Sunday Morning with Trevor Phillips | Sunday 8th March

He implied that the French, remember George Bush called them she's eating surrender monkeys, were better allies than we are. So much for the special relationship. The American Israeli assault on Iran is now into its ninth day. British boats are yet to arrive in the region. If Mr. Trump is right, we might miss the whole show. The Kremlin's man in London told us they're not neutral in this war. And if drones could speak, the ones flying over Cyprus have a suspiciously Russian accent. K Starmmer thought he had the presence here. It seems he's actually getting the wrong side of Mr. Trump's tongue. The bromance is, as they say in Washington, so over. We'll be joined by Foreign Secretary Iet Cooper. We'll bring you an extended exclusive interview with Russian ambassador Andre Kellian and the shadow home secretary Chris Phelp will be with us. Plus here throughout the show, editor of the spectator and former housing secretary, Lord Michael Gove, executive editor at Politico and co-host of Sky Politics at Sam and Anne's podcast, Anne McCalvoy, and former RMT general secretary Mick Lynch. Welcome to Sunday Morning with Trevor Phillips. A year ago, in the wake of the disastrous Oval Office meeting between Presidents Trump and Zilinski, Kier Stalma offered himself as a bridge between Europe and America. Given our special relationship with the United States, it seemed like a good idea at the time. And after the president's largely troublefree state visit last year, the prime minister was winning himself something as a reputation as a Trump whisperer. The whole bridge thing was of course a metaphor. The problem with metaphors is that different people can interpret them very differently. For his part, I think Sakir sees his bridge as a silvery, serene span, floating above troubled waters, connecting our great peoples. Mr. Trump, on the other hand, has a far more basic idea of what a bridge is for. As far as he's concerned, the main purpose of a bridge is to be walked all over. The last thing he wants to hear is the Brit's opinion. It's clear that what the Americans president sees as the UK's hesitation over the assault on Iran has soured the relationship that Starmer worked so hard to build. To be fair, many of Britain's allies in the Middle East share Mr. Trump's frustration with Britain's ultra cautious, loyally approach. They think he's let them down. And this morning there's reporting that the prime minister could have come under fire from the very man on whom many people believed he'd modeled his premiership, Sir Tony Blair. Well, it may be that they've all Trump Blair the Gulf states decided that nobody really needs a bridge when you can send a ballistic missile or a drone to deliver your message to Thran. A message which by the way consists of just two words. Surrender now. But it's not all bad news for the prime minister. Whether by luck or by judgment, Sakir is pitting himself against the only two men who might turn out to be less popular with the British public than he is. Tony Blair and Donald J. Trump. Well, let's get straight to the situation in the Middle East. A little early, I spoke to the foreign secretary, I bet Cooper. Foreign secretary, can we start with situation in the Middle East this morning? Are British forces in action? Well, we've had British jets have been flying each night and each day uh to help defend partner countries against uh air strikes, against the uh cruise missiles, against drones. And so they've been taking those defensive operations now for many days because we've got 300,000 British citizens in the countries that have been attacked by Iranian uh strikes in this reckless dangerous way including we've seen strikes on hotels and airports as well. >> Okay. I want to come back to ask you about the nature of defensive action moment, but more immediately you say we've got 300,000 people um British citizens out there. Um how are we doing getting those who want to leave out? >> Well, over the last week uh tens of thousands of people have uh managed to return to the UK from the region overall. There are still however uh restrictions on airspace. There are still uh some areas where airspace is closed. And so of course this is a really challenging situation but the uh we've been working very closely with the airlines with the commercial airlines and with the regional governments both to support them in getting flights back and also to make sure that there are added places for vulnerable British citizens we've been working closely with and we've also been organizing some additional charter flights and that's particularly for those who are vulnerable who might not be able to get one of these seats on the commercial airlines, but this is still going to take a bit of time and we just need to recognize the scale of the issue here is much greater than we've seen in other similar areas where we've needed to get British citizens home. >> But you'll understand why they uh people there might be complaining. So far, we've only had one flight in a week at this rate. >> Well, that's actually just not that's not right. So we've we've already had uh two uh charter flights return, but those are additional to the commercial flights. So we have been working with the airlines. I've spoken myself Oh, hang on a second. My I've spoken myself directly to the uh to the Emirates chief exec to the British Airways chief exec because it's so important for us to work with them. They are the ones who have all of the expertise to get most of the airlines back and to get flights back on to London, to Manchester, to other parts of the UK. That's what they've been doing. We've been working with them and we've been working specifically to get particularly vulnerable cases to get priority onto those flights. In addition, we've put on these charter flights and we're organizing further charter flights as well, but those have to be additional to the commercial airlines who we're working really closely in partnership and that's what most other countries are doing. Most countries aren't doing charter flights at all. What they're doing is just working with the commercial airlines. >> Understood. But people watching this out there will want to hear you say that the number of flights that we'll see in the next week will be ramped up from what we've seen in the last few days. >> So, we've already has seen that. So that's why we've now seen tens of thousands of people who have managed to return to the UK over the last week since this conflict started. And also that's particularly look the biggest area of course for British citizens is around Dubai. We've seen a significant increase in the flights coming back from Dubai. >> All right. Um, does it bother you that uh Tony Blair thinks that you should have supported the American attack from day one rather than waiting until Sunday night? >> Well, in the end, we have to act in the UK's national interest. That's what this prime minister has been doing. That's what Karma has been doing. And that is why uh the UK did not provide support for the first uh initial strikes uh led by the US and Israel. Uh but once we saw the Iranian strikes, reckless strikes on partner countries, we have provided defensive support for those countries, including the base support for the >> It took it took you a while. And and the person who's been most experienced at all of this says that he thinks you waited too long. Does it bother you or is he just wrong? >> I would say I I just disagree. I think look, there were two clear decisions here. whether to support the initial strikes and action that took place at a time when we had been pursuing diplomatic uh processes and negotiations which we thought should continue and there was that first decision to take the we decided the prime minister decided and I fully supported him that was not in the UK's national interest and then we had a second uh request to provide defensive support at a time when partner countries in the Gulf were be were facing strikes And again, we took a decision in the UK's national interest. But you're specifically asking, look, I would just say this, the uh there are some people in politics who think that we should always agree with the US, whatever. There are other people in politics who think we should never take action with the US again, whatever the circumstances. I don't think either of those positions is in the UK national interest. And it is the responsibility for Karma to act in the UK's national interest for British citizens. That's what he's been doing. >> Are you calling Tony Blair a poodle? >> I think the point is to make sure that actually we learn the lessons from some of the things that went wrong in Iraq. And I think that is exactly what Karma has done. And to make sure we've got military action taking place as we speak to defend countries that are facing Iranian strikes because that is in the British national interest, but we don't do things that are not in the British national interest. >> We we are talking friendly fire here. Early in the week, the president said of Karmama, "This is not Winston Churchill we're dealing with." He called the prime minister a loser. And last night he said, "We don't need people joining wars after we've already won." Now, will the prime minister just shrug his shoulders at these remarks, which some people might say are as much an insult to the nation as they are to him personally? >> Well, the the thing I've uh learned doing this job is that you have to focus on substance and not on social media posts. And that's the important way to do this. Yeah, it's not anybody's social media post. It's not some bloke in a basement um you know writing uhund whatever it is two 200 40 characters. This is the president of the United States. He says our prime minister is a