[Music]
okay I
[Music]
welcome to Sputnik orbiting the world
with me George Galloway and me gri
having subverted Yugoslavia for decades
Britain and the United States bombed and
splintered the country into an alphabet
soup of new States Serbia Montenegro
Croatia Slovenia Bosnia herzo which then
further broke up and then the West
liberated Kosovo out of Serbia and
recognized its unilateral Declaration of
Independence in absolute Defiance of
international law and the United Nations
Charter I wonder how that's going this
is of course in Stark contradiction to
their stance on Crimea where both the US
and the UK are intent on dragging the
world back to Cold War over a democratic
vote by the people of Crimea to rejoin
Russia and the contradiction doesn't
even make either John carry or William H
blush and NATO enforced uh peace in
Bosnia which has turned out not to be
peaceful or even stable and the state of
Bosnia herzo a rickety three-legged
stool with three distinct ethnic groups
rotating the presidency of the state
looks distinctly shaky with predictions
of a Bosnian spring now thickening the
air now joining us is Professor David
Chandler of Westminster University David
uh first of all has the breakup of
Yugoslavia been a success or a failure I
guess the question is for who um I think
for the Yugoslav people you could argue
that it definitely hasn't been a success
um but for the international
institutions involved uh the
organizations that needed a role after
the end of the Cold War they found a
whole load of tasks if you go to the
former Yugoslavia today there's
thousands of NOS institutions the EU
NATO the World Bank IMF and it's a it's
a peculiar success for those
institutions they're still peace
building 20 years later but it hasn't
been a success for the people that live
there uh of course if it were not for
these military Financial political
institutional uh outgrowths in the
former Yugoslavia there' be no economy
at all would there Bosnia 60% of the
people of Bosnia are unemployed even
with the presence of all these people
there that's true and that's why I guess
there's a lot of people there that
wouldn't like the international
institutions to go but um unfortunately
once you've wrecked the cake it's very
difficult putting it back together once
you break it you own it unfortunately we
don't own it but we are paying for it uh
what's been the cost to the taxpayer uh
in this country in the European Union of
this period of War followed by 20 years
of peacemaking You could argue it's been
a huge cost to the taxpayer but then
many other things are cost to taxpayer
as well I think the real problem is
probably the lack of accountability of
how that money has been spent and where
responsibility for failure lies and I
think it's really unfortunate as we saw
in the recent Serbian elections the
protest in Bosnia there's a protest
against local politicians when in fact
they have very little say over
policymaking and the EU in the
background that's actually managing most
of the policy and the accession process
can then lecture those politicians and
those people and blame them for those
problems well let's talk about Bosnia
first uh because there is this talk of
Bosnian spring people are furious with
the pathetic nature of the local
politicians who are as you've just
described pretty well powerless in any
case but the tripartite nature of Bosnia
as a state with a rotating presidency
how's that going clearly it's not going
well and there's elections at every
level very often but as you say the
politicians don't have much power and
that makes Democratic discussion quite
difficult it makes political
accountability quite difficult and it's
very unfortunate that as we've seen
recently the the result of that has been
I guess a revolt against the politicians
and then that allows the EU regulation
to be seen as somehow neutral and and
potentially positive I think the whole
discussion of local politicians being a
barrier or a problem is a very
problematic one especially coming from
the European Union obviously not a big
fan of democracy either
it's not guaranteed to survive is it
because uh the Serb part of the Bosnian
State uh doesn't really want to be there
and uh has recently been seeking Serbian
and even Russian uh help to stabilize
their situation and uh would really
rather be in that orbit there's a lot of
politics and a lot of political claims
but I think because politicians don't
have a lot of power and authority the
ret can sometimes be very different from
the reality on the ground and I think
often interethnic internationalist
disputes are then sort of blown up when
they they don't have that much content
we're not in the middle of a war
situation most people realize that
politicians can't do much to defend them
and that's why there's such a protest
against them but it's not as if there's
an
alternative uh political movement
emerging unfortunately it's more of an
anti-politics movement organized no and
I think that's really the fault of the
European Union's way that it's handled
it um the way that policymaking is no
longer accountable it seems that there's
no alternative apart from joining the
European Union the EU integration
directorate uh manages all the
policymaking and if you look at Bosnia
and Kosovo I mean their flags are
designed by the European Union they look
like European Union Flags the national
anthem is designed by the European Union
it's it's really quite tragic to think
of these countries as somehow being
distant from the European un and their
problems being the problems of their
local politicians yeah let's go to
Kosovo then um and here we have to make
a
comparison uh Angela mercel said that to
compare Crimea to Kosovo is
shameful and John Kerry and William hag
as we said in the introduction don't
even blush when they refuse any
comparison between the
two but the Western countries recognized
the unilateral independence of Kosovo
and are dragging us back to the Cold War
