Paddy O'Connell (2:30)

We heard sounds of protest in Iran with Donald Trump speaking at a news conference just on Friday.

Laura Kuenssberg (2:36)

Then the next voice you Heard was the U.S. deputy chief of Staff Stephen Miller speaking to CNN about Americans ambitions to take Greenland and the voice of a resident, a Green Lander, saying they want to be left alone.

Paddy O'Connell (2:49)

And we heard the sound of recent Russian attacks on Ukraine, particularly in the west of the country, and the Prime.

Laura Kuenssberg (2:55)

Minister Keir Starmer pledging British troops in Ukraine who would be on the ground to protect a peace if a deal can be done.

Paddy O'Connell (3:01)

All of that is from the last seven days.

Laura Kuenssberg (3:04)

It's a lot, a lot to think about, a lot to absorb. So we've asked for help.

Paddy O'Connell (3:08)

Yes, we need it desperately in general. So in order to make us join the dots, if there are any. Is there a new world order on display? Was there ever an international rules based order? All to be discussed with our guest on Saturday's newscast.

Laura Kuenssberg (3:22)

Newscast, newscast from the BBC.

Sir Lawrence Freedman (3:25)

Fat Boy Slim and me in the.

Chris Mason (3:26)

Classroom doing our violin lessons.

Sir Lawrence Freedman (3:28)

I was the tattletale in the class.

Paddy O'Connell (3:29)

Can I have an apology, please?

Sir Lawrence Freedman (3:30)

I trust almost nobody. Then daddy has to sometimes use strong language.

Laura Kuenssberg (3:35)

Next time in Moscow, I feel delulu with no salulu.

Sir Lawrence Freedman (3:38)

Take me down to Downing Street.

Chris Mason (3:40)

Let's go have a tour.

Paddy O'Connell (3:41)

Blimey.

Laura Kuenssberg (3:43)

It's Laura in the studio.

Paddy O'Connell (3:44)

It's Paddy in the studio. Hello.

Laura Kuenssberg (3:46)

Hello. So should we just step by step go through some of the key headlines of things that have actually happened in the last seven days? And we're obviously not going to go into lots of detail. We've done that on newscast through the week and there's all sorts of information out there on the BBC. But as we speak on Saturday at 3:30 in the afternoon, anti government protests on the streets of Iran continue in a very, very big way. Thousands upon thousands of people have taken to the streets protesting against the Ayatollah regime. Two human rights groups say at least 48 protesters have been killed since demonstrations began just after Christmas. A doctor and a medic at two hospitals told the BBC their facilities were overwhelmed with injuries. Of course, the question is, are we seeing in as much as we can the beginning of the end of the Ayatollah's regime that's dominated Iran and been very repressive for many, many years?

Paddy O'Connell (4:38)

Yes, because the Islamic Republic was born in part because of street protests deposing the shah, whose son is now on the lips of some of those protesting. A man you've interviewed and the name of that regime is on the lips as well of Donald Trump, who warned them if they attack the protesters, they will themselves be attacked. And President Trump said that Ayatollah Khamenei is pretty much packing his bags.

Laura Kuenssberg (5:03)

That's the suggestion that he might be fleeing and on the way out. But it's very hard to know exactly what's happening in Iran because there's been Internet blackouts and we can't get there to do free and fair reporting from inside the country. You mentioned Donald Trump, though, we also then heard his Secretary of State for War talking about what happened in Venezuela.

Paddy O'Connell (5:20)

It's interesting, if I go back a week, I remember Lis Ducet saying she was come to work on Friday talking about threats to Iran, and then on Saturday, she was talking about the plucking from his bed in his pajamas of the Venezuelan President Maduro and him being taken to New York. So now we're back to talking about what's happened in Venezuela, because it seems to be the question on everyone's lips, if he's running it, how is he running it with whom? And it's not been answered. In fact, one giant American oil company, Exxon, has called Venezuela uninvestable.

Laura Kuenssberg (5:59)

And of course, part of Donald Trump's big fanfare about taking Venezuela was that American companies were going to go back in and make billions from oil. So it's unclear what's next for Venezuela. Seven days on, unclear also what he really means when he's been talking about taking Greenland, either the easy way or the hard way. But we are seeing a kind of frenzy of activity from Donald Trump around the world, from the man, of course, who said he wanted to end all wars. So this is a very, very critical moment internationally. When it comes down to Ukraine. We heard the Prime Minister talk about putting boots on the ground if there's a peace deal. But Russia used a particular ballistic missile for only the second time as part of huge, massive overnight strikes against Ukraine. This time it hit Lviv, to the far west of Ukraine, near Poland.

