03/08/2014 Sunday Politics Scotland


The latest political news, interviews and debate in Scotland.

Similar Content

Browse content similar to 03/08/2014. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



Good morning and welcome to Sunday Politics Scotland.


As the EU imposes tough sanctions on Russia, we'll ask what effect it


We'll be speaking to the former Liberal Democrat leader,


Sir Ming Campbell, about why he supports taking a


100 years on from the outbreak of World War One, could such


This week, the screws were tightened on Vladimir Putin


as sweeping sanctions were imposed on Russia by the EU and the USA.


The West has plucked up courage as it seeks a resolution to


But you can't get into a fight without taking a hit and British


and Scottish companies will feel the effect of export restrictions.


Russia could also retaliate in the future, perhaps heaping more


Searches continue around the wreckage of MH 17 more than two


weeks after it crashed, allegedly struck down by Russian - supported


rebels. EU foreign ministers decided Russia had not done enough to stop


the supply of arms. The EU is targeting state-owned banks, it has


imposed an arms embargo, exports of oral equipment have been curtailed


as well. The US also has sanctions on weapons, energy and finance. The


decisions made in Brussels will affect key sectors of the Russian


economy but these are also key sectors of the British, Scottish


economies, so these restrictions will have an impact. David Cameron


himself said you can't throw a punch without bruising your first and this


has been a dilemma with the EU. These sanctions are intended to hit


Russia's economy in certain sensitive areas but you can't do


that without also harming your own companies. So companies feeling the


pinch. BP has warned its business could suffer. It has a 20% stake in


a Russian energy giant. Shell said they would assess the impact. The


oil technology sector will be hit by ex-board controls. With the oil


industry dominated by transactions in US dollars, British and European


banks will be worried whether new regulations. Meanwhile, RBS said on


Friday it would reduce their exposure to Russia. That is the


situation now. Any future Russian retaliation could throw up new trade


barriers. Scottish exports like whiskey could be affected. There are


conflicted views on how Putin wants to play this. Stay popular at home


and make the west out to be the bogeyman or de-escalate the


situation to save the Russian economy. And perhaps even the


European economy as well. I'm joined by Sir Menzies Campbell,


who's at Murrayfield stadium this This problem of sanctions, do you


think that is simply a secondary consideration and they have to just


put up and shut up in the interests of the greater good? I wouldn't put


it in those terms but you have to ask yourself this question: Can we


go on treating Russia as if it is business as usual? The answer, in my


view, is most certainly not because Russia has undoubtedly supported the


dissidents in eastern Ukraine, they supplied the missiles which brought


down the Malaysian airlines aircraft, and since then, Mr Putin


has done very little to help in the international investigation of the


causes of that crime when he could have brought


causes of that crime when he could are affected where as the people who


could really have an impact on the Russian economy will have nothing to


could really have an impact on the remember before the aircraft was


shot down, Mr Putin was sounding rather more considerate sea because


of the impact of sanctions on him. There is also evidence that the


oligarchs, the people closest to him and who -- whose support he


requires, have put pressure on him to alter the nature of his foreign


policy. I don't accept the notion that these sanctions will not have


an impact. The other thing people might say is, businesses in Britain


might suffer from the sanctions but wouldn't it be helpful of existing


contracts were cancelled? While people have been asked not to export


to Russia, the French are exporting warships to Russia! They have an