over a democratically expressed decision
of the people of Crimea to change their
situation to self-determine their future
how do you uh square that contradiction
well first of all not all the Western
countries have recognized Kosovo as an
independent state there's a number of
European union members that haven't
recognized Kosovo so kovo status is
already unclear in terms of
international law let alone well the
only legal Clarity is that the
intervention in Kosovo was against the
law which makes the comparison with
Crimea a relevant and important one but
I think the main thing has been that
Anga merkel's position has been quite
contradictory when you consider how the
European Union was encouraging the
oppositionists and undermining the
fundamental compromise in the Ukraine
between the West and the East and once
there's an external intervention like
that there's much less need for
compromise I think it's a similar
process that that I was saying about
Bosnia and Kosovo where it seems that
the EU is very distant from these
problems but in fact has been very much
involved well 110 countries have
recognized kosovo's uh Independence
that's a lot of countries uh Britain and
the United States are gungho were gungho
always for the breakup of Yugoslavia
then the further breakup of Serbia first
the breakup with Montenegro secondly the
breakup uh between Kosovo and Serbia
whether Serbia liked it or not so I
suppose the point I'm making is these
Hypocrites striding around the world and
from TV studio to TV studio denouncing
what's happened in Crimea even though
they are themselves responsible for what
has happened in Crimea they are the
people as you say who poured petrol on a
low Burning uh flame in Ukraine and made
the people of Crimea believe that their
situation was now untenable in the new
Ukraine am I not right yeah so that's
right obviously the fears that as you
say were underneath the surface were um
ignited or exaggerated by the the west
and turn to the European Union the the
lack of a vote uh the the threat to
Russians speaking rights and you can
understand those concerns and so Russia
in the Crimea was doing little different
I guess to what the European Union was
doing with the the leaders in the west
but that's often the case in countries
with a delicate balance external
Neighbors when they intervene in those
politics they undermine that external
balance and so I think the real
hypocrisy is not so much around the
independence but the idea that Russia is
more undermining than the European Union
has been it's clear that Ukraine is torn
between those two and I think it's
always the case that when you have EX
internal Powers dictating the politics
of it it's it's going to be problematic
and unfortunately once that happens
there's very little chance for a
domestic process in Bosnia or Kosovo
it's very difficult for domestic
politics to have any relationship to
society unless you have the authority of
policymaking and you could maybe see it
with the end of the Cold War with the
Breakaway of many states in Central and
Eastern Europe from Domination by the
Soviet Union they didn't really have a
chance to develop their own independent
before integration into the European
Union meant another type of
dependency is the disintegration of
Yugoslavia now complete or is it going
to further disintegrate and are these
places going to be going to continue to
be burdens on the rest of us uh because
they are essentially foreign
protectorates I'm not sure if I would
say that they burdens on us the burdens
of protectorates and stuff I think that
there's a burden for the people that
live in the region there's a there's a
lack of democracy a lack of possibility
for political Alternatives but um um I
often used to speak to Paddy ashtown who
was the EU dictator over Bosnia for a
long time still dictating you speaking
in uh in Saro just this week he loves he
loves democracy that much but his point
was because it's our money because we're
helping them with our taxpayers money
they don't really have a right to decide
what their policy should be and so I I
really go with that idea you don't go
for that language and I can understand
why and believe me I ain't know py
ashtan I don't want to intervene in the
Affairs of the people of the Balkans and
I don't want to pay for them either I've
got enough to pay for here at home we've
got enough problems of our own without
trying to sort the streets of Saro
that's my point only Professor we need
to continue this discussion because this
story is going to run and run Professor
David Chandler thank you after the break
Sheamus mil associate editor of the
guardian and author of The Epic book The
Enemy Within the story of thatchers
Britain in the 1980s and Beyond joins us
to discuss the life and death of the
greatest socialist leader of the last 50
years in Britain Tony Ben we'll be right
back welcome back to Sputnik the right
honorable Tony Ben will shortly begin
lying in state in St Mary's undercroft
in The Chapel at Westminster it is a
signal honor being paid to perhaps the
greatest parliamentary figure since
Charles James Fox the more remarkable
because Mr Ben's intentions were if not
like guy Fox certainly were to
thoroughly cleanse the Stables of the
British Parliament and its Unwritten but
all too oppressive Constitution I knew
him well and for 40 years I was one of
the original benites and was at his side
throughout his struggle for power
ultimately unsuccessful and right behind
him as vice president to his presidency
of the stop the war called tion joining
us to discuss The Life and Times of Mr
Ben and the meaning of his death to the
British left his leading journalist and
author Sheamus mil Sheamus we both knew
Mr Ben very well for many decades uh
let's just uh remember for a moment just
how great he was well he was an
outstanding figure in British politics
and on the left and uh one of the things
that was so unusual about him was that
