uh
welcome to sputnik orbiting the world
with me george galloway and me gayatri
the united states has extended its
bombing campaign against isis from iraq
to syria deciding yet again to dispense
with the inconvenience of a u.n
resolution authorizing military action
washington has assembled another
coalition of the killing including
france and various arab gulf states
prime among those gulf states is saudi
arabia that bastion of liberty and human
rights in fact as we discussed here
recently the saudis could probably teach
that evil cancerous band of head
choppers isis a thing or two about head
shopping the kingdom decapitated 26
people in the month of august alone
there is no doubt that isis must be
destroyed but as recent history shows
military action by the west has a habit
of deepening crises in the middle east
instead of ending them in fact for the
past decade and more of invasion and
occupation in the region we've had one
never-ending crisis discussing this with
me i'm delighted to see his top author
and journalist on the guardian my old
pal seamus milne but before that gayatri
asked london what they thought do you
think britain should get involved in a
war in syria
no
definitely not uh no abs absolutely not
i'm absolutely pacifist and i'm against
all kind of war there's no point looking
to syria and all these middle eastern
countries to see the problem the problem
is actually right here in england and
america with all these ignorant people
we don't need nobody i don't need no
british i don't need no american i don't
need no european union in my country
all i need is asia and we can survive
our country the regional solution yeah
we want our country to be in our own
hands seamus welcome to the sputnik
again um the british government has
pulled back from involvement in the
attack on
syria but has decided to join the attack
on iraq why the difference well i think
the crucial thing has been the role of
the labour party and the labour party
leadership which of course itself is
responding to public opinion
in britain
ed miliband has made the distinction
between
joining the attack on iraq because of
the request from the iraqi government
and intervening in syria where of course
there's been no such request
and
the syrian government had said that any
intervention would be an act of
aggression of course there's no really a
legal figure for the attack on syria
despite the attempts to conjure one up
in the last few days
i think it and labour's position which
was
set out really last year when the
british parliament uh blocked the attack
on syria
over the chemical weapons issue
you know it's a response to overwhelming
public opinion not only in britain but
throughout the world and throughout the
western world including in the united
states
which has opposed the continuing attempt
by the western powers to intervene
constantly redraw and control the middle
east and its resources and of course
they've used the fact
that isis is a particularly repugnant
organization and it's beheading of uh
british and american journalists and aid
workers uh of course in response as they
see it to the intervention by the us and
britain as a way of trying to change and
shift the balance of of opinion in the
us and britain and to some extent that's
been successful but it's very very
fragile and the fact that uh there's
been no vote in britain to support the
attacks in syria that have been going on
is i think a measure of that
the conservative journalist indeed a
colleague of yours
for a long time on the guardian simon
jenkins was arguing on the bbc this week
that ultimately these are issues that
have to be resolved by the people
themselves in the countries and the the
region he's right about that isn't he
absolutely right and this is the
underlying
nonsense of this continuing
endless war on terror that has been
going on really not only since the 9 11
attacks when it was officially launched
by george bush and led to the
catastrophic invasion occupation of
afghanistan first then iraq this is the
the obvious lesson that cannot be
learned and won't be learned and i think
it comes down to the fact that the
united states and its allies want to
find a way to control the middle east
and its resources but are unable to do
so it's obviously the case that these
interventions time and again have led to
the opposite of what they were sold as
they were supposed to be wars on terror
but they spread terror it was supposed
to defeat al qaeda in afghanistan and
defeat the taliban had exactly the
opposite effect al qaeda spread all over
the um middle east and the white and
north africa and the uh the region uh
the uh taliban is of course coming back
in in big measure uh in afghanistan
itself iraq was a catastrophe uh there
was no al-qaeda or isis when the united
states and britain and their allies
invaded iraq it was as the iranians have
said a frankenstein monster created by
this invasion and occupation each
invasion occupation each intervention
and of course we're not even talking
about syria about syria somalia yemen
pakistan where the interventions have
been going on in a less dramatic way in
recent years they've every single time
led to consequences which are disastrous
for the people of the region and also
for the peoples who of the country is
making those interventions what's needed
of course is a regional solution an
attempt to bring together the powers in
the region that have been backing
different sides in dealing with the
aftermath of the catastrophe of iraq
and and come to a regional settlement i
think that clearly is possible uh but
the united states and the western powers
have other ideas uh the countries that
you mentioned yemen and somalia those
are those are part of the seven
countries muslim countries as it happens
that obama now has bombed in the 60s the
peace the nobel peace laureate seven
countries in six years i mean this is
the endless war i mean
barack obama was elected to bring it to
an end and he made
moves in that direction he pulled out of
iraq
he wound down the afghan war but now the
logic of the imperial position of the