existing contract and if they didn't fulfil that, the French government


would be sued but I think it is perfectly legitimate to say because


of the recent behaviour, there is no longer to be any export of military


equipment or a dual use equipment because some equipment, if exported,


can only be put to legitimate civil use but military use as well. The


people got to understand what the impact on the stability in Europe


will be if Russia persists in pursuing this aggressive and


nationalist policy. The argument the British government is adopting is it


is backing Vladimir Putin into a corner. He has effectively been told


to give in or put up a fight. There is only one choice you will make. If


he insists on putting up a fight, there are consequences of that. This


is a man who led the annexation of a large part of a territory of a


sovereign nation. The impact of that upon the stability of the European


continent is very substantial and if we were having this conversation in


Latvia or Estonia or Lithuania, we would have in different terms. I


have been to that part of the world recently and there is great anxiety


about the extent to which Russia may now begin to exercise pressure on


these Baltic states. It has got to be demonstrated that the European


Union and United States will resist that we are sending 1300 troops to


conduct exercises in the Baltics in order to demonstrate that we have a


commitment to this part of the world, not least of course because


it is a member of the European Union. The Russians are among the


first to make the contrast between the attitude of the west of the


situation in eastern Ukraine and Gaza. Philip Hammond said this


morning that the situation in Gaza was one of intolerable suffering, he


had received thousands of e-mails from British citizen is objecting to


what was going on in Gaza, yet compared to these tougher sanctions


you are calling for in the case of eastern Ukraine, the British


government seems to be doing little other than hang wringing when it


comes to Gaza. I and many other people are doing a great deal and


indeed Nick Clegg in an article he wrote for the Guardian, doing


everything we can to alter the policy of the British government.


Hold on. I believe the British government's position has been too


literal. Nearly 2000 citizens of Gaza have been killed in


circumstances where Israel, which has some of the most sophisticated


military equipment, has essentially imposed a collective punishment.


That is wrong and that is why I shall do everything in my power to


persuade the British government to say it is wrong. When Ed Miliband


says that David Cameron and the British government should have


imposed in Gaza, you would agree with him? I would agree with a


position which Nick Clegg and in the Liberal Democrats have taken up. If


Ed Miliband belatedly wants to come along and support that position, I


am in favour of that, but you have to remember that a lot of the time,


the Labour Party's position is more concerned about next May in the


immediate impact of their policy. It is the anniversary tomorrow of the


outbreak of the First World War. Many people are making comparisons


with the situation now and the situation in August, 1914. It's not


just eastern Ukraine. There is Libya, Syria, Iraq, possibly Lebanon


now, where it looks as if the West has lost any sense of what it is


doing. Do you think we are entering into a situation which is more


dangerous than recently? I agree with the last part of your question.


There is instability. But you have to ask yourself if the implication


of your question is, why are we not doing more, what could we do? It has


been suggested we should take military action against Syria. There


is a limited amount of military capability in this country and I


haven't had many people who are particularly interested in defence


matters arguing that in order to maintain defence capability, we


should cut expenditure in other areas like health and education.


Joining me now from Inverness is energy economist


Tony Mackay and Jim Wyllie is a lecturer in International Relations


at the University of Aberdeen and is in our studio there.