where many people in leftwing politics
start on on the left and move to the
right Tony Ben did the opposite he
started as a as a sort of center right
figure in the labor party under Hugh
gateskill in the 1950s and he moved
progressively towards a much more
radical position in the 70s and 80s and
of course he was Vindicated on the great
issues and controversies of our time
from you know the the so-called free
market uh system that was ushed in in
Britain by Margaret Thatcher to the
Great Western Wars that have been fought
in the past decade or more um you know
he was proved right about those things
and he had a huge following in the
country people loved him in Britain in a
way that perhaps no other polit
politician today has been loved uh and
that's because he was seen as an
extremely honest committed principled
guy uh who' paid career-wise for
standing for what he believed in who'd
voiced something on behalf of millions
of people that had been shown to be
right that had articulated the interests
of millions of of people in the country
and Beyond and uh and that he had
achieved things as well from you know
constitutional change from uh you know
changing the rules about so he could
stand for Parliament when he'd be become
a hereditary peer uh to the referendum
on the European Union and the 1970s
introducing referendums in Britain he
was really responsible for that he was a
key figure in in building the support
for the alternative economic strategy in
the
1970s uh which really has got its Echoes
to today in what we're trying to do in
relation to the the crisis and the of
the neoliberal order that we're living
through at the moment and then of course
he made huge de Democratic changes in
the labor party in the early 1980s and
was at the center of the great conflict
you know so well yeah I want to talk to
you about that because coverage of his
death has been relatively benign bit
patronizing uh but relatively benign as
if he were a National Treasure but of
course it was not ever thus when he was
alive and kicking and struggling for
power and almost achieving it he was the
most hated man in Britain if you
believed the mass media which spent
Acres of newsprint to tell us that Not
only was he bad he was almost certainly
mad I mean it's incredible when you you
think back to that time uh in the 70s
and the 80s when uh many people in power
and positions of privilege in Britain uh
thought that Ben was going to lead some
kind of uh Revolution uh constitutional
or otherwise against them uh and that he
stood for something that was really
about to come to power and was very
challenging to their interests and uh he
was absolutely Savaged in the media uh
in which there's few Parallels for the
the level of attack I think that he
suffered I mean as you were saying I
mean it was quite a regular feature in
some of the Tabloid papers in Britain in
the 70s and80s for them to dig out some
cod psychiatrist to say it's not just
that Tony Ben seemed to be mad he was
actually clinically mad uh and this used
to attribute it to his excessive tea
drinking tea drinking he was a very
committed tea drinker uh throughout his
life and pipe smoker um no he was uh he
was treated
unbelievably aggressively and violently
and because they were afraid of him they
were uh because he had two things uh
some have one few have both he had a
very clear political line and direct
that he wished to travel but he had a
mass Following also I mean I've been
with him 30 years ago in uh Motorway
service stations where the entire
kitchen staff would come out to get his
autograph all the customers in the
cafeteria would gather around him he
would stand up on a chair and give an
impromptu speech this was a man with a
mass following in the country and a very
very radical uh political take so they
really feared The Establishment really
feared that this man could actually take
power and if he takes power he might be
right when he says I say what I mean and
I mean what I say uh do you think they
were right to be afraid of him how
revolutionary was Tony Ben well he
always said himself I'm not a
revolutionary and no one is a
revolutionary in Britain but I think
that he he was just he didn't want to
give didn't want to frighten the horses
fr the give undue AES and Graces to what
he was doing I I think he wanted to see
profound transformation a profound
transformation of British Society uh he
he clearly he was anti- capitalist he
wanted to see a transformation of way
the economies run who owns and controls
it he was a a great Democrat he believed
in the power of democracy at all levels
of society um in the workplace as well
as in The Ballot Box and uh and he he
was genuinely and people understood that
I think that he was genuinely very very
committed to the Democratic
transformation of life so no I think
they were right to fear Him uh I think
you know in a way um he he came to his
prominence and the peak of his power at
a time when the left was on the cusp uh
not only in Britain but throughout the
world of entering into a period of of of
long of long-standing retreat which
we're only just coming out of now I
think uh you know he was the peak of his
poers in the 70s and the 80s and of
course that was followed by the collapse
of the Soviet Union The Retreat of the
left throughout the world um the you
know the breakup of of uh the organized
working-class movement in many countries
but as I say I think since the
particularly since the crash of 2008 I
think that we we're in a different era
and I think he lived to see the time
when you know socialist ideas uh and
Progressive ideas that he stood for are
once once again you know getting a mass
following and for example in parts of
the world like Latin America and of
course he was loved all over the world I
mean not just in Britain I someone was
telling me the other day uh who was a a
friend of fuga Chavis the former
Venezuelan president that whenever he
turned up in Caracus and saw Chavis
