[Music]
Okay,
I get
[Music]
Welcome to a special edition of Sputnik
orbiting the world with me George
Galloway. Gatri is away, the birth of
our second child being imminent, God
willing, and she'll be back in due
course. This is a special edition
because, as you can see behind me, we
are at Westminster. If you look closely,
you'll see the flag at half mass. You'll
see the helicopter circling. You'll even
hear a siren or two because this this
week was the site of a vicious cowardly
terrorist attack which mowed down
innocent civilians on the Westminster
Bridge over my shoulder, killing women,
injuring people in significant numbers,
even throwing one woman over the wall
and into the river a long way beneath
her. She was fished out alive. Others
were not successfully saved. A
policeman, one that I knew in the House
of Commons, lost his life defending the
House of Commons and democracy itself
from an assault by a crazed man bearing
a large knife about which more later.
Because my very special guest for this
special Sputnik is Peter Ford, formerly
Britain's ambassador to Syria and to
Bahrain, an expert in the Middle East,
an expert on the swamp of bitterness
from which all of this has emerged. I'm
very glad to say he joins me now on the
Sputnik. Peter, let me start by saying
that just a few short years ago in the
building behind me, I was trapped in a
lift with the then foreign secretary
William Hey. Imagine his constonation.
Trapped in a lift with me, unable to
move, just him and me. And I said this
to him. William, you've been wrong
before. In fact, you've been wrong most
of your life. But you've never been
insane before. The policy you're
following in Syria is literally insane.
Why? Because the encouraging of young
men with knives to go and fight in Syria
is insane. Not just of itself, but
because one day those men will be back
with their knives in this building
looking for you and looking for me. And
yesterday I watched it all come true in
front of my eyes. What were your
thoughts as that news was breaking?
Well, you were obviously very precient,
George, and I I was uh shocked of course
by the u events. Uh and then I was
surprised by the reaction of our prime
minister. she saw fit to say that this
was an attack on our values
uh that we would hold fast to our normal
lives. What gave her the right to make
this false interpretation of the
terrorist incident? Why did she not
accept that there was a clear link with
our own policies in the the Middle East?
Yesterday was was it coincidence?
Probably not. a meeting in Washington of
all the great powers arranged against
ISIS. Boris Johnson was there. Was it
just coincidence? I doubt it. Was it
just coincidence that this week has seen
the bombing in Mosul reach uh a climax
with hundreds of people being killed,
most of them civilians, far more than
were killed in Aleppo. Surely what
happened was a reflection of these
political events in which we had a part
in the Middle East. Uh she appeared to
be trying to put up a smoke screen about
values and all that to disguise the fact
that politicians have taken decisions
which have caused or brought about
brought these chickens home to roost.
Some of us pointed out a year ago when
the decision was made to start bombing
Syria that sooner or later there would
be a price to pay. Now the government
want to hide this fact from the the
public. Uh and I I think it's
disgraceful. Her remarks were fatuous.
She owes it to the public to level with
them to say that we the government think
it's worthwhile. pos arguably it is
worthwhile but be honest about it that
this these are chickens coming home to
roost. This is the price we've got to be
ready to pay if we want to indulge our
British pens for bombing countries in
the Middle East.
I think that's very powerfully put.
We'll come back in a moment to the fact
that there is a real uh problem of
fanaticism and extremism
on the fringes of Islam. Uh I know it uh
well I've been up close and personal
with it. They've tried to uh kill me. Uh
but there seems little doubt that the
incident yesterday and other incidents
like it in Nice, in Paris, in Brussels,
in Berlin, in Germany. Uh these
incidents are of course connected to the
foreign policy of the West in the Middle
East. I don't think there's any sentient
being out there who doubts that. It's
only the politicians and their media
echo chamber uh who like to try to uh
deny it. Let's take Syria uh for for our
first example. Britain, your friends,
uh, former friends in the British
Foreign Office have willfully followed a
policy these last five years nearly of
supporting people whose allegiance is to
al-Qaeda and ISIS. In other words,
sending the message that it's all right
for ISIS and al-Qaeda to murder people
in Syria, to cut the throats of priests
in Syria whilst
feigning outrage when the same kind of
people motivated by the same mindset do
the same kind of things here. That
contradiction is too great to be
ignored.