Is it true you were a drinking partner of the Russian prime


minister? Are yes, I worked in Moscow the a few years. He and I are


old friends. You can give us some insight into how you believe the


Russians will react to this new wave of sanctions. Will they back off or


will it make them more determined to stick on the course they are on? In


the short run, President Putin is determined to stick to his current


policies. It will have negative impacts for Scotland. BP is a very


important player in the Russian oil industry and has a very good track


record of using supplies from Aberdeen and elsewhere in Scotland


that has worked with in the North Sea in Russia. There are companies,


particularly in the Aberdeen area, that will be affected by these


sanctions. Will they be affected in the short term? Presumably, those


sorts of things these people are involved in our medium to short-term


contracts. You are probably right. Also, the oil industry in Scotland


is going through a boom period, both in the North Sea and exports to west


Africa and the Caspian Sea. The companies that temporarily lose


contracts in the Russian Federation can probably find alternative


markets elsewhere. But there are other risks. I saw the other day


that Russia has banned imports of Polish apples, a few years ago, it


banned Georgian wine. So there are risks to scotch whiskey, salmon and


other exports. You think the whole sanctions policy is wrong. Explain


why. Sanctions are invariably strategic. It is when politicians


want to show the electorate they feel about something but don't know


what to do so they have sanctions. Surely you are not suggesting


military action? I didn't even hint at it. That would be crazy. What


needs to happen is to ask ourselves, what have other people done? They


would have called an international conference. This... The great powers


would have sat down and recognise the realities on the ground in this


particular part of the world. Russia has got huge interest and in terms


of capabilities, in terms of resolve, or the balances in


Russia's favour. The Ukraine is not part of the EU all NATO but


nonetheless, the great powers would have had influence on moderating


Russian demands and recognising the realities on the ground. Please let


me finish. The point I put two Ming Campbell is, do you believe there is


a danger that we in the West put Vladimir Putin in a position where


he cannot give in? This is what I was talking about when I said the


balance of resolve. The nature of the sanctions were imposing, for


example a ban on future military contract but carrying on with the


current ones. For example, drawing some spurious distinction between


energy development, but somehow we are going to try and control, but


current drilling and exploration can go on. This demonstrates that


really, at the bottom of it all, we don't quite have the resolve. Now,


let's not conflate the issue of the downing of the airliner, that


tragedy, with the other issues. That was an incident in the wider


strategic problem. That wider problem is how to deal with Russian


interests in this part of the world. Economic war at the very time when


the Argentina are defaulting and Germany has hurtling towards zero


growth, Portugal and Italy are on the verge of another economic


crisis, then to go into economic war with Russia is absolute nonsense.


Tony Mackay, again from your insight from working with the Russian state,


do you agree with that, do you think they would be receptive to an


approach that would say let's put to one side the issue of the airliner


and have an investigation into it, but let's all get down to sit at a


table and try and sort this out? Now, I think it is part of a wider


problem. I have been working in Ukraine for the last couple of


years. The Russian Federation is very strongly opposed to greater


integration between Ukraine, Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, with the


European Union. They have been trying everything they can to stop


that, including threats about increases in gas prices to Germany


and Italy. So, I don't think it is limited to the Ukraine. I certainly


think personally that the European Union does have to take a strong


stand against these issues. We will have to leave it there. Thank you to


both of you for joining us. A series of events to mark


the 100th anniversary of the First World War will begin


across the country tomorrow. In Glasgow a service of memorial


will be held at the city's cathedral, next week more than 8,000


people from across Scotland are expected to remember the fallen


at a service at Edinburgh Castle. Our reporter looks back at the role


Scots played in the Great War. Hello darling, this is the Army. I


just have the time to write. PC this war will end all wars. I really hope


it will. Scottish troops played a crucial role in the great War,


recognisable in their kilts, referred to by some as the ladies


from hell, they played significant parts in the Battle of Loos, the


Somme, Paris and Cambrai. 100,000 Scottish soldiers lost their lives.


Glasgow alone left 18,000 men -- lost. Many rural communities were


changed profoundly. Scotland lost more of its trips in the conflict


than in any other country in relative terms. It had industrial


forces behind it. It was the first time nations could use railways,


modern rifles and explosives. That industrial power forced up the death


toll. In the aftermath, the league of Nations was designed to avoid a


repeat of such large-scale loss, by favouring mutual disarmament and


settling disputes through negotiation and arbitration. But the


contradiction between collective security and states' national


interests was clear. Arguably, 100 years on, national interest is still


paramount. But what has changed is the way European politicians pursue


those interests. I am joined in the studio by


Peter Jackson who's Chair in Global Security studies at


Glasgow University. Let me perhaps get things the wrong


way round and start asking you about the present before I ask you about


the past. There is a theme in this programme. Sanctions in Ukraine


which we have spoken about. Niall Ferguson in The Financial Times was


seeing the situation in eastern Ukraine could be a parallel to what


happened in 1914 in the sense that a whole lot of things came together,


no one was really aware of what -- were war was going to break out at


the time, and suddenly warm was going on which nobody actually


wanted. Is there a parallel? I think there are some interesting


parallels, but I don't think we should be pushed too far. Niall


Ferguson tends to parallels too far as a matter of habit. I suppose the


big parallel would be the role of Serbia in 1914 and the role of the


Ukraine, especially the separatist elements in eastern Ukraine, today.


In other words, there was a frontier region which was considered vital to


the security of a much larger rate power, Russia in 2014, Austria


Hungary in 1914. And was external involvement in the form of Western


support for Ukraine and their democratic processes to the extent


that they exist, versus Russian support for Serbia in 1914 which was


considered a direct threat to the security of the Austro-Hungarian


Empire. Eastern Ukraine is not the only parallel which has been made.