united states in the region is once
again reasserting itself with yet
another intervention which will
certainly have disastrous consequences
we know that there will be terrorism
that there wasn't wouldn't have been
otherwise here and in other parts of the
world as a result and it won't lead to
the solution of the isis problem uh
no doubt is isis will be not back
militarily that's for sure but it'll
mutate and spread in other forms and it
will gain credibility it will gain
credibility from this attack not the
very you know the opposite i met a very
senior former cabinet minister mr
blair's cabinet a man who was gung ho
for all these previous wars
in the street this morning i shan't name
him as he was in his pajamas
uh but what did he decide
but the point that he made was i thought
a very profound one he said
russia
china
iran
and the west all have a common interest
in defeating this
ever mutating
menace of fanaticism and savagery
why is it beyond
international diplomacy therefore to get
them all on the same page that's true
and i think you know that is you know
part of the story of how this could be
settled in a different way with the
region at its heart a regional
settlement and agreement at the heart of
a wider international
agreement but i think that it's clear
and it's clear from barack obama's
speech in the united nations that the
u.s and their allies don't want to do
that it was he made a very very fierce
attack on russia and its policies in
ukraine uh and in other parts of the
world and there's no no question that
the u.s and the west are now
increasingly winding up the
confrontation with russia
even as they're starting to make
some kind of new kind of relationship
with iran but
i think what's you know
you can look forward and see out of this
conflict and this intervention which
will definitely spread you know a much
wider conflagration in the region and
beyond as a result of it including
countries like turkey moving in um to
you know the ungoverned spaces or the uh
you know the rebel dominated parts of
iraq and syria and other countries as a
result iran also may become more
directly involved so that's you know
that's not good for anyone what's needed
instead is a is a settlement which you
know gives every part of the story and
the powers in the region
an interest in settling it and bringing
this
monstrous you know uh frankenstein
monster to an end
is it uh one theory plausible that
the real reason why they can't reach
agreement with the other big powers
they can't just strengthen those who are
already fighting isis they must try to
do it themselves because they haven't
actually abandoned their goal of
toppling uh president bashar in damascus
yeah i mean
it's it's clear that you know the united
states
and and britain and france were
supporting the rebels in syria from very
early on covertly and then more and more
overtly and one of the impacts of this
uh
intervention in syria that the united
states is leading now could well be
the creation of a more credible
anti-assad
grouping in syria but it won't be any
kind of um
democratically led
progressive kind of outfit as people
hope i think in other parts of the world
and so of course it will be a threat to
the assad regime shameless the western
leaders keep on saying that they won't
send in boots on the ground do you think
they will end up sending anywhere there
are boots on the ground it's just they
rebrand the boots i mean they're now
special advisors special forces
there are 1 600 u.s special advisors in
in iraq now they're just uh
they're u.s soldiers um that they just
don't call they're not combat troops so
it gets given another name that will
clearly be expanded uh there will
clearly be other forces brought in
obama has been reluctant to do that but
the forces in washington uh pressing for
that intervention have clearly
overwhelmed that caution that he had
originally not that he wasn't
intervening he was doing so but it's
pushed him clearly beyond where he
wanted to go
but the
the prospect of all this i think is
deeply alarming and for people here in
this part of the world who think well
you know this group is vile and
repulsive and we need to do something to
stop it i think unfortunately it's not
going to do that it's not going to have
the outcome that they want there's going
to be many more brutal killings much
more vile ethnic cleansing because this
is not the way that this problem is
going to be settled it's only going to
exacerbate it it's going to spread it
the western world has to learn
that attempts to continue a
semi-imperial relationship with the
middle east and the wider muslim world
will not work it will lead continually
to a backlash that will damage those
making the interventions on a much
bigger scale the people of the region
and it's really a generational problem
that we're living through and somehow uh
the power of public opinion here and in
the united states and other parts of the
world needs to be exercised again to
restrain this process because it is
leading again to disaster seamus man
thanks very much coming up after the
break britain nearly broke in two and
we'll be discussing with john white just
why it didn't but might yet don't miss
it
welcome back to sputnik the referendum
on scottish independence on 18 september
saw an unprecedented 3.6 million people
in scotland cast a vote out of a
population of just 5.3 million
translating to a turnout of 85 percent
of the electorate quite remarkable it
followed one of the most exhaustive and
dramatic election campaigns in british
political history believe me i have the
scars to prove it
after which 55 voted to remain with the
united kingdom and 45 to leave it
however if you thought the matter was
settled you'd be wrong
in the aftermath conspiracy theories
alleging a rick ballot biased media
coverage and other ill deeds have given
way to renew determination by the yes
campaign to make independence the key
issue in scottish politics going forward
the s p and other independent supporting
parties are claiming an upsurge in new
members since the referendum and with