Absolutely. And this policy continues to
to this day. Uh the government continued
to demonize Assad as a butcher and then
express or feain surprise when Muslim
youths in this country take it seriously
and want to go out and do jihad against
the butcher. Uh David Cameron could be
sued by some of these youths for breach
of promise, I think. Um, and to this
day, just just two days ago, the
spokeswoman in the House of Lords,
Baroness Anel, uh, said that the British
government are supporting moderates such
as, uh, those currently fighting the
government in the suburbs of Damascus,
known as the Eastern Rout. Well, even
opposition sources recognize that the
fighters in eastern Ghuta are led by
Anusra, which is the al-Qaeda affiliate.
They're leading a campaign which is
tellingly called worshippers of God come
together and resist the butcher.
uh I rest my case. We are
giving materials and and moral support
to the kind of people in Syria that we
abhore as vile terrorists in London.
this all uh started uh didn't all start
but the approximate cause of what we
look at today is the invasion and
occupation of Iraq which you knew I knew
almost everybody in the foreign office
knew was a very bad idea and we now know
from Chilcot that almost everyone across
the river there in the security services
uh knew would be a bad idea knew would
have the dread dreadful consequences and
blowback that it uh did yet the
government proceeded with it. We could
put that down to an aberration, the
Blair aberration, if it had not been
repeated all over again and again, first
in Libya and then in Syria. What is it
about Britain uh that propels it into
this perpetual succession of attacks and
occupations of other people's lands?
Well, how long have you got George?
For you any length of time.
Uh briefly, uh two reasons. It's a
postimperial
instinct, a spasm to uh wreak mayhem in
um the countries of the brown people.
And secondly, it's cowtowing to America.
Uh both those factors came heavily into
play in
and arguably we were we were pushing the
Americans
in in in indeed u we were egged on by
the uh the French uh which would have
been a a repeat of the the Suez fiasco.
Um we almost uh repeated it in Syria.
You'll recall in 2013
uh the u commons uh bravely some a
number of brave MPs voted against a
Mosha government motion to start bombing
the Syrian army. Thank God. And that
changed history.
Many saw this as as as as a lapse by
Britain that we were not standing up for
uh western uh values. Um but on the
contrary it it was
a last
spasm
of good sense from our parliament and
politicians. I spoke in that debate
along with in fact right after uh the uh
late Gerald Kaufman uh there were four
speeches in the middle of the debate.
Two Tories two on the opposition side. I
feel that we played a part in winning
that very slim majority and it did
change history. But they returned for
more, didn't they? Uh not this time to
bomb the Syrian army, but purportedly to
bomb the people who are fighting the
Syrian army. What was that about? How
did that contradiction emerge?
Uh well, I think uh the government
probably felt under pressure from the
Americans to join the uh the campaign in
in Syria. You you'll recall that ISIS
became more and more powerful in Syria
in 2014 2015.
Um I think the government felt that that
they had to do their their bit by
America. As always, it's about us um
playing uh the role of trustee left
tenant or if you like tonto which in
Spanish means stupid. Uh that is our uh
our role.
That is a fantastic note to end the
first half of the show. The good news is
you've agreed to stay with us for the
second. Peter Ford, ambassador uh for
Britain in Syria and other Middle
Eastern countries. Be right back after
this.
[Music]
Welcome back to Sputnik orbiting the
World with me, George Galloway, and
Peter Ford, former British ambassador in
Damascus, in Bahrain, and a specialist
in the Arab Middle East, and in the uh
broader Muslim world. And it's about
that that we're talking with Parliament
behind us in the week that saw yet
another terrorist attack on civilian
people in the streets and outside the
parliament building itself. Peter,
thanks uh very much for staying. Uh
terrorism exists. It's a real thing.