Last year, the Economist magazine was seeing there could be an August


1914 situation, but it was pointing to East Asia and to the Americans


and the tensions over the islands between Japan and China. Are these


real parallels, or are we just too fond of making parallels? I am of


the opinion that history doesn't tend to repeat itself. All you can


draw parallels, every political situation is different. The


situation in East Asia just now is very different to the Balkans in


1914. A lot of little things can happen, and while politicians and


diplomats like to talk to us, and sometimes historians, in terms of


grand strategy, as if all these things are planned out in the agents


of histamine or what they are doing, obviously the First World War


crept up on them. Who could have said that ISIS would take over


sections of Iraq in silly? I can not agree more. It is one lesson is that


historians and policymakers should learn from the past. The medium and


long-term consequences of decisions made today are always to a certain


extent imponderable. It is important to reflect carefully on how things


might go wrong. It is in that sense I think that if we learn any lessons


from 1914, I would think that decisions to adopt a more


confrontational policy to escalate tensions can actually lead to


unforeseen consequences in conflict. I don't think that is going to


happen in 2014 over the Ukraine, or at least in the short or medium term


in the Pacific region. Let's go to the past. There was almost an


orthodoxy for a long time that the great War, unlike the Second World


War, neither side was particularly more right than the others. They


were a bunch of generals sending hundreds of innocent working people


to the slaughter. Is that still the dominant view? That was the dominant


view for a very long time. The origins of the First World War are


very different from the origins of the Second World War. In the 1960s,


however, a historian came up with a new argument that one could actually


trace continuity between Germany's aims in the First World War, which


were to build an empire in central Europe and Eastern European Russia,


and those of the long-term goals of Nazi foreign policy in 1939. From


the early 1960s until the 1990s, historians debated over the merits


of that thesis, but most have argued that Germany did behave more


recklessly than the other powers in 1914, mainly because it considered


the long-term trajectories of the balance of power to be working


against it. The other thing would be the outcome of the First World War.


One of the things this seems to be consensus on is that the Allies'


punitive attitude to Germany at least helped to pave the way for the


Second World War, perhaps a lesson we should learn from regarding


current circumstances? I agree with your line of argument. It is


important not to back the current Russian government into a corner. In


that sense, I am in agreement with some of the commentators we heard


from a few moments ago. However, I don't think that the parallels with


the Paris peace conference, the Treaty of Versailles, are all that


relevant. Most historians nowadays consider that the Treaty of


Versailles was far less punitive than it was characterised to have


been after 1919. On that intriguing thought, we will have to leave it


there. Thank you. Let's cross now


for the news with Andrew Kerr. The defence contractor Babcock


has warned independence could But the Scottish government insists


a yes vote will protect jobs Babcock has repeatedly raised


concerns about They claim it is unlikely all


existing naval support staff The centre of Glasgow has been


closed for the cycling road race. The men's event started


a short time ago. England's Lizzie Armistead went one


better than four years ago in New Dehli as she claimed gold


in the women's event. Crowds have been gathering to cheer


on the cyclists as they take on some of


the city's remarkably steep hills. And the Commonwealth Games will draw


to a close tonight at Hampden. Organisers say it will be just


as Glaswegian as the opening Organisers say it will be just


are clear. I have access to a marketplace of 65 million customers.


I work with the same tax system and don't have to deal with currency


exchange rates. All of this is critical to the success of


businesses in the UK. From a branding perspective, I have the


flexibility of being able to advertise myself as either a


Scottish company or a British company. That is hugely important in


the food and drinks industry. 600,000 Scottish jobs are dependent


on UK-based companies. Independence puts all of the Scottish jobs at


risk. I believe we need to do more to ensure that the affordability of


childcare and we need to do more to ensure equal pay for women. We need


to do more to get women into the boardroom and into business. We need


to do more to get women into our Parliament and civil service. But we


don't need to take the rest of independence to achieve this. Have


all the powers necessary to do that today. As a mother, I am concerned


about my children's future. Independence is an irreversible


decision. I want my children to grow up in a country that is


forward-looking, not inward looking and insular. I believe they can and


do have the best of both worlds. We need to retain the strength and


security of the UK, while bringing in more powers for Scotland.


