nonsectarian government. this is a government. dominated by islamists, and syrians are waiting to see| how quickly they'll make good on their promises to put in place a governance i for all syrians. joining me tonight arejohanna maska, a longstanding former adviser to president barack obama, and brian taylor, political commentator and columnist with the herald newspaper. first, the latest headlines. prince andrew says he "ceased all contact" with the businessman accused of being a chinese spy after receiving advice from the government. in a statement, the duke of york's office says "nothing of a sensitive nature" was ever discussed with the businessman known as h6. two men have been arrested

after a fairground ride crashed to the ground in birmingham city centre last night. people on the 180—feet—high city star flyer have spoken of their terror as the ride failed, leaving two women needing hospital treatment. france's new prime minister, francois bayrou, has said he faces a "himalayan" task ahead. he was speaking at a ceremony in paris as he took over from his predecessor, whose government collapsed after only three months. mr bayrou described the situation facing france as "dire". the uk economy shrank for the second month in a row in october amid uncertainty created by government's delayed budget. officialfigures showed a drop of 0.1% on the back of a similar fall in september, and it was the consumer—facing sectors including pubs, restaurants and retail that all reported weak months.

if you are just if you arejustjoining us, welcome to the programme. tens of thousands of syrians have been on the streets of the capital, damascus, today and in cities across the country celebrating the overthrow of the brutal assad regime, scenes that would have been unthinkable only a week ago. and this evening, fireworks have lit up the main square in damascus, but for many, and especially those who search in the morgues and burial sites, it is a bittersweet moment. around 150,000 people are thought to have died in the regime's notorious prisons, thousands more in the rebel—held enclaves that were bombed then gassed by assads�* forces. did the west do enough to stop it? last night on bbc question time, the health secretary wes streeting said, with hindsight, his party had made the wrong choice in 2013 when they opposed military action that was supported by the then conservative government.

looking back on the events of 2013, that the hesitation of this country and the united states create a vacuum that russia moved into and kept assad in powerfor much longer. so that was a mistake by labour, then? hang on just a second. what i cannot say with certainty and what we can't say for certainty even now that the rat has fled to moscow, to his backers, we cannot say that the back of assad is going to lead to a better syria yet. we don't know. this morning, the former labour leader ed miliband, who had whipped his party in opposition to that vote in 2013, said he stood by that decision in light of what had resulted from military action the ukjoined in iraq. i knew at the time that bashar al—assad was a terrible dictator. that wasn't the question. the question was should we put british troops potentially in harm's way with no clear plan for what the strategy was and indeed with the exit strategy was, and i believe the lesson of the iraq war, where hundreds of british

troops died and thousands were injured, was we should never put ourselves in that position or our troops in that position again. and of those people who think that bashar al—assad would have fallen if we had bombed him, well, we obviously know that's not the case because president trump took the decision to bomb him in 2017 and 2018, and he carried on in power. so, no, idon't regret that decision. it is true that at that time there was a growing weariness of foreign military adventures. in 2016, it gave rise to america first and the trump presidency, but here we are, many years on, faced with an equally precarious situation. what has happened to assad's chemical weapons? even a small amount of sarin, one of the most lethal man—made substances ever produced, in the hands of terrorists would carry the potential for hundreds or even thousands of casualties. mallory stewart is the assistant secretary of state for the bureau of arms control, deterrence, and stability. she spoke to us in the last hour.

we certainly knew about i the declared programme, and injanuary 2015, the organization forj the prohibition of chemical weapons actually was able j to confirm the destruction - of 1300 tonnes of the declared chemical weapons stockpile of the assad regime. - however, since that time, - and even throughout the process of the syrian government - joining the chemical weapons convention, we had beenj concerned that remaining stockpiles, remaining . facilities and equipment were not declared. and in fact that was born out through the course . of the syrian civil war in nine | confirmed cases of continuing chemical weapons used by the assad regime. . and the organisation has 19 outstanding questions - with respect to that declared stockpile, so we know that l

there's existing stockpile of material not declared. j we know there's existing capacity and equipment, | and that is a deep concerni for the us government and the international community. really interesting that this is come to the fore in the past 24-40 come to the fore in the past 24—40 hours. you are part of the 0bama administration. that his decision not to bomb in 2013 flow from the decision in the uk parliament or was apparent in washington he did not have the support of congress?— not have the support of concress? ~ ., . congress? we did not have the su ort congress? we did not have the support of _ congress? we did not have the support of congress _ congress? we did not have the support of congress or - congress? we did not have the support of congress or the - support of congress or the people. remember, we ran into thousand eight because president 0bama had famously stood against the iraq war. he was one who did not want to put my generation on the ground and wars. of course he was the one who drew the redline, and then could not act. that was a real