loser. Didn't turn up when he should have done. You guys are no longer our friends. By the way, when did he when did prime minister last speak to the president? Well, the US president has uh the responsibility to do what he thinks is right in the US national interest. The UK prime minister has the responsibility to do what he thinks is right in the UK's national interest. That means sometimes we will disagree and there are many areas where our security partnership remains incredibly strong and I have seen myself the close intelligence cooperation, the close military cooperation but there will also be areas where we disagree. So for example, we had disagreed on Greenland. We disagreed on the initial strikes that took place and whether the UK should provide the basing support for them. But that is a legitimate thing for the UK prime minister to do and frankly that is actually about UK national >> completely legitimate. I understand the diplomatic speak. But in English um Donald Trump is wrong. >> Well, we disagreed on a series of issues. There are also a lot of areas that we agree on and we do agree for example that Iran should not be able to develop nuclear weapons. >> Do you think you ought to send back as clear a message to him as he's sending to us? He's telling us we are a bunch of wimps. Why don't you just say straightforwardly, get out of here, you're wrong. >> As you'll know, the uh Karma's style of doing politics is obviously very different. And I think that kind of calm >> we're in a new world order here. Be straight. >> The calm coolheaded approach to these big serious international issues. Do you know I I really think that is right and we're not going to do things in terms of the rhetoric or hyperbole. We're going to do things on really practical calm steady decisionmaking because I think that is that is actually the British character more widely is to do things in a serious and steady way. That's what we're going to It's also the British character to solve disagreement over a cup of tea, direct chat. When did the prime minister last speak to the president? I don't don't think I heard an answer to that. >> The prime minister does speak to the president frequently. When did he last speak to >> I wouldn't comment on the details and timings. The prime minister does speak to he spoke to him in the last week frequently. He speaks to the president frequently as you'll know. >> He didn't speak to him since last Saturday according to the public record. >> Well, you know, he continues to have conversations and will continue to do so. Uh people watching this would say hm special relationship. It's not that special if in the midst of a crisis where the British uh are sending uh air air forces putting our troops at risk and so on. There is not a conversation between our head of government and the American head of government. >> Well, the thing about this this special relationship is it's deep. It goes back generations. I first got briefed, no I think this is important. I first got briefed by the CIA, went to the Pentagon and so on about the intelligence cooperation between our countries more than 25 years ago and it has strengthened in depth and collaboration ever since. So that structural cooperation is happening every single day, every minute of the day. I get all of that. That is immensely important. It's important to our security and it will continue. >> I I get all that. Okay, I'll give one more go. Your children would say the prime minister is being ghosted by Mr. Trump. >> Well, you know, if you want to conduct diplomacy through social media, that's one thing. That is not our style. >> That's what this president does. That's how we know what he thinks. >> I mean, come on. >> And this the government has a different way of doing that. And I think that's okay. I think it's right for us to give these serious issues the gravity that they deserve. All right, let let's deal with this the substance of this. Prime Minister says that we watched this build up. We anticipated this conflict days ago and so on. Well, um >> well, let me just ask you a bit of factual thing. Is it right that the frigot the the uh type 45 uh destroyer HMS Dragon is going to set sail on Tuesday? uh that is uh going to be heading for the Mediterranean, but you wouldn't expect me to comment on operational details around timings and things like that. >> All right. Well, um can you say anything about the report that it is now one of the reasons for delay was apparently that it's now being fitted for months at sea rather than weeks and therefore we're anticipating this conflict going on much longer than uh anybody uh thought at the beginning. I'm not going to comment on the operational details around HMS Dragon. I do think it's unknown at the moment what the course of this conflict um is going to be. We obviously want to see as swift a resolution as possible that provides uh regional security and stability, but we don't currently know what the course of the conflict is going to be. >> The reason all this matters is that um both Mr. Trump and also uh the Gulf States, the Gulf Cooperation Council have said pretty clearly that they think that we as a country look unprepared. We're turning up late. We weren't ready to help them. The Prince of Wales, which is our uh one of our two carriers, is now on 5 days notice to head to the region. But we haven't even made a decision now 9 days in whether we're going to send our biggest asset into this theater. It feels like we are dithering to these people. >> Well, I just strongly disagree with that and you'll have heard interviews with the chief of disagree, but that's what they think. >> I know. Well, I'm I'm explain why I think I strongly disagree with um uh that assertion and I've spoken to many of our Gulf partners. We have many discussions over the course of the last 10 days uh and detailed discussions as well and know how closely we are working in partnership. So we uh took action between January and February to pre-eploy because of the regional tensions that were growing to increase our deployments to the region. The F3eploy we didn't we didn't actually deploy them. >> Hang on. We moved F-35s and Typhoons to the region. 400 additional personnel were deployed again to the region to ensure that we had better capabilities in place. We uh increased our deployments of radar and air defense uh equipment to Cyprus in advance of anything happening in order to respond to what we could see happening with the regional tensions. Since the conflict has started and we've seen the scale of the response, this reckless response from the Iranian regime which frankly has shocked the Gulf countries who were no part in those initial strikes and have found themselves receiving these missile strikes and drones. Since then, we have gone further and we've also sent wildcats. We've sent helicopters. We've sent the additional typhoons to Katar and so that is important. We've responded to the escalation. All of this all of this I understand but you know they are saying it's not enough we don't and the criates were incandescent uh they they were uh outraged that Acriteri came under attack and it's still going to take days for us to get there look just to be can I ask you so be clear about one thing is drag dragon is going to be in theater will prince of wales end up uh in in theater >> so again I'm not going to to get into the operational uh decisions on that and as you'll know that the prime minister had previously announced that the carrier strike group would also be heading to the high north as well. So there are other issues involved and I'm not going to the high north is more important than >> I'm not going to to comment on those operational decisions. What I can tell you is the decisions that have been taken already and what is being deployed. >> Of course what the soldiers would say is this. This is exactly what they've been warning about that actually uh we've cut back on effectively on our assets. So we're in a situation where you think reasonably you've got two priorities. What do we do about the high north, the Russians and so on? What do we do about the Middle East? But we've got to choose. We can't do both. >> So is there a bigger picture? >> That's a reality. So is there a bigger picture here in which the security threats have grown? That is absolutely right. Are we also dealing with an inheritance in which the previous government cut defense spending and actually has hollowed out the uh defense investment that we inherited. That is what we inherited. That is exactly why we've now had the biggest increase in defense with with generals who said that we've been hollow our military been hollow. >> So I think there is a long-term issue as to what the conservatives did to our defense and we've said that many times that is not new. What I can say though is what this Labor government has done in response, which is the biggest increase in defense spending since the cold war, substantially increasing our investment and expanding that support because we know we have to respond to security threats and also taking some difficult decisions including to ask about something very specific. >> Um, do you find it alarming that the drone that struck near at Critieri was partly built with Russian technology and components? there is a a serious issue of concern the way the collaboration between uh Russia and Iran over a long time on some of these issues. We know we have faced threats to our security in Europe from Russia. We see that in Ukraine but also more widely those threats to Europe as well. And of course now we're seeing the Iranian threats play out in the Middle East and in the Gulf as well. It's part of a bigger pattern around security. >> It's got nothing to do with us. >> The Russians are saying it's got nothing to do with us. >> And