put

more pressure directly from the

ground on Assad if you withheld

humanitarian aid from the pro-rebel

areas and said you will not provide

aid to his pro-regime areas, does

that work?

No, because we are guided

by humanitarian principles, to help

people indeed in all locations. We

are not driven by politics but by

people need. We do not think it

right not to help people in

extremely dim one location in order

to bring a change on ground, we are

driven by severity of needs criteria

or where to help.

This shows the

cycle. The UN is in a position where

it would not deny anyone

humanitarian aid but they are almost

completing the Assad strategy.

Assad

has been good at taking advantage of

opportunities and essentially using

UN aid to his advantage but I do not

think in this case the UN can do

very much.

You mean on the ground or

the UN Security Council?

The UN on

the ground. And the UN Security

Council has been rendered impotent

by the veto. Every time there is a

proposed resolution can result in

that they have vetoed it.

I have

been asking that for seven years.

Does the UN have any political

purpose longer-term?

I think the UN

can be a vehicle to implement a

political settlement is Syria but we

can no longer rely on the UN to be

the instigator of a solution to this

conflict. I think this is the role

of the United States and the west in

general and sadly we are not seeing

this political will in the west or

the US in particular.

That is a

change because at one stage we said

these problems and conflicts have to

be solved within the region and now

you are saying we need intervention,

you cannot imagine saying that ten

years ago, but you say we want the

US right back on the ground and you

want the UK and the rest of the

country is looking on?

I am saying

it is political will, I'm not

talking about military intervention,

I do not think that could do much at

this stage. What we are seeing is

the west turning a blind eye to what

is happening in Syria and Assad and

Russia are taking advantage of the

inaction to widen the scope of their

activities

activities knowing is no

accountability. Do you think Assad

has won the war? He has not, he is

taking over areas militarily and

only doing so by not just making

rebels evacuate by force, but by

making these areas uninhabitable for

the original residents. We are

seeing a process of democratic

change in Syria that Assad with

Russia is orchestrating and this

will be damaging for Syria in the

long run.

In the UK's highest court, defeat

today for the Metropolitan Police

and a judgment that could have far

reaching implications

for all police and crime victims.

The Met lost an appeal

against the awarding of compensation

to two victims of the black cab

rapist John Worboys over

the police's failure

to investigate him properly.

The women had argued

their treatment by police

breached their human rights.

The Metropolitan Police

have accepted the ruling

and are braced for more claims.

I mean, let's be clear,

we've always been held

to account for investigations.

We have a long history of that

and it is right and proper

that the police service

is held to account.

We are a public service,

that's what we do.

Of course, there will be more

claims, there is the potential

for that, and people will no doubt

pore over and look at this judgment,

as we all will, and work through

what are the policy implications?

What do we now need to change?

What are those things,

where do we have to look

at balance and priorities?

Well, to discuss whether this

is a landmark ruling -

and what the implications

are for both victims

and the police - I'm

joined by the barrister

Kirsty Brimelow QC.

Nice to have you. In layman 's

terms, what does this actually do?

What does it change?

It's very

significant, because what it has now

set out is that you and I as

individuals, if we are subject to

serious assaults, serious violence

is committed against us by an

individual, and the police commit

serious errors in their

investigation of our complaint to

them about the crime committed, we

can hold them accountable as

individuals. So it's moved away from

any suggestion that the police don't

have accountability to an individual

if it's not them actually who are

carrying out the crime.

If you were

in a police force now, would you be

worried about the cases that might

come?

The police have an

obligation... This is under human

rights law. They have an obligation

to provide an effective

investigation if there is a crime

committed. The article, article

three, means that we as individuals

are protected against inhumane,

degrading treatment and torture, and

its binary. That means the state has

to pass laws to protect us. In this

case there is an offence of rape, so

somebody cannot commit a rape and

there is a punishment for that.

There is also a procedural

obligation on the state that means

they have to carry out an effective

investigation

investigation if a crime is

committed. As for some of the

comments coming from the police that

this is a problem for them, they are

saying resources, and one of the

things they are saying is that they

may have to move resources away from

fraud or these type of allegations,

but I have to say I don't see that.