the formation of the self-proclaimed 45
movement named after the 45 percent who
voted yes but also drawing an
association with the 45 jacobite
rebellion in 1745
it's clear that politics in scotland
won't be returning to normal anytime
soon
joining me as i weighed into this
marathon i'm delighted to welcome
political commentator and writer john
white but before that gayatri took to
the streets of london red gloves and all
to find out what people thought there we
had to put up with english mps the shrop
and scottish question times
so i don't care that they're quenching
and moaning like a bunch of little
englanders we're from dundee so they all
voted for yes
i think it would have been a very small
britain not great britain little britain
this is britain now if it had gone it
would come
and then we would have had to collect
the pieces and bring it back
it was an enormous cleavage john uh you
and i were both there you uh analyzing
and theorizing i
virtually hand to hand fighting
political fighting on the front line
it was a sharper polarization as i have
ever known people
hated each other
at least for a moment
in my case quite a lot of people hate me
still judging by my twitter feed got
quite vicious why was the cleavage so
deep
well in the words of oscar wilde
patriotism is the virtue of the vicious
and i think we saw that come to the fore
during this campaign but i think the key
word in your remarks at the start of
this package was unprecedented it was
unprecedented first and foremost for the
stakes involved were talking about the
prospect of breaking up a 300 year old
political union so it became a zero-sum
game in that respect it was
unprecedented as you say for the turnout
85 percent which was massive of a
population of 5.3 million people 3.6
million casting a vote i was
unprecedented i think also because of
the immense
nature of the yes campaign i mean in the
final two weeks running up to the vote i
got the sense in some parts of scotland
especially working class communities
that there was a democratic insurgency
taking place from below and i think it
rode a wave of anti-politics which was
given political expression by the yes
campaign but for me the most important
aspect to this referendum was the
collapse of labor in scotland i mean the
better together campaign
if you wanted to write a manual on
everything not to do in a political
campaign you would come up with better
together the man who led aleister
darling is a perfect example of a
first-rate second-rate man
the decision by labour to join into a
campaign with the tories will go down in
infamy i think almost on a par with
ramsey mcdonald the labour leader's
decision to enter a national government
with the tories and liberals in 1931
but interestingly
rather than resolve the issue all it
succeeded in doing is kicking over a
constitutional hornet's nest which is
reverberated right across the united
kingdom well we'll come to what it means
for the united kingdom uh in a minute
and
gordon brown
had to be
brought back from the
living political debt uh otherwise they
would have lost the referendum ed
miliband didn't even acknowledge his
existence in the campaign
uh in his speech to the labour
conference this week
if not for gordon brown i'm absolutely
certain that the result would have been
yes
uh and i speak as someone who
played a part in the in the victory
myself
um
the
collapse of scottish labor was most
pronounced amongst the 20 percent of
irish catholic scots
who had traditionally been virtually 90
percent labor for generations for scores
of years why did that happen
well i think there's been a more
increased assimilation of the irish
immigrant community in scotland over
many many years it's not the same as it
was in 1930s and 1920s but when you talk
about gordon brown's role i mean if you
were jim baxter holding the midfield
together
facing defeat gordon brown was dennis
law coming on the last minute of extra
time to nick the winner and the fact
that he's been so abruptly and blatantly
airbrushed from history history of
labour which we saw at the labour party
conference when he wasn't you know even
on the stage with all the dignitaries
from scottish labour that tells you a
lot about the state of the labour party
it's really it seems to have collapsed
in on itself but interestingly i think
the scottish national party were very
clever in how they posited this campaign
they called it civic nationalism they
they tried to they never felt very civic
to me exactly they tried to maintain it
was an inclusive political project which
obviously we know nationalism by
definition
definition is exclusive but they were
very very very clever in how they sold
it and i think a lot of people bought
into that idea i mean if you think of
the sultan the soul tie was waved as a
progressive symbol throughout this
campaign and if anybody knows the
history of the saltire it's as much a
reactionary symbol for an
anti-imperialist or anti-colonialist
such as yourself as the union jack but
this was all airbrushed and it was the
saltire was this flag of progress and i
think unfortunately especially on the
left
socialism in scotland has given way to
parochialism
they're now
talking about continuing the fight they
had earlier said it would be dead for a
generation if it did not pass but now
they're saying they can't rule out
having another go in five years time
and
some
slightly dangerous risky
ideas are being floated now by the yes
campaign
a unilateral declaration of independence
achieving independence by the mere act
of electing a majority of snp
mps
do these ideas have any legs
they certainly do amongst us an element
of the yes campaign as you mentioned the
45 group which is a reactionary turn in
response to the vote given that two
million people living in scotland voted
no we do live in a democracy after all
but they're not accepting the result so
the yes campaign is determined at this
point to keep going there's going to be
a a proliferation of new parties on the
left new permutations new coalitions etc
and independence will be the key issue
around which they will all revolve so