look, I I can't comment on the detail of uh you know, of what the particular situations are. What I can say is there is a bigger pattern of co cooperation between Russia and Iran. >> Last time you and I spoke, we discussed the death of the dissident Alex Navali in Russia. Um, I spoke to the Russian ambassador a couple of days ago uh for this program and I put your words to him and here is what he said. Our foreign secretary uh spoke to our program just a few weeks ago and she had absolutely no doubt that this was in some way shape or form uh the act of the Russian state. >> Do you think that we have got this frog in from this South America? Tell me please. Well, I think her point was that no one else had the capacity to bring in that kind of of >> toxin. I will tell you I will tell you that uh we have here in London six places six places who are selling this type of done it synthetically which is based on this rock poisons. >> Nothing to do with you guys. >> Nothing to do with us. >> What um what is your response to Mr. Kellen? Yeah, it was the Russian regime had the means and the motive. We know that there was evidence of the Russian regime having been involved with that kind of lethal poison and Alexander Nali was in a Russian prison. They had the means and the motive and we had clear evidence and it's why we stood with a group of other countries because we had done that detailed research that got that detailed evidence and once again they are not taking responsibility for the way in which they pursue anyone who speaks up against their regime and all they try to do is misinformation and obfiscation but we are clear about what the evidence shows. >> Foreign secretary, thank you for your time this morning. Thank you very much, Trevor. >> Well, um, just to say, I should have made the point that the Tony Blair words I referred to earlier were from reporting in the Telegraph. Uh, we understand that Mr. Blair is clear that the event was private. It was not meant to be attributed and he did not, and I'm quoting here, admonish, rebuke, or criticize Kia Starmer. Glad to know that they're watching. Well, let's see what our panel made of all that. We're joined all morning by the editor of The Spectator, Lord Michael Gove, the executive editor, Politico and co-host of Sky Politics at Sam and Anne's podcast, Anne McCullvoy, and former RMT general secretary, Mick Lynch. Um, if we're going to start with you, an and by the way, International Women's Day, I gather you're one of the most powerful women in Westminster, >> one of apparently. Thank you. Um, how serious do you think this uh split between uh Trump and Star is? And is Tony Blair's reported intervention uh significant or not? >> To start with the the first point, yes, I think it is significant. I think when you look at the amount of commitment that the UK has and the exposure that we have, however defensively it is framed, as we've heard from Iette Cooper, we've seen all the reporting in the last days about splits at the highest level of government about how far we should go and should we have gone earlier into into basically into the region and into the Iran crisis. Now clearly for President Trump, the answer is that we should have done. But I do think Kesto was between a rock and a hard place here. If he had moved earlier, he would have aligned himself with what was essentially a barrage and an assault on Iran. It's not absolutely clear that that's what the British position should be. It is clear that we should be and are massively involved defensively. And that's why having such a a murial figure in Donald Trump who I think sees the alliance if you like as a one-way street a relationship that that works when he gets what he wants out of the UK but clearly has no desire to hear anything else is a problem. Contrast Frier's German leader this week absolutely not really contributing much saving the blushes of my German colleagues but you know not that much in military terms in hardware in cost and in risk who gets a warm relationship simply because he says you I don't really mind that you you've hit Iran. I think for for Blair well I think you could imagine Tony Blair's position is always going to be closer to Israel than to the American harder line position on Iran. probably everything at the moment that comes out that looks at all different is seen as critical of Star. I don't think he meant it that way, but I think there are just genuinely different positions here. >> Um, Michael, um, did did the prime minister sort of have to choose between Donald Trump and the British public? >> Not per se, no, because I think if he'd given a firmer lead, then I think that the British public would have responded to uh the clear direction that he set. The problem I think for the prime minister politically is that uh his uh acquiescence as the left will see it in this war or al orbeit belated means that once again he's a poodle not perhaps as uh uh determined and energetic and loyal a poodle as Donald Trump would want but a poodle nonetheless but for those who would like Tony Blair have preferred him to have uh kept the Atlantic Alliance strong then he's proven that he prefers uh proarication and evasion rather than leadership. So he finds himself in a very difficult position. his defenders and there are very few defenders who are as eloquent as Avette Cooper will say well he has to uh navigate through very difficult waters but the problem is that he appears to have navigated himself up a creek without a paddle >> as as we're in watery metaphors before I ask you about the general situation um there will be members of your former uh union uh out there on boat won't there >> well there could be depends on the length of the mission and the the needs of that of the fleet. So they support the fleet and put themselves in danger but they have suffered an awful lot of cutbacks and non-investment if you like and their fleet the Royal Royal Fleet Auxiliary uh vessels are very depleted and some of them are knackered I think is the word you'd say and being scrapped as we speak. So I think there was one scrapped last week. So they're in a parlor state. So Britain's response, whatever you think of that response is not going to be that effective if you haven't invested for nearly 20 years, I suppose, or more. But on the on the point about Star, you said he the metaphor was as a bridge. He probably feels like a more of a doormat this morning, the way he's been treated by all sorts of people, but and I'm not usually a massive supporter of Star, but I don't I think he's made the right choice. He he has a duty as the prime minister and the government has a duty to defend British personnel, British assets, British people, British interests. Uh and he's right not to commit to this war. This is an invasion of of a sovereign country whether we like that government or not. This is a sovereign government that we recognize and it's been invaded without notice, a preemptive strike, uh as it's been called. And it's Israel's war. Ultimately, Israel is getting what it wants out of this situation. Uh more than one country is under attack. All of its Arab neighbors are receiving uh incoming death if you like uh one way or the other. Lebanon is about to be massively invaded. Beirut is going to be attacked and it is being attacked now. People are dying all over the region and the majority of them are people that Israel regards as hostile. Now that's a situation that >> well they are that's because they are hostile. >> Not all of them are hostile. Not all of them are hostile. >> Great. Many of them are hostile to Israel to many degrees. Not all of them. What I'm saying is that the confilration has broken out all over the region and that is at the instigation as even Mark Rubio said of the Israeli government. They have said that they were going to strike and we've got to get in behind them. >> Well, I I think that's it's partly the case that Israel has been existentially threatened by Iran and is especially threatened by the development of the Iranian nuclear program outside any >> Well, we were told it was destroyed a couple of a couple of months ago. destroyed >> and they destroyed it. >> This is where I think we will go wrong to be honest with me. I think if we start to get into sort of gotchas about whether something that Donald Trump said turns out to be 100% copper bottom truth to >> surely should be something very well. >> So hang on can I sorry but can I just put a point back to so hang on because you were told by Donald Trump do you therefore believe that you believe Donald Trump so much that you think there's no threat from Iran. There's no threat from the nuclear capability outside every agreement. Remember also that the British government and the Australian government and the Canadian government, these are not like mad raping governments. >> What we've got is >> think that there is a problem. >> What we've got is Stalmer trying to take a logical position based on his own beliefs and the interests of the country that he's in charge of. He's got to make that decision. >> You said it was all about Israel. >> It is about Israel. >> Okay. About Israel. Israel has instigated this war. >> Okay. I'm going to come come back to you both in a moment. We've got plenty of time to um settle this argument or possibly not settle it. But it is 9:00. You're watching Sunday Morning with Trevor Phillips. In the last hour, the foreign secretaries told this program that Kia Starmmer's way of doing politics is different to Donald Trump's after the president yet again criticized the prime minister. Iette Cooper said it's a challenging situation to get Britain's out of the Middle East. Uh well, let's go live to the region now and try and get a sense of the situation in Jerusalem. Our international correspondent Diana Magnet is there. Good