detriment for us. it was also a real detriment probably in our leadership in the region and definitely left a vacuum. we can say all this is true and still today, i would say donald trump got elected again on an anti—engagement, he does not want to be involved in foreign wars platform. and so we don't have the public sentiment on our side to get very actively involved. our side to get very actively involved-— our side to get very actively involved. ., , ,., . involved. context is important. as i say. _ involved. context is important. as i say. at _ involved. context is important. as i say. at the _ involved. context is important. as i say, at the top, _ involved. context is important. as i say, at the top, there - involved. context is important. as i say, at the top, there was| as i say, at the top, there was a weariness post iraq and post afghanistan, but i think it comes back to this tension that is still really there between a foreign policy that is moral and a foreign policy that is pragmatic. because today, we are still faced with the same problem even though we delayed on bombing assad.— on bombing assad. true. of course the _ on bombing assad. true. of course the differences - on bombing assad. true. of i course the differences between ed miliband and wes streeting will cause some awkward moments

in cabinet _ will cause some awkward moments in cabinet when they me and at the time — in cabinet when they me and at the time ed miliband was an opposition and not cabinet and wes streeting was nodding parliament. but i'm sure the earlier— parliament. but i'm sure the earlier division was appointed very— earlier division was appointed very sharp and savage in the labour— very sharp and savage in the labour party over the handling of the — labour party over the handling of the incursion into a rock. it reflected discontent with tony— it reflected discontent with tony blair's stance of the time, _ tony blair's stance of the time, the support he gave to the american government and reflected all of that discontent and it's quiet and it is— discontent and it's quiet and it is still— discontent and it's quiet and it is still there broadly in the _ it is still there broadly in the labour party and within the wider_ the labour party and within the wider movement on the left. do i think— wider movement on the left. do i think it — wider movement on the left. do i think it is — wider movement on the left. do i think it is significant? i think— i think it is significant? i think it _ i think it is significant? i think it is _ i think it is significant? i think it is fully troublesome within— think it is fully troublesome within the existing government but no — within the existing government but no more than that. no more than _ but no more than that. no more than that— but no more than that. no more than that by contrast with those _ than that by contrast with those remarkable scenes ofjoy on the — those remarkable scenes ofjoy on the streets of damascus and elsewhere. and no more than or nothing — elsewhere. and no more than or nothing hy— elsewhere. and no more than or nothing by comparison with the ambition — nothing by comparison with the ambition. ,., . ambition. the important question _ ambition. the important question is _ ambition. the important question is what - ambition. the important question is what it - ambition. the important l question is what it means ambition. the important - question is what it means for