this issue is going to consume scottish
politics
for quite some time but it won't be led
by alex salmon this time do you think
that will make a difference
no i think nicola sturgeon is is is
obviously going to be the new leader of
the snp alex almond who fell on his
sword the day after the vote he resigned
he added quite a shakespearean quality
to the whole affair but nicolas sturgeon
i think is alex salmond in a skirt to be
honest let's move on to what it means
for the rest of the country because if
gordon brown played that decisive role
that we both think he played
the message he delivered in playing that
role namely that there would be other
more powerful
instruments devolved to the scottish
parliament uh divo max super devo max as
i called it
it looks doubtful now whether that's
going to be delivered at least on the
timetable uh that the three party
leaders promised that's also very
dangerous playing with fire isn't it
yeah well i think it's playing with fire
in a sense that if you start passing out
more uh
powers to different parts of the country
then you will end up with that race to
the bottom that we warned against with
regard to the possibility of
independence tax raising powers
corporation tax and so on so you could
end up with a situation where the
centrifugal forces pushing pulling
against westminster would be such that
you're talking about the breakup of the
united kingdom by default so i do think
this will all dissipate though i think
that we'll go back to politics as normal
hopefully sooner or later but i do think
in scotland the issue will consume
politics in scotland and the body
politic in scotland from here on in what
about the english nationalism that
risks being sparked by what is seen by
right-wing nationalists in england as an
over-compensation to the scots in order
to keep them in the union
devolution for england an english
parliament english votes
for english measures no mps from
anywhere else being allowed to vote on
tuesdays and wednesdays in parliament
and so on does that have legs or is that
just a kind of ukip right-wing
nationalist pipe dream well i think it
has legs because ukip has such traction
now in parts of england so it kind of
plays into their narrative but i think
the danger with this is that
james conley once said that partition
talking about ireland would lead to a
carnival of reaction on both sides of
the border and i think we've seen an
element of that now
on the back of this referendum campaign
in scotland we saw the ugly scenes in
george square and glasgow were loyalists
taken to the streets because because
nationalism begets nationalism
nationalism is not so much a political
doctrine is as a symptom of political
and social underdevelopment in one
instance or political and social
retardation in the other
scottish nationalism and english
nationalism belong in the second
category so in under the weight of
austerity we're seeing a rise of
nationalism of different gradations
different uh levels of of force
all over europe and scottish national
national fits into that narrative so i
think we've we've just succeeded in
erupting all these schism these fissures
national identity identity politics
we've even seen the recruited sense of
regional identity cornwall yorkshire
you know it's shetland was talking about
having its own referendum if scotland
had voted yes so i think you should be
careful what you wish for when you start
talking about constitutional politics
this anti-politics finally uh
i'm absolutely with you on that
much of the feeling was not so much
for
scottish nationalism or the creation of
a scottish state but a rejection
of what i call the three cheeks of the
same backside the political
establishment uh what kind of uh
likelihood is that that the mainstream
political parties can recover any of
that ground well looking at the labour
party conference in manchester there's
very little prospect i mean one of the
the key things that i saw took place two
or three days after the scottish
referendum when the dignitaries in the
scottish labor hierarchy arrive outside
the labour party conference in
manchester to a rapturous welcome and
applause from the labour bigwigs
you'd think they just won the european
cup this was a disaster for labour
glasgow north lanarkshire western
barcelona these were labour strongholds
they used to weigh the labour vote in
absolutely absolutely they've gone and
in parts of scotland especially
low-income communities labor is almost
as reviled as the tories so you think
that
this would spur a period of
introspection about where they've gone
wrong no no they're not clearly it
hasn't they don't get it and i think the
danger is that we're going to go along
and we will have separation if there's
nothing to fill that vacuum people need
change but not just in scotland all
throughout this island but the
disconnect between the political class
and ordinary people on the street
especially people who are suffering
under austerity has never been wider and
is very very dangerous john white thanks
for that
and now it's your turn to tell us what
you think through the portals of social
media what's rattling gayatri well on
the question uh of britain's involvement
in the war on in syria and iraq uh
akhtar makes the point that britain has
got no money for its citizens but it can
fund expensive wars what happened to
austerity
on the frisco's referendum
damon q makes the point that parliament
frequently fails as people scots lost
their chance to have a government for
their people not for business and neil
barrington says that people want real
change hopefully the indie ref has made
people ask serious questions about our
country and i think that's really the
point yeah yes it's the point we were
discussing with john brit there's
something rotten
in the state of britain and that's all
that we've got time for this week which
alas means that's the end of the show do
please keep in touch with us on twitter
at rt underscore sputnik and on facebook
you can like us on sputnik on russia
today it's goodbye for me gayatri and
from me george galloway it's been
marvelous
you