morning, Diana. Morning, Trevor. >> What are we >> We've had a pretty quiet um 24 hours here. >> Sorry, say again. >> I was just going to say we've had a pretty quiet 24 hours actually after sort of quite heavy sirens yesterday. It's been pretty pretty calm on the ground. >> What do you think? Um what do you attribute that to? Uh, is it that the uh the Iranians and their proxies are pausing or is it that they've just run out of ammunition? >> I definitely don't think they're pausing. I think they're pacing themselves. But, uh, the US and Israel have been working pretty hard to try and degrade their ability to launch missiles and, you know, blow up launchers as they're moving on the ground, destroy drone carriers. Um, but I think also they recognize that Israel is extremely welldefended. Um, and the Gulf countries are much easier to strike, especially with drones, and will possibly have more of an impact on Donald Trump's reckoning. I think that is why you're continuing to see those strikes on the Gulf despite the comments yesterday from Iran's president Masoud Pzeshan that um that uh that the Revolutionary Guard would desist from attacking the the the Gulf nations, his his neighboring countries. You know, after he said that, there was this whole kind of wave of response from hardliners with within the regime, essentially wrapping him on the knuckles and saying um they will do nothing of the sort. um and any country that harbors or is home to US military bases uh will pay a price for it. And we've seen that in continued attacks um across the Gulf today. >> We're hearing that um the Iranians may have reached some conclusion on the identity of the new supreme leader. How do you analyze that, Diana? What's um what do you think we should be looking for? Well, there are a couple of names who've been circulating and I think that neither of them represents a change from the sort of system that we've seen in place for the last 47 years. One of them, Majaba Kame, is the son of uh Ali K who was killed just over a week ago and he is, you know, he's very closely associated with the revolutionary guard. He joined them at the end of the Iran Iraq war. he's been in the background of his father's office um since then uh understands the political and military and security structure in the country very well and I think he is uh the revolutionary guard's preferred choice he certainly won't represent a break um then you have the grandson of the previous Ayatollah um Hassim Kmeni and uh he too is a is a pretty hardline candidate Um if one of those is is is appointed then you will see that the uh those in charge um within you know a fairly diverse uh cross range of of of the clerics, the military, the revolutionary guard and the civilian leadership you know that they that they have decided that uh resistance and unending revolution is still the name of the game in Iran and that they are um going to continue their hardline policies. It's possible especially when you have these sort of forward- facing more pragmatic um figures like Ali Lareni who is the head of the National Security Council or the foreign minister Achi who has been um addressing you know the American public pretty consistently all the way through this now I don't think he'll be appointed but as a wild card maybe Lareni maybe that would be a nod um to the west that uh that the regime is uh open to further negotiations and discussions We we'll have to wait and see what it is that they do. I think what they are very concerned about is um that the Ayatollah's death has left a security vacuum and that um now they've established this sort of mosaic system as they called it where essentially you have pockets of revolutionary guard military the the security establishment operating as sort of independent units wherever they are keeping the fight going on such a broad range of fronts. now um that uh there needs to be someone at the top who is coordinating things and is is is keeping things together. So um you know Israel, the United States have both said that any new leader especially if it's Mosha Makame um will be taken out. Um and I think that's also why uh the assembly of experts who are the body who anoint this leader have decided for now that they're not going to be meeting in person because Israel's made it very clear that they know where they would meet and that they would take them out. >> Diana, thank you so much for for for that. Uh we'll no doubt be following it uh all day and uh you'll be reporting on what you might call the competition for the least desirable job in the world right now I would think. Anyway, thanks Diana. The Russian ambassador to the United Kingdom has told this program that his country is not neutral on the United States Iran war and he was supportive of Iran. Andrea Kellin spoke to us before reports that Russia is sharing intelligence with Tehran. I started by asking about that US action in the Middle East. Your government uh statement on this has been that this is an invas not an invasion but it's a transgression of territorial integrity and uh and so on and why wasn't the security council consulted and so on. And it struck me very forcibly that uh in 2022 uh Russia did exactly the same in fact put men into a foreign country. >> Uh at at the time uh as I have said these are two different things uh but uh uh we did have a plan uh we did have strategy when it has all started. We did have a clear clear goals and we have indicated all uh absolutely clear goals. uh there are four of them and I would not repeat them as but as for the moment what's going on in Iran this is absolutely illegal uh and uh an and provoked aggression uh by Israel and United States against Iran which has no explanation which has no clear goal which has no planning which has no exit strategy most of all and people really let it be US Europe and US Russia We do not understand why it is happening because it happens in the middle of negotiations uh which uh between United States and Iran on the critical topic of uh nuclear issues uh and uh as we have been informed by the minister of foreign affairs of Oman who was mediating it. They were close to success in it. So uh US has interrupted uh these negotiations and decided to make a strike. So it is critical that we will come back to to to it and to come to a negotiate a solution. >> Is um Russia going to come to the aid of Iran in any way because Russia and Iran have been allies. The uh Iranians have supplied um expertise and uh material to to Russia. Would you for example uh consider supplying Iran with munitions, drones and so on? >> Uh you know that we have all sympathies with Iran. They are our neighbors. They historically uh we have had always very good relationship with Iran. But for the moment uh as uh it has been announced yesterday, Iran didn't ask for any assistance or help. >> And if they were to ask, Russia would consider it uh that request seriously and make an uh assistance available. >> Well, you know, we are not only sympathetic with Iran, but we are also sympathetic with the countries of Persian Gulf with all emirates. We have uh interest in all of them including Iran and the best will be of course to cease to stop immediately any aggression over the Europe. >> So this is interesting because most of the Gulf uh cooperation council countries have come out in support of the Israeli and uh American action. Is Russia going to be neutral in this? >> We are not neutral. uh no venue to we are supportive uh to Iran of course and we consider as I have said uh very negatively uh what is being done and besides we do not understand this logic uh uh it is the logic at the moment of western countries and all the others is that Iran is to blame for everything. uh but no one is saying that uh US and Israel has initiated an attack against Iran and Iran is only responding to this attack. So this is uh simply uh unfair. Can I put this to to you? If I were an ally of Russia in various ways, I would expect Russia to be coming to my aid um physically and materially. But Assad in Syria, Maduro in Venezuela, Kamei now uh could all count on rhetorical Russian support. But you seem to be saying that actually uh Russian support is fine as long as it's speeches in the Security Council. But you're not promising any help in war. the Americans uh give the Israelis and their allies whatever they want in terms of weapons. You won't >> you know in in international relations uh there are different grades of uh uh partnership. Uh what we do have with Iran this is strategic partnership alliance is a different thing. alliance in interpretation of the United States. For instance, it has a a treaty uh they have treaty they have special uh all partnership and alliances with several countries which uh um which uh includes also military assistance uh South Korea for instance, Republic of Korea, Japan and the others. We do not have such a treaties neither with Venezuela or uh you named uh Iran or uh uh what else Syria uh we are cooperating with them. We have a lot of relationship with them but as for special treaty on uh defense assistance or milit is a different thing. >> All right. Well, what should I think if I were a member of the Cuban government with which uh the Soviet Union had an agreement and I believe Russia has does have an agreement. If the Americans decided and there's some sign here that Donald Trump uh wants to regard Cuba to some extent as part of Russia's sphere of influence. Should the Cubans now start to feel nervous that if that happens they won't be able to look to Russia for genuine material support? >> Uh it's very hypothetical question which is good when I was thinking to provoke me are we going to send troops? I don't think so. Although it's a hypothetical possibility I guess that we will do everything by all means to settle down crisis. uh