16/04/2017 The Papers


No need to wait to see what's in the papers - tune in for a lively and informed conversation about the next day's headlines.

Similar Content

Browse content similar to 16/04/2017. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



of a sense of people coming together after the Brexit vote.


Hello and welcome to our look ahead to what the papers will be


With me are John Crowley, who is editor-in-chief


at the International Business Times, and Tim Stanley, the leader writer


and columnist for the Daily Telegraph.


Let's have a quick look at some of the front pages


The Telegraph has an interview with Prince Harry, who talks


about how he sought counselling to cope with the death


The Guardian reports on the vote in Turkey giving President Erdogan


the power for major constitutional reform.


The Times leads with North Korean defiance in the face of pressure


The i also leads with the tension in North Korea,


reporting that China and America are working together


The Mirror reports on President Trump's message that he is poised


They say that the Americans caused the North Korean missile


The Mail lead with the deterioration in UK Russia relations,


And The FT focus on US commerce secretary Wilbur Ross,


rubbishing International Monetary Fund claims of US protectionism.


Many of the stories we have been reporting on today feature on the


front pages, but we start with an exclusive in the Daily Telegraph, an


interview with Vince Harry talking about how he has coped with the


death of his mother. It was 20 years of not thinking about it, he said,


and to make use of total chaos. A very, very frank, no holds barred


interview that the Daily Telegraph has managed to secure. Our columnist


has a new pod cast in which she talks to famous people about their


mental health, and their first guest is, amazingly, Prince Harry, who has


talked in this very unfiltered, honest, dramatic way about the


anguish and the grief over his mother's death. It won't surprise


anyone to know that he has been struggling with this. He lost his


mum when he was 12 years old, and he has had to deal with that, and live


with that, in the public eye. What really is astonishing, what makes


the interview historic, is a member of the Royal Family talking in such


a candidate and frank matter about so private a subject. He goes on to


say later in the article, on the front page, which advertises the


piece that he has done, the experience I have is that once you


start talking about it, you realise that you are actually part of a big


club. But it is that silence, isn't it, that people feel unable to share


with each other. The trauma, the upset, the grief that they have gone


through. Mental health issues are... It is still the boot, I think. But I


think this historic interview will go massively fire to breaking down


those issues that people have about talking about it, as well -- taboo.


It is immensely brave, and he is using an princely language, using


very visceral, human terms -- unprincely. He said he wanted to


punch someone out, all the time. And you look at him now, I think, in a


completely different light than before, when he made this interview.


He is very much his mother's son. You are saying in the first part of


this programme that it was reminiscent of his mother's frank


interview about the divorce. It is also reminiscent to me of his mother


reaching out to AIDS victims, a willingness to go somewhere where


everyone is a little bit uncomfortable, the media, the


establishment unwilling to break it to do, crossed a line, and talk


frankly, without any elitism whatsoever -- breaker taboo. Being


willing to go there and talk about it, in the same way she did with


AIDS. How much of risk it that he has done this interview? I don't


think this is a risk at all. I think people will praise him for his


bravery in speaking about this. We were talking offset about whether


Clarence House had seen this or not. Remember, he is moving into a new


phase of his life, he has a girlfriend, but in November he spoke


out quite extensively about media intrusion into his partner's


personal life as well. It was said at the time that it didn't seem to


have gone through Clarence House. There were a few ruffled feathers


about how he had gone out an attack the media, and I wonder, with this


interview, whether maybe he was shooting from the hit a little bit


himself. So maybe there is that question about, wow, you have spoken


so rawly about this, but I can't see any downside for him. He will get


praised for this. You can't really do an interview on the subject, can


you, without laying it all out? Absolutely. I guess if there is any


risk, it is not about anyone thinking less of him for talking


about the subject, if there is any risk it could be that some less


scrupulous people in the press will take the view that he has opened


himself up, so that invites us to go looking for more. I hope they won't.


I don't think they will, because this feels so rave, so courageous,


to almost go naked like this into the public with your deepest, rawest


emotions, I think almost everyone will be touched by it and will


respect it. Don't forget, it is about promoting his charity as well.


He wants people to support Heads Together. It is not just someone


talking about their private problems publicly. He clearly wants to send a


message that people can and should talk about it, and even this great


public figure is talking about it. In the Daily Mail, UK relations with


Russia are at an all-time low. This is Moscow's ambassador in London.


Saying that Number Ten has been raising tensions in Europe. How?


Well, very undiplomatic language, taking a pop at Boris Johnson, who


has perhaps had as a weeks. He presented his idea to the G7 that


there should be new sanctions on Russia, which was rejected. He was


also due to go to Moscow and cancelled his visit because Rex


Tillerson, the US Secretary of State, wanted to go there as well.


Very undiplomatic language for the UK to be using. Thinking of the


Cambridge spy ring, Alexander Litvinenko, there have been bad


moments. In the 1850s we were at war, but you can't get much worse


than that. There is an interesting thing about the Putin regime, a


willingness to use undiplomatic language, and even, as we were


saying earlier, to troll people. The Russian embassy Twitter account


sometimes goes after personalities and teases and trolls them. It fits


in with that picture. Our relations at an all-time low? Well, the


context of this is Britain sending troops to Estonia to put down a


marker, along with NATO, to say we will not accept Russian aggression


or revanchist when it comes to the Baltic countries. Our things at an


all-time low? No. And there is more stuff that Britain could do if it


wanted to send a message. This country as a source of enormous


wealth for the Russians. There is a lot of investment, a lot of buying


of property, a lot of money which goes through London, and any


government which really wanted to punish the Russians could start


addressing that. If the Russians think things are bad, it could get a


whole lot worse. We will go to the Guardian. Calls for a recount as


Erdogan claims new power in Turkey. The opposition are not repaired to


concede they have lost, they want something like 60% of the votes to


be recounted, looking for irregularities. It seems that some


of the ballots did not have the official stamp on it. You can


understand why the opposition... Every opposition says this, so it is


understandable, and the result was very narrow, and therefore they are


more inclined to challenge it because it could make a difference,


but also this is a leader who has been arresting journalists, jurors,


people who are dissidents, in other words, why would you trust him, if


he is the state, to efficiently and accurately and fairly run an


election? It is entirely understandable they are protesting.