They are obliged to carry out an

effective investigation. In this

particular case, the Worboys case,

there were a series of serious

omissions from the first complaint

that was made in 2003, and it took

them until 2008 to finally carry out

a proper investigation into it. And

they have apologised. This should be

good for the police. We want an

effective police force for the white

if you were perhaps one of the young

men who have been falsely accused of

rape. There was the case of the

young man whose phone messages have

been checked. Under this change in

this law, would he be able to take

this grievance? That would be

slightly different. There has to be

a real egregious error.

They could

have sent him to prison.

This seems

to be more to do with issues of

disclosure at the CPS, at the

prosecution stage. They might be

slightly different positions. This

is where someone is complaining of a

crime committed against them,

someone being prosecuted for a

crime. So the same things won't

apply.

What sort of cases due thing

will be applied? Individual cases,

or mass cases like Hillsborough? Is

it going to take us to places

where...

What is important is the

common law. Through the courts at

the moment, you cannot bring a case

against the police for negligence,

as an individual. This is a saying

that if there has been serious

failures for a crime committed, very

serious, serious violence, inhumane

treatment or torture, offences like

rape, serious assaults, serious

domestic violence, then with those

cases, I could take the police to

court, sue them, hold them

accountable for their lack of

effective investigation. It doesn't

open the floodgates. It's not going

to be for every single omission or

oversight by the police, but it is

significant, because it should keep

the police on their toes in future.

Thank you very much.

Egyptians will vote in presidential

elections next month.

The former army chief

Abdel Fattah el-Sisi looks

certain of re-election.

Serious challengers have been

disqualified, arrested or have

dropped out of the race.

Human rights groups say

the election will be a farce.

They accuse the President

of presiding over an unprecedented

crackdown on human rights

during his four years in office.

Press freedom is also under attack,

and Egypt is now in the top three

countries world wide

for jailing journalists.

But tonight, we bring you a rare

opportunity to hear the stories

of some of those in Egypt who have

borne the brunt of the el-Sisi

regime, courtesy of the BBC's

Middle East Correspondent Orla

Guerin.

She joins me now.

One that it is nice to have you.

This has been a very tough place to

work as a journalist.

First we

should say thank you to our

interviewees who agreed to be in the

film. I have been based in the

country for four years, and over

that time, people have been

increasingly reluctant to speak.

That fear has been palpable. It's

not just a case of going back to the

bad old days to Hosni Mubarak.

Seasoned human rights campaigners

would tell you that it's going back

to the bad old days. Serious. Lots

of people being tortured. One of the

victims said, torture now is a must.

In the course of making the film, we

were in contact with many families

whose loved ones had disappeared or

been tortured, or killed in some

cases. They wanted to highlight the

abuses, but were scared of reprisals

and too frightened to tell their

stories on camera. It was tricky for

us to make the film. I have worked

across the Middle East over the last

couple of years, including places

like Saudi Arabia and Iraq. From my

experience, taking out a TV camera

is more difficult to do in Egypt

than any of those countries. The

minute you do, the police are on

you.

you. They are trying to shut you

down. It's a country where

journalist 's face high risk,

particularly local journalists. A

number of journalists behind bars at

any time, and you can be accused of

spreading false news, which is an

offence in Egypt. That can be used

against journalists and against

human rights workers. Let's have a

look at your piece.

Welcome to Egypt.

Enticing images of timeless

hospitality and ancient

attractions.

A picture postcard view

the authorities are keen to promote.

But there is another Egypt,

a military backed regime.

Where dreams of freedom

have been crushed.

It is understandable

to be scared, with a

regime that is not

hesitant about killing.

I've never seen a regime as

bloody as Sisi's regime.

It all looked so different

seven years ago.

This was Tahrir Square

in February 2011.

The night the people broke free

of President Hosni Mubarak.

Ending 30 years of

authoritarian rule.

Or so they hoped.

But now the square feels

like a place of lost

opportunity.

Standing here in Tahrir Square

seven years on, there is

really nothing to indicate that this

was the cradle of an uprising, that

it was here that the people

toppled an autocrat.

The monument is bare,

no list of names of all of those who

were killed, and that is just

the way the authorities want it.

It is as if the revolution

has been erased

and along with it

the hope it brought.