It's not false flags. It's not Israelis
dressed up as Muslims or any of the
other nonsensical conspiracy theories.
It exists. Extremists exist in the
Muslim community. Western governments
have done their best to inflate it, but
there have always been the Wahhabist
mentality, hundreds of years old, is
pretty extreme and encourages uh
extremism. As long as this extremism is
growing and there's a a clear and
present danger, uh how do we defend
ourselves here in Britain against it?
Well, the first thing is to stop making
the situation worse. Uh you touched on
it u just now. Um we we have to stop
um en encouraging the flow of of young
potential jihadis from this country. uh
by and we are encouraging it by
demonizing the Assad government. Uh
David Cameron kept calling Assad a
butcher. So it's not surprising his
young men go out there. Um that's the
first thing. We should stop uh making it
worse. Um we should also stop making it
worse by trying to overthrow the secular
government of Syria. This is absolutely
inane, George. It it absolutely inane
that
you could say see looking across the
sweep of the Middle East that whenever
we see a secular government, we try to
overthrow it.
It's extraordinary.
Iraq, um, Tunisia, uh, Egypt, Libya, uh,
Syria, all had secular governments and
we paved the way for Islamist
extremists.
Fortunately, in in Syria, we haven't
been totally successful, but we have
been instrumental in causing this wave
of jihadism.
Um,
is that stupidity or is there a cunning
plan of which I I don't have the
capacity to work out.
I certainly don't think it's a cunning
uh uh plan. I don't think the foreign
office is up to a cunning plan.
More Austin Powers than James.
Exactly. Exactly. Since my day anyway.
Indeed. Um I I I think there's a failure
of analysis
uh a failure to recognize the phenomenon
for what it is which is mainly Sunni
revanchism
specifically Sunni it's not Islamist
extremism it's Sunni Islamist extremism
99.9%
of the acts of terror carried out in
Iraq uh uh Syria and the West are
carried out by Sunni extremists. Um, but
it's taboo to mention this partly, I
suspect, because of course the
countries, the rich oil producing
countries of the Gulf are all Sunnis and
therefore we we mustn't go there. We
mustn't offend them by saying that it's
Sunni extremists who are the the crux of
the issue. Uh instead we prefer to
demonize Iran which is the Shia
predominantly Shia country which has
absolutely no hand in any of the
terrorism that we see on our streets.
And yet we demonize Iran more than we do
Saudi Arabia. We demonize Hezbollah
which is a Lebanese Shia movement
militia.
uh even though they are helping to keep
the peace in Lebanon, prevent that
country boiling over and are fighting
the jihadis
who we profess not to like in Syria. We
our analysis is wrong. We're totally
inconsistent.
And as always, it comes back to the way
we have to count to the Americans
because the Americans have wanted it
this way. we rationalize it so that we
can go along with it. It's now going to
be very interesting to see if this
calculus changes with with Trump.
They're opening a new chapter of
discussion here. But it it it it's
feasible that Trump in the coming months
will uh tell will will complete his own
assessment of the situation in Syria and
Iraq and say, "Hey, it's time we stopped
actively trying to overthrow this
secular regime. We're not going to help
them, but we're just going to stop
trying to overthrow them, and you guys
need to follow suit at that point."
Maybe common sense will break in on the
foreign office. And number 10,
that will be a particular challenge. And
indeed, it will be not since Suez that
we will have had an American government
with a more sane foreign policy towards
the Middle East than a British
government. At least in the 1956 episode
of Suez, Britain was still at least seen
as a a a world power. Now we're actually
not. We are uh tonto as you absolutely
memorably put it. We go around the world
threatening everyone with America's
army. But if America's army is refocused
and re uh re-evaluated,
that's going to leave the British
foreign office and the British prime
minister either up the creek without a
paddle uh or having to roll back pretty
quickly. Which will it be, do you think?