Ruth McKay there, and next week we will have our next guest to explain


Now it is time to have a look at what is coming up in the week ahead.


I'm joined by David Clegg, who's political editor at the


Daily Record, and Isobel Lindsay, vice chair of Scottish CND and


Let's start with what we have been talking about. Do you feel worried?


It has been very unsettling in the last few months. We have gone from


one situation to the other. You can't help but watch the scenes in


Gaza and feel distraught. The situation in Ukraine is extremely


worrying because we thought the Cold War had been resolved. Now it


appears we are heading back to a situation where these are issues we


have to consider again. I am not lying awake at night but it is


something that is troubling and concerning. It is not just those


areas, though. Who could have guessed a few months ago that a


caliphate would be declared in parts of Syria and Iraq? Look at Libya as


well. Indeed. And you wonder what our security services have been


doing with the massive amount of resources that they have. But it


does suggest that it is not desirable that Scotland is here,


with 200 nuclear weapons sitting 25 miles up the road from us. It is an


illustration about why we should look at serious disarmament. Part of


the problem here is also there is a lot of hypocrisy on our side because


you look at the situation of all these crises. Where are the calls


for sanctions against Israel? We are still selling them military


equipment that has been used in Gaza. The last point has a lot of


validity. Very little being done about what is going on with Israel.


That is a charge that is very difficult to defend. Before we get


too serious, Commonwealth Games, enjoyed it? It has been fantastic.


It has been a wonderful event. The atmosphere in Glasgow has been


superb and the medal in the Scotland has exceeded expectations. You are


not a Usain Bolt fan? I have no taste for jamborees and sport but I


like to see people enjoying themselves so in that sense, it has


been great. There has been an interesting metaphor there. We have


had quite a lot of athletes that have taken part, doing very well.


They would never have got a chance if it had just been Team GB. Because


you have had these wider teams... It is on the front page of the


Observer. Subtle, isn't it? I am not sure what Nicola Sturgeon said


exactly that! I don't think this is a huge player but I don't think it's


unhelpful if things are done well. I do remember 1979 and I do remember


things like Argentina were no help in terms of the feeling of


depression in Scotland about our ability to do things well. Do you


think the success of the Commonwealth Games has any relevance


to the independence debate? Absolutely not. That story has been


stretched to the max to get the headline. However, anyone saying


that is talking nonsense because politics is politics and sport


sport. Scotland has enjoyed the Commonwealth Games immensely but no


one will think about that when they cast a vote. Let's look at some of


the other papers. On Tuesday, the debate between Alex Salmond and


Alistair Darling is coming up. Who do you think will win and what is


win mean and does it matter? It matters more than the Commonwealth


Games, certainly. We have had a nice breather period and what the debate


on Tuesday is going to do will kick-start the fight. We will have


six weeks of real campaigning. As far as who will win, I would expect


Alex Salmond to come off better overall but the problem he has is


that the general expectation from everyone is he will make mincemeat


of Alistair Darling. Even though a win a win because expectations are


so high. Or Alistair Darling needs do is defend. How are you feeling


about this? While there have been instances of debates that have made


a difference, one of the Balmer once set his campaign back -- one of the


Barack Obama ones. Debates like this are very important. The reason is


sitting next to me. Sorry, David, you are not too bad, but print media


is so heavily weighted towards the no campaign and because of that,


broadcasting is different. Broadcasting has to have some equity


in presentation. There just has to be fair broadcasting debates. That


is why the debates are very important.


Scotland's Golden Games at 6.05pm on BBC One Scotland.


Jackie Bird is joined by reporters and guests across Glasgow as


the city prepares for the closing ceremony of the Commonwealth Games.


and finding the remains of Sunday's chicken.


In my book, leftovers should be a joy, not a chore.