Icons of the

uprising, like Alaa Abd

El-Fattah, have been

treated as enemies of the state.

He was a leading light

of the Tahrir protests.

Secular, articulate,

a software developer.

Alaa Abd El-Fattah was accused

of organising this protest.

The demonstrators appeared peaceful.

The authorities were not.

Others told the authorities

they organised the

protest, but he was still

sentenced to five years.

Another member of

Egypt's Generation Jail.

His fractured family go

through the motions.

Without a much-loved son,

husband and brother.

Human rights groups say

there are thousands like

them in Egypt, families

of political prisoners.

His sister campaigns

against civilians being tried in

military courts.

In this household, resistance

runs in the family.

But she says the struggle

for change is harder than

ever under President

Abdel Fattah el-Sisi.

The level of bloodiness

is beyond anything I've

ever heard or experienced.

And the way they have

managed to desensitise

people towards death, to belittle

the value of people'slives.

To make people get used

to death sentences,

to forced disappearances

and abduction.

To torture, to torture victims.

This is becoming daily news.

Her brother has another year

to serve, then faces a further five

years on probation with

stringent conditions.

In this tightly-knit group,

the empty space at the table

is keenly felt.

Those who end up in custody can

expect the harshest treatment.

My sources say torture

is commonplace, but few victims

are willing to speak.

Mahmood Mohammed Hussein

has first-hand experience

of the latest torture

techniques.

He was accused of attending

a banned protest and held

without trial for

more than two years.

He says the only reason

he was arrested, aged just 18, was

because of his T-shirt.

The slogan read -

a nation without torture.

Aren't you afraid that

by speaking out like this,

that the authorities

could come after you again?

Torture victims used to have one

refuge - the Al Nadeem

Centre in Cairo.

But, last year, the

authorities moved in

and forced it to close its doors.

Its co-founder,

a psychiatrist, says

the prevalence of torture

in the

Sisi era is the worst

she has ever known.

I have worked in this

field since 1993.

And I have been hearing about this

field since my university years.

What I have been seeing

and what my colleagues at the centre

have been seeing since

2013 is unheard of.

It was never, never ever that bad.

So how widespread would you say

the practice is now?

As widespread as the country.

As widespread as the country.

What would you say to government

officials here in Egypt who deny

there is torture?

You are liars.

I would say, you are liars.

I would say you know

there is torture

because you practise it.

And then there are

those who are hidden

behind the sun.

That's what Egyptians

call the growing numbers

who vanish from the streets

and are held in secret by the state.

Anyone opposing

the regime is at risk.

Human rights campaigners say

enforced disappearances are a

trademark of the Sisi era.

They have documented

at least 1500 cases in

the past four years.

But they believe the

real figure is much

higher.

This is Zubaida, a student of 23,

who wants to open her own business.

Her mother says she and Zubaida

were arrested near a demonstration

in 2014 and convicted

of offences including

attending a banned protest.

She says they were in the wrong

place at the wrong time and spent

seven months in jail,

but were later acquitted.

She tells me that in 2016,

Zubaida was detained

again at a police

checkpoint and disappeared.

She was dumped by the roadside

after 28 days, a changed girl.

But her legal papers show

the anguish did not end there.

As Zubeida was

struggling to recover,

she disappeared for

the second time last April.

Her mother says neighbours

saw her being taken by

armed and masked police.

Zubeida's treasured keepsakes

are just as she left them,

waiting for her return.

Her mother refuses to give up hope,

refuses to be silenced.

We wanted to ask the authorities

about Zubeida's disappearance

and the other cases in this report,

but they wouldn't

give us an interview.

Previously, the authorities

had told me there is no

systematic torture.

But if mistakes are made,

officers are punished.

They have also denied there

are enforced disappearances and

widespread human rights abuses.

On the banks of the Nile, there

is little hint of change.

Egypt looks locked in the past.

Elections are coming,

but President Sisi

doesn't need to worry

about the outcome.

Several potential challengers

have been intimidated

out of the race.

Many here are concerned

about security amid bomb

attacks by the so-called

Islamic State.

The president says he is

waging war on terror.

But human rights

campaigners say he is using

that as a pretext to

wage war on dissent.