Uh well, I think the British government
are beginning to um negotiate for
themselves an exit route on Syria. They
they've started to say, "We think
there's no place for Assad in the future
of Syria." But if the people of Syria so
decide,
this is they're leaving themselves
wiggle room, I think. And this is new.
Peter, it's necessary to defeat ISIS and
al-Qaeda, but it's not sufficient. If uh
if one defeats them, they'll be back
under another name and not very
longistant afterwards. Uh because the
material conditions that have spawned
these extremist phenomenon continue to
exist. Indeed, but but the ISIS
themselves are not going to go very far
that they will be leaving sleeper cells
that could be reemerge at any point. I
mean, we saw in Syria how they they lost
Palmyra and then came back and lost it
again. It's a game of whack-a-ole which
is going uh on here. You whack them in
one place and they pop up in another.
And uh this is very hard to get on top
of. Um already we see signs that uh ISIS
are moving camp to southern Syria and
indeed to the Golan even where they can
suck with their Israeli friends uh in an
interesting uh de facto alliance.
It's quite a pantomime horse that one.
Yes. Uh uh but but you're right uh
there's uh clear uh examples of the most
weird uh arrangements. There's some uh
ISIS uh material seized yesterday uh
anti-aircraft uh um uh m material which
had clearly come from the United States
and it was seized from ISIS in Mosul.
So the the weird and wonderful pattern
of relations uh has not gone away. No,
of course you're right. Even ISIS itself
will continue uh to exist in one form or
another. But isn't it overwhelmingly
true that our long support for
dictatorship of various kinds in the
Middle East has not just dictatorships
but failed dictatorships who couldn't
even make the trains run on time has
produced this swamp uh out of which all
this comes.
Um I'm not sure I'd go along with that.
uh think casting my eye across the the
regimes that would fit that desru des
description. I I don't think we had any
role in in keeping the Assad
government's father and son in power. On
the contrary, we've been against uh
Basist rule for many many
We were quite close to Saddam on the
other hand. We gave Saddam every
encouragement to attack Iran.
And it's certainly true of the regimes
in in the Gulf. We propped up regimes in
in the Gulf with no thought for
consequences
and regimes in uh in in Jordan and to
some extent Egypt. But um Syria is as in
many things a different case.
It is it's a different kettle of fish
altogether. Isn't the center of all of
this Saudi Arabia the fountain head,
financial fountain head, ideological,
theological fountain head, the the the
money uh the treasury of this uh
extremism and yet our
monarchs,
ministers and grandees of all kinds have
the closest possible relationship. I I
sat for nearly 30 years in parliament
being told by government ministers that
Saudi Arabia was our best friend and
closest ally in the Middle East.
Notwithstanding all that I've just said
about it,
it's it's very sad. Uh I served in Saudi
Arabia. I have Saudi friends. uh many
admirable things about how the Saudis
have modernized and also we have to
understand their internal constraints.
Um
had a long history of Wahhabism. Uh some
more modernizing governments have tried
a little bit to reform. But you're
right. Essentially, Saudi Arabia has not
been on the side of the the good guys.
Uh Saudi Arabia has given at least um
spiritual support to extremism.
Um if if you want to know what life is
like in in Raqqa under ISIS, just go to
any provincial town in Saudi Arabia.
Um,
it it's curious indeed that ISIS have
not really turned their attention to
Saudi Arabia. Is it because they
they've taken their inspiration from
Saudi? They see nothing to change there?
Is it because they're being paid uh
protection money? Um, that's an
interesting pairing.
Frankly, probably a mixture of all of
those things. You asked me earlier, how
long have I got? All I can say to you is
I wish I had longer, but alas, I don't.
Peter Ford, former British ambassador to
Syria, also uh with the Honora, the
United Nations agency that does so much,
indeed is the only agency that does
anything at all for Palestinian
refugees. It's been an honor, a
privilege to interview you today here on
the Sputnik. That's alas all we've got
time for in this special edition of
Sputnik. Join us again next week. But
meanwhile, let's remember those who were
killed or injured in this week's
terrorist attack.