we will talk to everybody. We will talk to security council, insecurity council. We will make all but peaceful means. We we we are not Americans. We do not want uh to make uh to change uh the uh legal uh legal situation by by force. It's a it's a Americans are now trying to substitute international law by the force of hgeimon I will say or something like that. So this is not our style. >> Well, okay. Well, let's talk about your style. Um, Ukraine. How many Russian soldiers have died in the war with Ukraine? >> Uh, well, I have been asked many times to answer this question, and I refuse to do it. There are calculations by serious experts. Uh, I know uh these calculations, but I'm not going to reveal it to you. the Center for Strategic and International Studies. You may or may not believe they're thicker, but they put it at around 325,000. Okay. Whatever it is, putting your You are a senior Russian official. Your colleagues have to tell Russian mothers that their sons or daughters have died in this conflict. What are you saying to those people about why? To whom? >> To the mothers and fathers and brothers and sisters of those who have died in the conflict that you started with Ukraine. >> It is a special military operation which has it is needed because uh the uh the situation was uh threatening to our vital interests of course and the decision has been taken to to make it. Uh it continues right now. It goes slowly I will say but steadily. And what is what is happening in Ukraine that Ukraine is uh losing this war uh steadily in all aspects economical as industrial aspects military aspects. Ukraine is shrinking right now in spite of all assistance getting that it is getting from from from the west. shrinking very slowly, partly because of the tactics that are being pursued by Russia. Um, the United Nations reports that 15,000 Ukrainian civilians civilians been killed since Russia invaded in February 2022. You're waging war on innocent people. you talked um a little while ago about essentially what is legitimate cause for war, understanding objectives and so on. Doesn't matter what the objectives are, Russian munitions are killing Ukrainian civilians. That cannot be right. after uh 2014 when the uh so-called revolution of dignities uh take took place in Kiev uh then uh you know that KEF troops has again to the east and to the Lugansk Detsk and all the republics uh where people resisted uh and they didn't want to obey to the nationalist that has gained a rule in Kiev itself and Ukraine ke authorities sent an army uh to kill innocent people in Lugansk in Denisk and during uh nine years they bombarded uh shooted killed and it was around the same figure as your name 15,000 to 20,000 >> I've heard that justification many times but it still doesn't explain why uh Russian munitions have been targeted at civilians and we're now coming out of winter um Russian uh forces have attacked energy plants There are people freezing to death in Ukraine. >> Winter is over. It is spring now. >> Yeah, they're still freezing to death. >> You have anything to ask me, please. >> But they're still freezing to death. Come on. >> Uh, not anymore. I think that they have restored partly the infrastructure, energy infrastructure, >> uh, and it situation is not critical. We have had a chance to ruin it totally, but we didn't gone into that. >> How long is this going to go on? My hope that it will end as soon as possible. Everybody hopes for it. But for need we need to achieve the goals and we need to achieve uh actually what we need to achieve is it has been agreed with uh President Trump in Anchorage in Alaska uh some months ago. We did have a good framework of agreement uh over this and uh we work on that. We work on that understanding and we hope to to achieve uh and to reach goals that has been set up with the Americans. Uh during this meeting >> the uh parolympic uh authorities of uh Spanish support authorities have admitted Bellarus and Russia to the the games that are going on now. Um the United Kingdom is boycotting the opening ceremony. What is your response to that? Well, I think it is very silly of course since United Kingdom does not send any sportsman to this par Olympics. So what what are they pretending to boycott? They have sent one official from the government as I understand. But uh anyway uh sport and politics the are two different things which has many times been said by the Olympic committee by the way and uh we of course still do not understand why it is boycotted since Israel and United States uh uh parolympics are participating perhaps they would like to boycott as well them >> so you're equating the United States and Israel with >> with Russia >> so about what about paralympics supported as I say and politics has nothing to do in common. >> Um very last question it's a puzzle to British people. Um Mr. Putin is seems to be uh all powerful. Um what would succession to Putin look like or can nobody actually imagine Russia without Putin? >> Uh well it's a strange question because Putin has been reelected uh two years ago. Uh in fact uh we did have elections also on this premises. Lots of people voted for him his popularity now is around uh 80 85% every day. It is being measured weekly. I think uh and it his popularity doesn't diminish and what's going to happen well in six or seven years I don't think it is. It's it's it's a matter of discussion. >> Mr. Ambassador thank you so much for your time. >> Thank you. Well, um, watching that back and I haven't seen it before, uh, some masterclass, wasn't it, Michael, in obiscation? >> It's a fascinating insight both into, uh, the broad Russian mindset, but also into what you learn as a Russian, presumably beforehand, Soviet diplomat. Um, and in particular, the way in which, uh, questions which were uncomfortable, whether on Cuba or on Putin's future, were hypothetical. and also I think the barefaced hypocrisy in saying that Russia uh doesn't believe in force but does believe in international law and then you very elegantly rather than pushing back you were the uh dispassionate interviewer you said okay then Ukraine and you know the the the the point was made and the fact that when challenged on what he would say to the mothers of those who died in that war. He went back into diplo speak, political speak about the special military operation and Russia's vital interests and so on. Uh I don't think it was necessarily the case that you'd touched a raw nerve, but what you'd done is that you'd exposed the fact that uh while the Russians can mount their own critique of what America and Israel and others have done, what they can't do is effectively defend their own position, their own hypocrisy, their own actions here. Mick, the the the the thing that's been interesting um is the way that when he says they're neutral on Iran, the Iran crisis, um they clearly aren't quite as neutral as those words would imply, are they? >> I think he said he wasn't. They weren't neutral. They they were actively supporting, but it I doubt if that will turn into much material assistance uh beyond words as you put to him. But he must be chuckling this morning. I mean, he's a man who does give rise to chuckles on all round, I think, cuz he's he looks like he's from Central Casting and he sounds that way. But he what they will achieve, I think, in this period is equivalence. They will be able to say that what we're doing is only as equivalent as what you're doing. We've got our justifications, and Trump has put forward some justifications which seem to change every time he reaches for the text buttons. Uh, and so they're they're going to be laughing about this. It wouldn't surprise me frankly without being too conspiratorial now that they've got some easement on the uh oil and gas embargos that this may have been on a nod in the wink with the Russians. They spent a lot of time with the Russians and now there are two invasions of sovereign nations at the same time uh without verifi very verifiable or justifable means and without consultation with anyone else. I mean America and Israel have gone into Iran. didn't consult Britain, which is one of Star's defenses about what his his position and it seems to the the publics of the nations around the world that these two people, Trump and uh Putin, are acting in very similar ways. Uh because we don't know what's going to happen next. >> Uh but it just so happens that Putin is stuck in Ukraine in a in a murderous cycle. >> Forgive me, you're you correct me. Uh I I went into the interview thinking he would say they were neutral. So I was mild I was mildly surprised when he did and they're still in my head. Uh what do you think an >> well it's interesting for me you know the former kind of Moscow correspondent background how yes to an extent he's still central casting. Yes he's from the Soviet school if I speak your weight. You know you put your money in and you get out plops the the answer. However, the the Russian state doctrine here and I think you exposed quite a lot of it with those questions I do think has changed and it it has changed partly because of Putin and that over consolidation of power and repression under Putin which is still not comparable to Donald Trump of America and Donald Trump in many ways menace to the international system and in many ways very unwelcome uh to me as well but it is not Putin's Russia and it's quite important to under understand that I think if you were Iran if you were um Cuba if you were Syria when push came to shove. What you see is that Russia will say we are not neutral. But that is not the same as saying we will do actually very much to assist you. And the days I think when people could run off so did Bashar run off to to Moscow where he drives his uh sports car around the the Moscow ring road. Um you know that is probably not I