foreign policy going forward which will come back to in a second. let's bring in somebody who was watch this for many years. joining us on the panel randa slim. she is a senior fellow and director of conflict resolution at the middle east institute. thank you for being with us was a limit get your view. do you think it was a mistake on part of the british and american governments not to bomb assad in 2013? it governments not to bomb assad in 2013? ., , ., , , ., ~ in 2013? it was a big mistake and try to — in 2013? it was a big mistake and try to understand - in 2013? it was a big mistake and try to understand the - and try to understand the hundreds— and try to understand the hundreds of— and try to understand the hundreds of thousands i and try to understand the hundreds of thousands of and try to understand the - hundreds of thousands of lives that could _ hundreds of thousands of lives that could have _ hundreds of thousands of lives that could have been - hundreds of thousands of lives that could have been saved - hundreds of thousands of lives that could have been saved if. that could have been saved if then— that could have been saved if then we _ that could have been saved if then we did _ that could have been saved if then we did not _ that could have been saved if then we did not assad - that could have been saved if then we did not assad the i then we did not assad the means to kiii— then we did not assad the means to kill people _ then we did not assad the means to kill people with _ then we did not assad the means to kill people with barrel- to kill people with barrel bombs _ to kill people with barrel bombs and _ to kill people with barrel bombs and we _ to kill people with barrel bombs and we denied i to kill people with barrel- bombs and we denied assad the nmans— bombs and we denied assad the means to — bombs and we denied assad the means to use _ bombs and we denied assad the means to use chemical- bombs and we denied assad the i means to use chemical weapons. we know— means to use chemical weapons. we know now— means to use chemical weapons. we know now that _ means to use chemical weapons. we know now that by— means to use chemical weapons. we know now that by 2013, - means to use chemical weapons. we know now that by 2013, thati we know now that by 2013, that state _ we know now that by 2013, that state was — we know now that by 2013, that state was hollowed _ we know now that by 2013, that state was hollowed out. - we know now that by 2013, that state was hollowed out. the - state was hollowed out. the iahiiity — state was hollowed out. the iahiiity to _ state was hollowed out. the lability to the _ state was hollowed out. the lability to the regime - state was hollowed out. the lability to the regime was i lability to the regime was nonexistent. _ lability to the regime was nonexistent. by- lability to the regime was nonexistent. by 2015, - lability to the regime was . nonexistent. by 2015, when lability to the regime was - nonexistent. by 2015, when the russians — nonexistent. by 2015, when the russians and _ nonexistent. by 2015, when the russians and iranians _ nonexistent. by 2015, when the russians and iranians and - russians and iranians and hezbollah _ russians and iranians and hezbollah were _ russians and iranians and hezbollah were not - russians and iranians and hezbollah were not there | russians and iranians and l hezbollah were not there in force — hezbollah were not there in force the _ hezbollah were not there in force the pro— hezbollah were not there in force the pro prop - hezbollah were not there in force the pro prop up - hezbollah were not there in force the pro prop up the i force the pro prop up the regime _ force the pro prop up the regime but _ force the pro prop up the regime but then - force the pro prop up the regime but then by- force the pro prop up the regime but then by 2050 j force the pro prop up the - regime but then by 2050 when the russians— regime but then by 2050 when the russians intervened, - regime but then by 2050 when the russians intervened, it - the russians intervened, it made —

the russians intervened, it made it— the russians intervened, it made it very— the russians intervened, it made it very difficult - the russians intervened, it made it very difficult for i the russians intervened, it i made it very difficult for that position— made it very difficult for that position to _ made it very difficult for that position to gain _ made it very difficult for that position to gain ground - made it very difficult for that position to gain ground until| position to gain ground until now — position to gain ground until now but _ position to gain ground until now but in _ position to gain ground until now. but in 2013, _ position to gain ground until now. but in 2013, the - position to gain ground until| now. but in 2013, the regime was — now. but in 2013, the regime was dying _ now. but in 2013, the regime was dying and _ now. but in 2013, the regime was dying and intervention . was dying and intervention could — was dying and intervention could have _ was dying and intervention could have basically- was dying and intervention could have basically led i was dying and intervention could have basically led to| was dying and intervention . could have basically led to its downfaii— could have basically led to its downfall and _ could have basically led to its downfall and saved _ could have basically led to its downfall and saved hundreds | could have basically led to its. downfall and saved hundreds of thousands— downfall and saved hundreds of thousands of— downfall and saved hundreds of thousands of lives. _ downfall and saved hundreds of thousands of lives. but - downfall and saved hundreds of thousands of lives.— thousands of lives. but is ed miliband made _ thousands of lives. but is ed miliband made clear- thousands of lives. but is ed miliband made clear in - thousands of lives. but is ed miliband made clear in the l miliband made clear in the interview this morning, for all the america first rhetoric from donald trump, it was actually hand it did go and bomb syrian weapon size of a thought came to weapons were being manufactured in 2017 and that did not have the rebels or remove assad.— did not have the rebels or remove assad. . , ::' remove assad. yeah, but in 2017 ou had remove assad. yeah, but in 2017 you had already _ remove assad. yeah, but in 2017 you had already the _ remove assad. yeah, but in 2017 you had already the russians - remove assad. yeah, but in 2017 you had already the russians on| you had already the russians on the ground _ you had already the russians on the ground and _ you had already the russians on the ground and iranians- you had already the russians on the ground and iranians on- you had already the russians on the ground and iranians on the i the ground and iranians on the ground~ — the ground and iranians on the ground~ you _ the ground and iranians on the ground. you had _ the ground and iranians on the ground. you had the _ the ground and iranians on the| ground. you had the hezbollah militia — ground. you had the hezbollah militia on— ground. you had the hezbollah militia on the _ ground. you had the hezbollah militia on the ground _ ground. you had the hezbollah militia on the ground and - ground. you had the hezbollah militia on the ground and we . militia on the ground and we know— militia on the ground and we know that _ militia on the ground and we know that once _ militia on the ground and we know that once the - militia on the ground and we know that once the russiansj know that once the russians were — know that once the russians were no— know that once the russians were no longer— know that once the russians were no longer there - know that once the russians were no longer there able i know that once the russians . were no longer there able help assad. — were no longer there able help assad. once _ were no longer there able help assad, once hezbollah- were no longer there able help assad, once hezbollah was - were no longer there able help. assad, once hezbollah was there to be _ assad, once hezbollah was there to be on— assad, once hezbollah was there to be on the _ assad, once hezbollah was there to be on the ground _ assad, once hezbollah was there to be on the ground with- to be on the ground with israel. _ to be on the ground with israel, they— to be on the ground with israel, they left. - to be on the ground with israel, they left. so - to be on the ground with israel, they left. so we i to be on the ground with. israel, they left. so we still have — israel, they left. so we still have the _