Of course, it puts Erdogan in a very difficult position. He has just been


given the tools to use great power, but on the other hand because the


country is so divided, if he is wise he will not use that great power. It


is the worst possible outcome for Turkey, and he very deliberately


used very strong man terms during the election campaign, a very bitter


and rancorous election campaign, quite an emotive speech he gave


afterwards. Saying that he wants eventually to bring back the death


penalty, so then you have international bodies saying, be very


cautious about how you proceed. And of course, with the EU, Turkey has


long dreamt of joining the EU. You now have a strong man in power, do


have a benign dictatorship or not a benign dictatorship on the borders


of the EU? How does that impact on things, and how will the EU react to


this as well? Tomorrow, bear in mind they have been giving 3 billion


euros a year to solve that slight migrant issue we have going on in


Greece as well. So it actually adds more uncertainty, this election. The


rubberstamp the needed did not come. He thought he would get 55%. He


didn't get it -- the rubberstamp he needed. And the government tries to


block Iraq War case against Blair. It is a private prosecution. It is a


private prosecution, the former chief of staff of the Iraqi army is


trying to bring this. This is on the back of the Chilcott enquiry, which


we all know about, which was published last year. Jeremy Wright


QC, the attorney general, has said there are a number of reasons that


can't be done. It is quite involved legalese, he has said you can't have


aggression under English law, that courts should not rule to create


criminal law, they should interpret the law. But again, we are talking


about whether we are going to get involved in various disputes around


the world. Of course, Iraq for many people still looms large in some


people may say can we move on? I think if we did a poll of the


audience and said should Tony Blair be prosecuted, it would be very


interesting to see what they thought. He is not a popular man in


this country, it is fair to say. The legal process still continues for


certain people. Interesting to see the government intervened to try to


quash this. It looks as though the private prosecution doesn't have a


leg to stand on because he has effectively already been granted


immunity, and there was a private prosecution -- if there was a


private prosecution, stuff under the Official Secrets Act would be


dredged up. Do people want to move on? I don't know. On the one hand


Iraq was an enormous shock to the country, and it is something we are


still living with the consequences. It still informs our foreign policy,


it is one reason we didn't get directly involved with bringing down


Assad in 2013. On the other hand, do we need to draw a line and move on?


I am not so sure. You could put Tony Blair on trial, and that would give


some people some sense of satisfaction, to see the past


properly prosecuted. On the other hand, you might also feel it gives


Tony Blair more oxygen and continues to keep him as a player within our


political system. Which by the way he continues to want to be, he has


announced his political comeback. Finishing with the Sun, Mission


Kimpossible. US cyber spooks destroyed missile five seconds after


launch, some intervention, the Sun would have us believe. Sir Malcolm


Rifkind believes there is a possibility, that the US has the


capability to interrupt a nuclear test like this, and it is possible,


who knows, but that might have happened again. It is a fantastic


headline and in some ways it is slightly irrelevant. The point is


that it failed, and what matters more is what America and China


between the two of them are going to do about it. Does it matter that it


failed? If you didn't fail under its own uselessness, they couldn't fire


their own test missile, and it had to be intercepted. Incompetency, or


something worse, I don't know. The US has said it it had been a nuclear


test then I think Trump would have taken action. I think that is the


more important point. And that would have been an extra red line for


China. Precisely. It would be an act of incompetence if your system could


be hacked. So in that sense it is incompetent regardless of whether it


took place or not. North Korea is probably already in effect a nuclear


state. The issue is its ability to deliver them weapons. And one reason


America has to act is not just being bellicose, this is a National


Security issue. If North Korea can probably deliver a nuclear weapon


across the Pacific Ocean and strike the West Coast, or Alaska or Hawaii,


then it becomes a national security matter. And we have Mike Pence in


the region trying to reassure North Korea's neighbours. Which was


preplanned. We should make it clear that he didn't just decide to


parachute himself in. We were talking earlier, and China is the


big issue. What is their role in this, and how do they played? China


has supported North Korea economically in terms of its energy


resources, in terms of its food. Let's not forget, North Korea's


raison d'etre is almost too destroy the country of South Korea. The


question is, are they bluffing or will they see this through? It is a


paper tiger. Its conventional forces are quite weak and could easily be


overwhelmed. Despite those displays. At some of the stuff being displayed


as possibly not even real. It is easy to whip up a crowd like that


and put on a Big Show. That is why they have those big rallies, to


intimidate the West. What is interesting is how laid-back South


Koreans are about all of this. I think they are rather phlegmatic


about it. You hear the Helen Furey coming out of North Korea all the


time, and I think they have almost got used to it. Let's bear in mind


soul is only 35 miles away from the border, and they do have thousands


of armed missiles pointed at Seoul -- Seoul. If something happens,


Seoul, with 10 million souls, would be in the crosshairs.


Don't forget, all the front pages are online on the BBC News website,


where you can read a detailed review of the papers.


It is all there for you seven days a week at bbc.co.uk/papers,


Download Subtitles