think what they have in mind now. I think what they do is a very limited amount of support enough to make life uncomfortable for the for the west. Certainly they can supply drones and other material that will be damaging but it's not the days of that cold war. You know we're we're fully behind you. We'll we'll come to you with the you know your allies. Putin is much more hedged about that. I thought that came out very well in those as you say the slight discomfort of his answers as well as the I'm going to tell you bunch of lies about Ukraine. What do they say? What do they say to the mothers, the fathers, the brothers and sisters? What they say is is a relentless barrage of of untrue propaganda that you and you've heard it that Ukraine effectively that Ukraine was attacking Russia, not the other way around. >> Well, he he did in fact say some something to the effect that uh really unpleasant people have taken over in Ukraine and that's that's what the special military operation was about. And of course, they pay. >> But you didn't say war because they don't use the word war. >> Yeah, in indeed. Um actually in this discussion I haven't warned you about this but it strikes me one dog is not barking at all. China >> well I do think that uh the efforts by Donald Trump in Iran can't be seen uh in isolation from his broader recognition that China is the ultimate strategic competitor for the United States. Uh and I think the spectator argued this week that uh his actions in Venezuela and his actions in Iran are like a chess player who is taking off sometimes just knocking off uh the other players pieces. So uh Iran and Venezuela uh were and are Chinese allies. Um the flow of oil from Iran uh has kept the Chinese economy afloat. Yeah, I think 15% of China's oil comes >> and Trump is seeing Xi I think next month. Um what he's doing in advance of that is demonstrating who the biggest gorilla is in the room. >> Okay, we'll take a break now. I'll be speaking to the shadow home secretary Chris Phelp next. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. What's the best thing about being a Sky News presenter? We've done the work and the reading so you don't have to being a Sky News presenter. Hello and welcome Westminster, the heart of British politics. I'm so sorry about what happened to you. So what on earth is going on? >> It's not true. >> Can I tell you what I think is really unusual? Mornings with Reanim Frost. Let's crack on. Let's get started. >> What's the best thing about being a Sky News journalist? Who's funnier news journalist? >> A special edition of the world with me, Yalda Hakeim. >> Pakistan has a right to respond. >> You're like, what? >> Historic day appeared today. Congratulations. This is a huge moment. But what happens now? The best thing about being a Sky News journalist. >> They call him the king of the jungle. >> Being a Sky News journalist. Ustra Albaga has this report and this is what's left of it. >> As a woman of color, how did the Harris campaign speak to you? >> People risk their lives to speak to us for this report. >> Mr. Zuma, Sky News. We're trying to see as much as we can. What's the best thing about being a Sky News journalist? >> Who's funnier? >> Being a Sky News journalist. A special edition of the world with me. Yalda Hakeim. >> Pakistan has a right to respond. >> You were like what? >> Historic day appeared today. Congratulations. This is a huge moment. But what happens now? Well, I'm joined now by the shadow home secretary, Chris Phelp. Um, morning. Um, your former defense secretary, Ben Wallace, said that the government had been caught with its pants down uh in Iran cuz it had cut back on defense spending, but um, warships don't get magicked out of nowhere suddenly. Uh, the cuts happened on your watch. You, the Tories, sold the pants and the belt and the braces long before Labour turned up. So, shouldn't Wallace have been aiming his fire at your predecessors? >> Good morning, Trevor. Well, look, I think the fact is we do have warships that are capable of defending Cyprus and defending Gulf States, ships like HMS Dragon and the aircraft carrier HMS Prince of Wales, um, equipped with advanced F-35Bs, which the last Conservative government um, purchased and commissioned. The problem is the problem is those ships as we speak are nowhere near Cyprus. They're nowhere near the Gulf. They're tied up at the docks in Portsmouth. Um because uh Kestar and Labor government showed no foresight whatsoever. And even they knew even though they knew three or four weeks ago that America planned this action against Iran. They did not move those ships into the region. That is a dereliction of duty, frankly. And it's left Cyprus undefended. And it's left it's meant that we the UK have made essentially a very limited or no contribution towards defending those Gulf states which undermines our credibility in the region. They could have moved those ships three weeks ago but they didn't. I I don't normally hurl 14 years at you, but come on. Look, you were you guys were in for 14 years, which is a sort of period where you prepare for this kind of thing. And the truth of the matter is that as uh I talked to foreign secretary about it this morning, that the real problem here is that we just don't have enough assets. Two weeks ago, you would have been saying to me, we need to have ships in the high north because the Russians are coming across the Arctic. But today you also want them in the Mediterranean and in the Gulf. You can't have both because over 14 years you reduced the stock of uh military assets so dramatically we have to make a choice. >> Well, hang on. These ships are currently not in the high north. They're not in the Gulf. They're they're in Portsmouth and they're getting prepared for a mission. >> And K Star could have made a decision about three weeks ago when he became aware that America was planning this action. He could have decided, Karma could have decided to move those ships to the Mediterranean and the Gulf, but he didn't do that and that is a dereliction of duty. Now, we do need to increase our defense expenditure. That is certainly true. And we conservatives have said we need to get to 3% of GDP extremely quickly. Labor don't have a timetable for that. Let me finish the point. We've also said that we should we should immediately reinstate the two child benefit cap, which would save three and a half billion and spend that money on our armed forces. Just last week in parliament, Labour voted to get rid of that benefit cap. Pay people with three, four, five, 10 children unlimited amounts of money. We should not be spending money on that. We should be spending the three and a half billion on our armed services. And that is a different choice that we would make. >> You could you could do your party a service by simply saying right now, sorry, we didn't do all this when we had the chance. >> Well, look, in government, we did equip the aircraft carriers with the F-35Bs. We did. We knew the things that you're saying need to get done now. Well, look, the world I think is arguably a lot more dangerous now than it was even five or 10 years ago. Um, with, you know, >> to 3% 10 years ago >> in the last in the last 10 years and the world or 15 years, the world has got considerably more dangerous. You've got the Russian invasion of Ukraine. You've got China being a lot more assertive and um looking over at Taiwan, you got the situation in the Middle East now. Uh, you know, the world is more dangerous now than it was before. We did invest in the aircraft carriers and in the F-35s, for example. We also we also renewed our nuclear deterrent in in government but we need to do more. We need to do more. >> All right. But just quickly on on Iran uh your leader says that um you should take more assertive action. Does assert more assertive action mean that RAF planes should join uh should fly sorties join bombing raids on Iran? Uh yes it does because Iranian military uh installations are being used to launch missiles um at British targets and at targets in other countries around the Gulf like the UAE um and uh Aman and others and we should be actively seeking to destroy the military installations on Iranian soil that are launching uh those missiles and and it's a dereliction of duty again it's because Karma is so weak that he won't authorize that kind of action. This week I talked to the home secretary about a plan to reduce immigration. I heard your leader say you'd go further. How would you go further than throwing children in the back of vans and removing uh indefinite leave to remain from lots of people and so on. What would you do that is more draconian? >> Well, let's let's start with illegal immigration across the channel. Um we would go a lot further than the Labor government and we would say we would come out of the ECR. We'd come out of the modern slavery treaty and that would enable us to deport anyone crossing the channel illegally within a week either back to their country. >> How did that stop them coming across the channel? >> Let me just explain. >> They went back. This government sent some of them back and they came turned. >> No, no, no. Not not deport them to France. Deport them back to their country of origin if that's possible or to a safe third country like Rwanda if not. Now, if you're an illegal immigrant in France and you know if you cross the channel, you're going to wind up back in your country of origin or somewhere like Rwanda, you are frankly not going to bother attempting the crossing in the first place. Australia did something similar and that worked and Australia and Australia did >> say that. But there's absolutely no evidence that that's true. In fact, the numbers have risen. As much as you have said this, as much as this government has said this, where is the evidence that anybody sitting in Calala wanting to get on a boat is hearing Chris Phelps saying, "Oh, if you turn up, we're going to send you back and believes it." >> If we if we did it in practice, right, then within two or three months, people would simply stop crossing. And I'm not making that up because Australia did exactly what I'm describing. I spoke to the former Australian prime minister who said that in September 2013, they started doing what I'm describing. They took people coming to Australia. >> They put them on an island >> and and within about 3 months within about 3 months the crossings stopped completing. >> They put them on an island on the middle of the Pacific which we can't do. But anyway, >> but we can return people to their country of origin or or to a safe third country like Rwanda. And within a few months of of of that happening in practice, not just me saying it, but it happening in practice, people would stop attempting the crossing. And by the way, coming out of the ECR would also allow us to deport all foreign criminals, not just some. and it would enable us to deport people with no right to be here. All of that is a lot tougher than what Shabbana Mahmud said because she won't come out of the ECHR and that mean the truth is the legal system means she therefore can't deport criminals and she can't deport all illegal immigrants. >> Chris, thank you for your time this morning. >> Thank you. >> In just a moment, we'll hear once again from our panel. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. The best thing about being a Sky News journalist. Going to take you behind the scenes here for election night live. They have gone up and up. Big Sky News journalist >> Ed Conway Sky News. Is anyone going to talk to us? Mortgage rates did go up very sharply during your time in office. Here it is. First off, just the scale of what we're looking at. Our data shows it's been happening. Question is why it hasn't been stopped. Back to our panel, Lord Gove and Mccalvoy and Mick Lynch. Um, let's just try and see if we can work out where we think this might go. Mick, do you think this is going to take a long time or do you think that uh essentially that the Americans are going to try and find uh some kind of settlement in the way they did in Venezuela? >> Well, it depends on Trump's appetite, how long he can pay attention to it and his regime. But the the defense secretary or the war secretary or whatever he's called this week seems to be really enjoying this. a very perverse situation where somebody's actually enjoying people being killed on the high seas and elsewhere. I hope he does do that. I hope he gets bored and wants to extricate himself quickly because a lot of people are being killed and we shouldn't forget that it's not just about the politics and how Starmmer feels about Trump and Trump feels about everyone else. People are being killed on the ground, incinerated and bombed to death. Some of them maybe deserve that. Some of them are completely innocent and that's got to stop. And Israel, if it keeps going with this invasion of Lebanon, as we we think might happen, may turn this into a a more serious situation. But I hope it comes to a very quick conclusion uh one way or the other. But it may let loose lots of other stuff. Uh we've seen the the collapse of Syria over the last 10 years, which let loose a load of stuff. We've seen Libya, we've seen all sorts of countries, Ira Iraq especially, where it let loose a whole series of nightmares for the people of that region. So, I'm hoping that it can be contained. Uh, and where we go after that, we'll have somebody will have to pick up the pieces through through processes which hopefully we we should have done before uh this started. >> Michael, >> I think I think it's the case that in the essence of the Iranian regime, what really matters to them is regime survival. We carried a piece in the spectator this week by Matthew Gould, our man in Tel Aviv, but also a former acting ambassador in Tehran. He talked about the thinking in the ayatoller's minds and of course there are some that are more religious, some that are more ideological than others but ultimately they're bound together with the revolutionary guard in believing that uh whatever their ideological impulses they need to stick together as one regime in order to survive. What the Americans are doing are basically saying well if you step up to become the leader of this regime then it's a short-term appointment. It's a zero hours contract being supreme leader of Iran. You don't have many more hours than zero. >> No. Um and therefore what they're seeking to do is to change the calculation for people. So think about individual survival rather than regime survival. >> Uh how quickly they'll drive that change in the regime is a very difficult thing to judge. >> Okay. By the way, I'm counting the spectator plugs. We're up to two. And what do you think? Where where are we going to get to? >> Well, chime in with the political ones then. No, I I think there is a bit of strategy here. I know it looks it's often a bit crazy when you look at the way that Donald Trump changes what he focuses on. But as Mick rightly said, you know, some I don't agree with his analysis, but the Israelis are, you know, very experienced at dealing with Iran in this sense. It's kind of their peer threat and foe in the region. So I think what they're aiming for is exactly as Michael says is to separate off individual interests from the regime. But that that's not actually a very stupid strategy, right? Because once if you are able to do that then you've created deterrence and it will be watched by other countries. I think you know you mess a bit with with America with Israeli backing at your peril. What's harder to see is what is a win. Where can Donald Trump I don't think it's even about his shortterm attention span because actually he's got a very good attention span when it comes to his own political survival and he's proved that rather better than many of those who oppose his worldview. So what he wants to do is get this sorted out by the summer. So he gets on a road to the midterms where this is not dominating and he's not stuck in the forever war paradox where you got JD Vance and people around him who've made really clear that ideologically they oppose anything like America being at war in the old kind of way of getting bogged down in Iraq or Afghanistan. So what can he say is a win? one is he gets something on that looks like they've hit a lot more of the nuclear proliferation sort of capacity of Iran. the idea that you get back into negotiation. I mean, I'm sorry, but I've covered GCPOA and many other acronyms for many, many years, and I'm not even like the biggest expert on the region. As your own correspondent said, rightly, this is a 47year problem, and is built up here. The fact there's an extra round of talks in in Aman. This is not a regime at the moment that is going to willingly walk into a room, you're going to come out with a deal. This is going to be fraught and it's going to continue. The question is for how long. I suspect that Donald Trump will go quite hard and then want to take take a break as we run to the midterms. >> There's the other the other element of this is of course is the uh bump in the road in the relationship between us and or London and Washington. Um uh Iette Cooper said interestingly that she uh got her first briefing years ago from the CIA. It's all very exciting. U I I assume you must have had similar briefings Michael. Is is this actually just a bump in the road? Is this recoverable or has something changed in the way that we are going to relate to the Americans? >> Yes, I think that something uh has changed. Um I uh I think it's difficult to uh um avoid both understatement and overstatement because uh the special relationship has never meant that Britain is permanently and 100% aligned with America. uh as as you will know you will have covered things like uh the the disagreements between Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan over Grenada and they were two of the uh leaders who were closest uh in uh America and Britain respectively. So it doesn't mean subservience and complete alignment but it has meant overall that broadly there's been an understanding and um as Tony Blair articulated in the private meeting that you mentioned earlier the general default position of the British prime minister has been to be helpful wherever possible but I think both Trump's personality and also America's broader longerterm shift away from Europe and towards China those two things are driving a new type of relationship between Britain and America. >> Mick, um I don't know if you noticed this that you you were talking about Mr. Trump's attention span. I'm kind of with an that we we can underestimate Donald Trump. But I was struck but uh that in yesterday's press conference, you know, one of these rolling press conferences, he talked a couple of times about Cuba and he talked about Marco Rubio, his secretary of state whose um family comes from Cuba and for whom Cuba is a really big important thing. Um if I were the Cubans, I'd be nervous, wouldn't you? >> Extremely. uh they're being starved, being denied access to energy and access to all sorts of materials to run an economy in society. The blockade has been in for what 60 years or so and it's being tightened probably as tight as it's ever been and and Russia and others are not there to provide alternatives. Mexico is feeling the squeeze as well. So I don't think the prospects for Cuba are very good uh despite its longevity and people underestimated Cuba all of that time. I mean, they weren't a regime without some support in the country, but it will be the next step. I would have thought the next pawn that Michael described to be swept off the chessboard