israel, they left. so we still have the iranians _ israel, they left. so we still have the iranians and - israel, they left. so we still have the iranians and the l have the iranians and the russians— have the iranians and the russians and _ have the iranians and the russians and hezbollah l have the iranians and thel russians and hezbollah to have the iranians and the - russians and hezbollah to help them _ russians and hezbollah to help them up — russians and hezbollah to help them up in _ russians and hezbollah to help them up in 2017. _ russians and hezbollah to help them up in 2017.11u�*e— russians and hezbollah to help them up in 2017.— them up in 2017. we were 'ust -la in: a them up in 2017. we were 'ust playing a cup i them up in 2017. we were 'ust playing a clip from i them up in 2017. we were 'ust playing a clip from the i playing a clip from the assistant secretary of state for arms control in the us, and she has great concerns of the mustard gas and there are tonnes of it not accounted for, the precursors for searing gas, which are not accounted for, and yet no access for the international inspectors. how quickly do you think that needs to happen and what concerns do you have about the weapons sites that assad had built? i sites that assad had built? i think action needs to happen quickly, _ think action needs to happen quickly, be _ think action needs to happen quickly, be swift, _ think action needs to happen quickly, be swift, because i quickly, be swift, because despite _ quickly, be swift, because despite this— quickly, be swift, because despite this agreement i quickly, be swift, because. despite this agreement this supposedly— despite this agreement this supposedly was— despite this agreement this supposedly was struck- despite this agreement this i supposedly was struck during the 0bama _ supposedly was struck during the 0bama years— supposedly was struck during the 0bama years with - supposedly was struck during the 0bama years with assad i supposedly was struck during i the 0bama years with assad to dispose — the 0bama years with assad to dispose of— the 0bama years with assad to dispose of his _ the 0bama years with assad to dispose of his chemical- dispose of his chemical weapons, _ dispose of his chemical weapons, assad - dispose of his chemical weapons, assad did . dispose of his chemical| weapons, assad did not dispose of his chemical- weapons, assad did not live up to those — weapons, assad did not live up to those terms _ weapons, assad did not live up to those terms of— weapons, assad did not live up to those terms of the - weapons, assad did not live up i to those terms of the agreement as expected _ to those terms of the agreement as expected from _ to those terms of the agreement as expected from assad. - to those terms of the agreement as expected from assad. and - to those terms of the agreement as expected from assad. and so| as expected from assad. and so it's important— as expected from assad. and so it's important that _ as expected from assad. and so it's important that these - it's important that these depots— it's important that these depots are _ it's important that these depots are put - it's important that these depots are put under- it's important that these .