Having been here for more than four

years, I know a lot of the

problems that Egypt is facing.

There are real economic issues.

There are serious

security threats from IS.

But this is the most populous

country in the Arab world and if

Egypt can't steer a course towards

real democracy, that is a problem

for the Middle East

and it is a problem for the west.

And I'm leaving here with questions.

How long before all

of the repression

here starts to backfire, and how

many more prisons can the regime

fill?

And you can see a longer version

of Orla's film on Our World this

Saturday and Sunday at 9.30pm

on the BBC News Channel

and on the iPlayer.

In the last hour -

extraordinary footage

from the White House.

President Trump has been meeting -

in public - survivors

of last week's shooting

at Marjory Stoneman Douglas

High School in Florida

that killed 17 people.

Also there, relatives of the dead.

For over half an hour, the President

sat almost silent as they laid

bare their pain and talked

of the need to open America's minds

to all kinds of solutions to gun

crime in schools and asked him not

to allow this to be just one

more school shooting.

The President opened

proceedings with some words

on tougher gun regulations.

We're going to be very strong

on background checks,

we'll be doing very strong

background checks, very strong

emphasis on the mental health

of somebody, and we are going to do

plenty of other things.

Once the President had

made his opening remarks,

it was a chance for those whose pain

is still raw to have their say.

My daughter has no voice.

She was murdered last week,

and she was taken from us.

Shot nine times on the third floor.

We as a country failed our children.

This shouldn't happen.

We go to the airport -

I can't get on a plane

with a bottle of water,

but we leave some animal to walk

into a school and shoot up children.

It's just not right,

and we need to come together

as a country and work on what's

important, and that's protecting

our children in the schools.

To feel like this, ever, I can not

feel comfortable in my country

knowing that people have, will have,

ever going to feel like this.

I want

to feel safe at school.

We heard from President Trump at the

end of that extraordinary outpouring

of thought and of pain and one of

the ideas President Trump picked up

bomb was to talk of more guns in

schools for specific teachers, he

said that would be something that

could cut short any attack by a

gunman in that situation. Not maybe

the only idea that the students had

pledged to him but we will see if

that goes further in coming days.

Looking at the papers, The Times,

more people should get pills to beat

depression. Extra people should be

offered antidepressants in the

largest study of its kind. Academics

investigating anti-Semitism on

Twitter. That more people shared

tweets that challenged any kind of

racism than shared of the thing

itself. In the Guardian newspaper

the picture of many young people in

America marching for gun control. In

Florida, a day that saw thousands of

people across the States to walk out

and join those marchers. And also

the black cab racist given legal

aid. I think we can cross to the

Washington bureau and speak to our

correspondent in Washington. We saw

some of the speakers and heard from

the president himself. What is your

reaction on what impact that has

made tonight on the President

himself.

It seems as far as

President Trump's thinking is

concerned the solution to mass

shootings is not fewer guns, but

more. He said he would be backing

this controversial proposal to

basically have more weapons amongst

school staff, to have teachers

armed, perhaps people in other roles

in the School armed and be able to

adopt what is called here concealed

carrying, to have weapons about

their person. That view was

countered by a man called Mark

Burdon, whose son died in the Sandy

Hook massacre. His wife is a teacher

and he said simply that this could

lead to shoot outs on school

property. He said school teachers

had quite enough to do, based on his

wife's example, already, rather than

act as vigilantes. The president

said he was considering tougher

mental health checks on people who

buy guns in the United States and he

promised his administration would

find a solution to this, as he put

it.

For people looking for a

political sea change from this

Republican president, is your sense

it will come?

Not really. We have

had over the past days signs the

president was keen on limiting

certain... Putting in place certain

limitations on firearms, the backing

of a bipartisan bill for more

stringent back ground checks that

sort of thing, but he appears to

have rowed back completely with the

idea there should be more guns in

schools, not fewer.

Thanks.

That's it for tonight.

Before we go, the world's

biggest and best known

international photography awards,

the Sonys, are about to announce

who's on the coveted

shortlist this year.

Here's a sneak peek at some

of the top contenders.

Good night.

# Like a sound you hear in your ear.

# No matter what you do, it is going

to have a hold on you.

# California soul.