Paddy O'Connell (6:45)

And so what we're doing is bringing these issues before you as newscasters to see if we can join dots between them, if we can see, does one influence the other. Now, I read a report in the Times today which quotes a protester on the street deliberately saying that Donald Trump has emboldened her. And of course, women in Iran are very important part of this story of protest because their rights are routinely crushed, not only what they can do, but what they can wear and what they can show of their hair. And not surprisingly, women in Iran have been protesting for. For years against this.

Laura Kuenssberg (7:23)

And if you think about this, and we're about to hear from somebody who's expert in all of this, but I think we can't underestimate actually the significance of what might happen in Iran, with its position in that region, the Middle east, so often a sort of cauldron of boiling discontent and conflict, were Iran to move towards anything like a democracy or a country that then became a reliable partner, that could have a really profound impact and if newscasters, I know, they're a smart bunch. If you spin back to believe it or not, 2024, you and I talking about the boss of NATO, Jens Stoltenberg, who said everybody has to understand now that there is an axis of authoritarian states, he named Russia, Iran, North Korea and China. If Iran as a link in that chain were to be transformed or removed or turn into a country that democracies could do business with, that could be absolutely transformational.

Paddy O'Connell (8:17)

So that's why we've turned to an expert witness who we'll bring you in just a moment. Because the guest concerned was also looking at what went wrong in the Western British and American attack on Iraq in 2003, when it's widely acknowledged, and we'll hear this in his own words, that Britain and America did not ask what next? And they certainly, if they did ask it, they didn't have an answer. And if they did have an answer, it wasn't shared. And if it was shared, it was shared with the wrong people. So, I mean, it's a very big question. This regime change in Venezuela, which is a huge success for Donald Trump on the face of it, and not only that, a textbook special forces operation people will be talking about for years. It's absolutely extraordinary what happened. So. And you say if there's regime change in Iran, it would be a massive foreign policy goal for the United States. But it's not as simple as taking one piece off the board.

Laura Kuenssberg (9:15)

It's really not. There is an awful lot to unpick, and I'm pleased to say that we are joined by Sir Lawrence Friedman, professor of War Studies at King's College London, and probably one of the best people in the country to help us try and put this all together, or at least work out whether we can put it all together. So, Professor Friedman, thank you so much for joining us.

Sir Lawrence Freedman (9:35)

Good to be with you.

Paddy O'Connell (9:36)

So, Lawrence, what on earth is going on?

Sir Lawrence Freedman (9:39)

Where'd you start? So there's a lot going on, and they're different. They have their own different trajectories. Their starting points are quite different. The issue with Iran, which potentially is by far the most significant of everything that's going on at the moment, goes back to the revolution in January 79, the falling out with the Americans not long after over hostages, and the expectation that's been there for the last few years that this is a regime in trouble and could fall without there being any clear idea exactly what would follow. The question of Venezuela, you can trace right back to the Monroe Doctrine, which has come Back into the news. From the early 19th century, American presidents have seen the Western Hemisphere as a place where they can do more or less what they want for some time. And the issue of Venezuela was there under Biden. It's not just a Trump thing. The only issue that is there that is very Trump is Greenland. It's the case of past American presidents have wondered why Greenland is not part of the United States. And it sort of might have been an anomaly to be corrected, but they haven't done anything about it or considered it worth really making an issue until Trump came along and he raised it in his first term, and he's raised it more vehemently now. So that is the only issue in which there's a very definite Trump origin. But, of course, Trump adds his own slant to all the other issues that are going on at the moment.

Laura Kuenssberg (11:25)

Should we take them then, briefly in turn? So I feel like there's sort of brownie points for newscasters for you saying that Iran is the biggest and most significant thing that's going on. Do you believe that we are seeing the end of this regime? Because, as you say, a lot of experts in this field and Iranian activists have been saying for a while, oh, this is. Could be the end. This could be the end. Including the Shah's son, Reza Pahlavi, who we spoke to and we talked about here on newscast. You always had the sense from people who believe in democracy that it was sort of wishful thinking. But do you, Professor Friedman, think actually this is it?

Sir Lawrence Freedman (12:03)

I think so. And the reason people have been cautious is because there is no obvious leader of this protest. Not the way that we had the Ayatollah Khomeini. Yeah.