may well be Cuba. But it's a question of how long can we accept this that somebody that just feels they can do whatever they like and expect their allies to just be completely subservient to their wishes. We don't know what's next. We had Greenland. We don't know what where he'll turn his attention. And countries, sovereign nations such as this one, have to be able to set their own foreign policy have to set their own economic policy. And Americans traditionally when they don't like your oil policy, uh, or your agricultural policy, as in Latin America over the years, come and swipe people away. We can't tolerate that forever. We can't just tolerate Trump deciding he doesn't like a regime, so it's got to go. >> Okay. What is next is a break, but in a moment we'll talk about that economic impact. This is how you travel when the mafia wants to kill you. He's almost given up his own freedom. But that's the price he's willing to pay. >> Here, they don't just arrest Andrangetta mafia members. They also live among them. Time after time, I've seen the devastating impact of extreme weather and climate change. >> We don't have much snow at the moment. >> They've had a warm spring, an exceptionally hot summer, and that means they're expecting to lose more than three times the amount of ice than they usually do. >> Flames are still forcing people from their homes and leaving many questioning their futures. >> Here was my life. We have nothing. I can't say anything. It's so sad. This disaster is testing the resolve of everyone on this island. >> The only way out now is by boat. Everything you see is devastated. And the misery being felt by people living here is repeated in towns and villages across central Europe. Sky News. Get the full story first. >> Turkey is burying its dead. >> The loss is profound. Whole families died in this collapse. Generations wiped out. The violence has penetrated the heart of the city rather than being contained to the estates around the edge. And that speaks to the level of anger being felt here. In Sweden, police have seized a lethal stash. This is just a small sample of the deadly arsenal taken off the streets. This is an example of an advert. Really anyone of any age to say I'll do that for a million crown and then have to go and shoot someone. >> Yes. >> I'm Siobhan Robbins, Sky Europe correspondent based here in Berlin. We've got your Sunday mornings covered. From the front page and the sounds of the streets to the voices of the people who make the major calls and big picture politics beyond Westminster. We'll put you at the heart of our story. I'm ready. Are you? Join me, Trevor Phillips. Sunday mornings on >> What's the best thing about being a Sky News presenter? We've done the work and the reading so you don't have to be a Sky News presenter. >> Hello and welcome Westminster, the heart of British politics. I'm so sorry about what happened to you. So what on earth is going on? >> It's not true. >> Can I tell you what I think is really unusual? Mornings with Richard Frost. Let's crack on. Let's get started. >> What's the best thing about being a Sky News journalist? Who's funnier sky news journalist? >> A special edition of the world with me. Yald deahim. >> Pakistan has the right to respond. >> You're like what? >> Historic day here today. Congratulations. This is a huge moment. But what happens now? >> Back to our panel. Michael, an and Mick. Um an of course all this may have an impact on our economy. What do you think? >> Oh for sure it will have an impact on our economy. I was covering the spring statement Rachel Reeves the chancellor was giving earlier this week. Really that's now it's a work of fantasy. It's all in the rear view mirror. All this time we're strong and stable. We're sticking to our rules. You know things will come good. Inflation's down a bit. Ghosts of Richishy Sunnak. That argument didn't even work out for him. Can you imagine against this backdrop? We just talked in your interview you there after your interview uh with the Russian ambassador about oil and gas price spikes and where that goes and one way or the other it looks like it's going to have big energy knock-on costs. Now the government can absorb them to a certain extent. You can't just say to the consumer, "No, your bills are up£500 because of Iran." But then everything else is off course because we know Rachel Reed has had problem leaving herself what we call headroom like she doesn't have a lot of options when the figures are already drawn so tight. Is it likely to slow down international trade and activity? Well, I think so. I mean, if people are being sort of you forced out of their luxury apartments in Dubai, then that's not great, is it for or it's not exactly the best argument for trade with the Middle East. So I mean I think he's not the only person to stumble with this problem but it is a problem. >> Well one of the answers is there's only so much you can do if you're sitting there as Rachel reads she's got a way of eventualities as well. If it's a six week thing may drift back to to normal and she may be able to get on with some strategy if she has it. We haven't seen that strategy yet. Certainly from the left position, we were looking at more growth, more uh changes to to the structure of the economy and and some some stuff for working people, you know, whatever it is that comes our way. That'll all be delayed if there was any idea of doing that. And I think in some ways you've got to just you can't keep re responding economically to every single turn in the market. The markets will come back to some sense of norm as soon as they sense that things have gone back into equilibrium themselves. >> Okay. In the meantime, some people have made a lot of money out of this situation and maybe there should be some consideration and some taxes after that. >> Okay, Michael Mick is 100% right. Um, and >> there you go. >> No, have we got that recorded please? Can we just >> No, the the the so the two broad things. one uh it is the case again as the spectator was covering a couple of weeks ago >> I have to get myself >> that the the the the tax structure in this country is indulgent towards financial services um and far too penal towards small and medium uh sized enterprises but oh gosh sorry but more broadly uh that's deputy editor asking me to get four references into the spectator but more broadly uh the other thing is uh these events reinforce the importance of making sure that you can move as as closely as possible towards a greater level of energy security. Yes, renewables are part of that mix, but at a time when we still have huge reserves of oil and gas in the North Sea and Norway is exploiting them and we're not, that doesn't make sense. >> Last thing here really, um, what is Kong going to be feeling this morning? Is this good for him or not? 15 seconds each. Mick, >> I think it's good for him. He's shown some resilience. Whatever you think of him, he's kept going and I think he'll keep going through this and I think his position will turn out to be right. They are going to defend uh British interest in British people and they're not going to be branded with instigating this war which I don't think will resolve the problems in the long term. We need a deal in the region that settles all the issues not attacks. Uh I think this actually strengthens his position within the Labour Party funnily enough because uh criticism from Trump and indeed from Tony Bear as you pointed out given the current state of the Labour Party only helps its leader. >> Yeah, he gets to talk about Labor values perhaps with a bit more credibility having stood up to Donald Trump. He didn't have much choice after Donald Trump trampled on him. Shortterm it's fine I think for Kama, but the may elections are not going to be fought largely on our position in Iran. The underlying lack of confidence in Kier Starmmer I think will still be a problem. >> This has been great morning. Mick Lynch backs Stalmer. Michael Crow backs Mick Lynch. Come back for next Sunday for more madness. 8:30. >> The best thing about being a Sky News journalist. >> Going to take you behind the scenes here for election night live. They have gone up and up. Big Sky News journalist. Ed Conway Sky News. Is anyone going to talk to us? Mortgage rates did go up very sharply during your time in office. Here it is. >> First off, just the scale of what we're looking at. Our data shows it's been happening. Question is why it hasn't been stopped. This is Sky News today. It's 10:00. The headlines. The special relationship fractures even further as Donald Trump again criticizes K Starmmer for his Iran war stance. The US president has uh the responsibility to do what he thinks is right in the US national interest.

Join Trevor Phillips on our flagship weekly programme that aims to set the political agenda, delve deep into the big stories and hear from news-making guests. Read more on today's top stories here ➡️ https://trib.al/tUsMtTl #SundayMorningWithTrevorPhillips #TrevorPhillips #Politics #Sunday #Westminster SUBSCRIBE to our YouTube channel for more videos: http://www.youtube.com/skynews Follow us on Twitter: https://twitter.com/skynews Like us on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/skynews Follow us on Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/skynews Follow us on TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@skynews For more content go to http://news.sky.com and download our apps: Apple https://itunes.apple.com/gb/app/sky-news/id316391924?mt=8 Android https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.bskyb.skynews.android&hl=en_GB Sky News Daily podcast is available for free here: https://podfollow.com/skynewsdaily/ To enquire about licensing Sky News content, you can find more information here: https://news.sky.com/info/library-sales