depots are put under strict control— depots are put under strict control quickly. _ depots are put under strict control quickly. because i depots are put under strict i control quickly. because right now, — control quickly. because right now. syria _ control quickly. because right now. syria is _ control quickly. because right now. syria is a _ control quickly. because right now, syria is a seething - now, syria is a seething cauldron _ now, syria is a seething cauldron of— now, syria is a seething cauldron of malicious. i now, syria is a seething - cauldron of malicious. really, the leader— cauldron of malicious. really, the leader is— cauldron of malicious. really, the leader is set— cauldron of malicious. really, the leader is set to, - cauldron of malicious. really, the leader is set to, yes, - cauldron of malicious. really, the leader is set to, yes, buti the leader is set to, yes, but there — the leader is set to, yes, but there are _ the leader is set to, yes, but there are so _ the leader is set to, yes, but there are so many— the leader is set to, yes, but there are so many malicious| there are so many malicious that— there are so many malicious that are _ there are so many malicious that are operating _ there are so many malicious that are operating on - there are so many malicious that are operating on the i that are operating on the periphery— that are operating on the periphery right _ that are operating on the periphery right now- that are operating on the periphery right now in. that are operating on the i periphery right now in syria, and — periphery right now in syria, and we _ periphery right now in syria, and we don't _ periphery right now in syria, and we don't want _ periphery right now in syria, and we don't want these - periphery right now in syria, - and we don't want these weapons to fall— and we don't want these weapons to fall into— and we don't want these weapons to fall into the _ and we don't want these weapons to fall into the wrong _ and we don't want these weapons to fall into the wrong hands. - and we don't want these weapons to fall into the wrong hands. i - to fall into the wrong hands. i said to fall into the wrong hands. said we would talk about to fall into the wrong hands.“ said we would talk about how the decisions of the past influence the future and i was late is not a democratic president's decision as to what happens going forward on foreign policy, but we have just talked about this seething cauldron in syria that sits next to lebanon, where hezbollah has been defeated, the problems in gaza. the whole middle east is in turmoil at the moment so is this really the moment so is this really the time when the united states just walks away?— just walks away? well, you know, donald _ just walks away? well, you know, donald trump - just walks away? well, you know, donald trump is - know, donald trump is inheriting a very different situation than he did when he

inherited the 0bama situation. you are absolutely right. there are a lot more problems, and he is moving in with a very different team than he did last time. last time, you people like mike pompeo, who very aggressively wanted to get involved in various regions. this time, he has said no mike pompeo, no nikki haley, sol fear that even ifjoe biden makes some actions, like he take some actions right now, donald trump is already on the global stage. donald trump is already on the globalstage. he donald trump is already on the global stage. he is already having conversations with people, and he could contradict president biden on that global stage and people will end up listening to donald trump. the big question i have is who is he listening to on this issue now that he does not have the likes of mike pompeo whispering in his ear? ., likes of mike pompeo whispering in his ear? . . �*, in his ear? gal, and that's auoin in his ear? gal, and that's going to _ in his ear? gal, and that's going to be _ in his ear? gal, and that's going to be something - in his ear? gal, and that's going to be something to | in his ear? gal, and that's - going to be something to watch, what experiences there in the second administration, because you can bet that the turks and the russians in the irradiance

will be looking very closely at the first moves in the middle east from this new administration and they will capitalise. administration and they will capitalise-— administration and they will caitalise. j , ., ., ~' capitalise. they'll be looking very carefully _ capitalise. they'll be looking very carefully indeed - capitalise. they'll be looking very carefully indeed on - capitalise. they'll be looking very carefully indeed on hisl very carefully indeed on his views— very carefully indeed on his views from syria and the people of it's _ views from syria and the people of it's eerie alone should be left to— of it's eerie alone should be left to determine their future and want to understand that. but given the nature of the regime _ but given the nature of the regime that has gone and the concern — regime that has gone and the concern is _ regime that has gone and the concern is that you mentioned there — concern is that you mentioned there about weaponry, it's understandable that other nations and particularly nations— nations and particularly nations in that region will wish _ nations in that region will wish to— nations in that region will wish to have at least an oversight or a say with regard to the — oversight or a say with regard to the soon to be president donald _ to the soon to be president donald trump. he is a volatile individual. _ donald trump. he is a volatile individual, sway perhaps by influencers from around him and it is to _ influencers from around him and it is to be — influencers from around him and it is to be hoped fervently that — it is to be hoped fervently that those influences include a balanced — that those influences include a balanced and gentle and genteel perspective as well as those advocating perhaps a more extreme position upon him. a final extreme position upon him. final thought because on this programme we have focused on the kurds a lot this week and the kurds a lot this week and the role that they play in the northeast of the country,

specifically in terms of security in securing the prices fighters and the families and supporters of those fighters. how important do you think it is that america stands by the kurds in the months ahead? you know, i kurds in the months ahead? you know. i don't— kurds in the months ahead? you know, i don't think _ kurds in the months ahead? you know, i don't think donald trump _ know, idon't think donald trump will— know, i don't think donald trump will want _ know, i don't think donald trump will want to - know, i don't think donald trump will want to get - know, i don't think donald - trump will want to get involved in syria — trump will want to get involved in syria i— trump will want to get involved in syria. i mean, _ trump will want to get involved in syria. i mean, he _ trump will want to get involved in syria. i mean, he was - in syria. i mean, he was forced in syria. i mean, he was forced in his— in syria. i mean, he was forced in his first _ in syria. i mean, he was forced in his fi