Chavis would say ah Richard how is Tony
Ben uh that's what Chavis wanted to know
because he had followed Tony Ben's
career and his ideas and his as you say
his Mass following his ability to
popularize socialist ideas and
Progressive ideas in a way that could
appeal to people in simple aoristic
terms and he was a great communicator
Jus uh I met um Miss Tony Ben a couple
of times and the last time he even had
his his pipe with him indoors oh doesn't
matter but he was he was an unrepentant
no smoking laws meant nothing to T
revolutionary he he was getting ready to
get on stage with his pip be amazing
very kind adorable man and how was he
personally in how did you know him
personally yeah I think he was an
incredibly kind guy and he was uh you
know he was completely without side to
him he would deal with anyone whether
they were a president or or the person
working in the kitchens uh in the same
way he treated everyone with respect and
people understood that and they saw that
you know he some young person would come
and start button H holding him about
something and he would listen to them
and take them seriously there's the
famous story that is been replayed a lot
in recent days of uh how the comedian
Ali G tried to set him up for a
humiliation of course even Tony Ben took
it completely seriously and said oh
these things you're saying are quite
wrong you know you shouldn't uh talk
about women like that and so on and in
the end Tony Ben got the better of it
without even realizing it was a comedy
sketch so he was I think he was a really
a a very very kind and generous person a
very serious person who took people um
you know act completely on their own
merits but he also had a sense of humor
and uh that came out a lot as well so I
mean I described the other day like the
kindly Old Gentleman at the back of the
train and the railway children the Old
Gentleman used to wave his handkerchief
at the kids and then help to solve their
crisis that's uh the kind of uh man that
he was but he's gone now perhaps the
single charismatic leader of which he
was a perfect example uh will not be
easily replicated and maybe shouldn't be
cuz after all uh uh leaders can come and
and can go and there are many parts of
the world too where placing all one's uh
hope and uh and uh faith in in one
person can often be uh dangerous that's
completely true I mean but in a way in
the left in Britain we've had a number
of uh of charismatic leaders uh we've
been fortunate to to have that you know
in the in the period we were talking
about uh in the 70s and ' 80s you know
we had people in trade unionism like
Arthur Scargill we had people in local
government like Ken Livingston who
became the focus for these mass
movements of for Change and Tony Ben and
others and uh I think you know real life
throws up these people and sometimes uh
you know people who've been one thing
like Ben was early on his career when
there's a movement which is drawing Mass
support they get they gravitate towards
it themselves as he did um so people who
are one thing at one time can then play
a different role in another period And I
mean I think we you know of course you
shouldn't put your faith in in single
leaders or charismatic leaders for for
the reasons you said and many others but
but of course we need people to
articulate the mood and the spirit and
the ideas and the movements of our time
and the way Progressive ideas and and
demands of our time need to be
articulated and we need people to do
that at all levels of the movement all
levels of society both in Parliament and
in trade unions in social movements and
I think those people arise and are
arising and that's not just happening in
Britain it's happening in other
countries as well so Tony Ben died and
uh Bob Crow but they they are being
replaced and will be replaced by other
people and I think that's not our our
problem our problem is to find a way in
this time to articulate and take forward
those ideas and those interests in
society which have been so denied a real
voice in politics for the last
generation I think that is happening and
it's happening all over the world and
it's also happening here as Jara said it
matters not that I fall what matters is
how many come forward to pick up my
rifle AB remembering Tony Ben Sheamus M
of the Guardian thank you very
[Music]
much now it's your turn to tell us what
you think in the social media Roundup
what's rattling guy
so Tony Ben is no more so what is left
of the left Jack Tipple says very much
still alive as much now as ever just
woefully under represented in Parliament
and Peach says as long as socialism is
seen as a dirty W the battle continues
the left needs to come together now we
don't have to call it socialism could
call it social democracy we can just
call it for each individual policy yeah
because it is indeed a dirty word yeah
uh well up to a point uh I was once
present at a conversation between Fidel
Castro and the late uh Hugo Chavez in
which Fidel Believe It or Not uh
suggested to Chavez to stop talking
about socialism just do socialist things
people will like them then later you can
explain to them regarding the former
Yugoslavia shafat Rashid says Russia was
right recognizing independence of Kosovo
opened up a whole Pandora books which
later came to hunt the West regarding
Crimea well I mean they're just
Hypocrites you cannot possibly say that
Kosovo has the right to unilaterally
illegally against the United Nations
Charter and international law declare
itself to be independent but that Crimea
cannot it's just sheer total utter
hypocrisy shameful as Mrs Merkel might
say but they're the other way around the
other way around yeah okay well that's
it for this week well that means
unfortunately that's all we've got time
for you know where to reach us on
Twitter rtor Sputnik and on Facebook you
can like us on Sputnik on Russia today
it's goodbye from me gri and from me
George Galloway it's been marvelous
[Music]