Paddy O'Connell (12:18)

There are silos, aren't there were silos of power in the regime as well, couldn't it? Because you could, as Laura was hinting, and your work, looking at what Britain and America did not do, asking what next in Iraq, you could get rid of Ayatollah Khamenei and then you might then be replaced by someone else from the Revolutionary Guard or somewhere else.

Sir Lawrence Freedman (12:36)

So there's all sorts of possibilities. There's always consideration of coups at this point. I mean, even the British government in 2002 was wondering whether there might be a coup in Baghdad that would make dealing with Iraq that much easier. So there's always consideration of coups, and that's possible. But these regimes survive because they thought about coups. It's one of the more obvious threats. So it's possible. Or there could be somebody in the regime that will try and do a deal, but with whom. So I think the reason why I think the regime probably is on its last legs is the economic situation is so desperate in Iran, it's hopeless. And the President has just admitted he hasn't got any levers to pull to make it better. They were promising to hand out $7 a month to people or something. It's not even clear that they can afford that. That's not going to help when there's nothing to buy. So I think it's the severity of the economic situation and the desperation of the people that still makes it difficult when the hard liners in the regime are determined to hang on because there's no future for them. So on the one hand, you've got economic desperation, which is propelling people onto the streets and their sense that the regime may be on its last legs. And the issue in these circumstances is partly how resilient the regime is itself, whether it breaks at the top, also whether there could be any reluctance by the forces of law and order not to fire. And already you're not seeing the police being used particularly. They're already overwhelmed. This is the irgc. These are the hard line forces of the regime being used. And they have killed people. And what Trump said he would do if they did, there's reports of 10 already being killed.

Paddy O'Connell (14:35)

What's the answer to why it's everything everywhere all at once? Why do we see this news cycle which in seven days has included America wanting reiterating its lust for Greenland, Maduro having spent a week having been plucked from his bed from Venezuela, these riots in Iran, the new bombing in the west of Ukraine by Russia. Can you help us understand why we talk about a new world order? The rules gone. Why is it all happening?

Sir Lawrence Freedman (15:04)

Sir LAWRENCE so all of these things have got their own trajectories. They're coming together. I mean, the Ukraine situation is more or less as it was all of last year, with Russia pushing on, but only making slow progress at high cost and regularly battering Ukrainian cities. There's nothing new there. And the peace initiative there more or less coming to a conclusion. The Venezuelan situation has been there for a while. Sometimes just things happen together. You have these times in history. Indeed, at the time of the Iranian Revolution, 78, 79, you had Camp David with the Israeli Egyptian peace treaty, which seems a long time ago. You had Saddam coming to power in Iraq. I don't think there's a simple cause similar course the new world order issue. I think one has to again, be careful about the phrase came into use in the 1990s after the end of the Cold War. And it did seem different, largely because the west seemed to enjoy a sort of hegemony. The Western ideas were being spread around the world. Talk of globalization, free movement of ideas, of people, of goods and so on. World Trade Organization and so on and so forth. Humanitarian intervention, impose Western values and democracy against repressive dictators. All of these ideas were around then. And it was particularly, you know, it was a new world order then, but it was one that suited the west for understandable reasons. And what's happened is that that has become frayed, fallen apart to some extent and is now challenged very directly by China and Russia who say that that world order always favored the west and never took account of our interests. And of course, in the 1990s, both Russia and China were much, much weaker powers. China in particular. The other thing to keep in mind is not the security side of things, but the economic side. I think the financial crash of 2008, 09 still has an enormous impact on world politics because it's undermine the credibility of what the west was saying about itself and its economic model. And also of course, caused problems in the domestic politics of Western countries which are still being felt, including the United States. One reason why Trump is in power.

Laura Kuenssberg (17:34)

And including here at home too, I mean the Prime Minister was one of the things he said to us last week, actually he thought one of the reasons he was having such a hard time and the public was so cross with him, is because people are still feeling the effects of that 16 years later of being skinned the last time labor was in power. But I just wonder, how do you account Sir Lawrence for the Trump factor in all of this? Because some people would say, and you've just outlined it, as Jens Stoltenberg outlined to us last year, look, this is about big long term changes. Forgive me, it was in 2024 he said that this is about big long term changes. It's about increasing authoritarian states power. It's about the rise of China. At the other end of the spectrum, some other commentators and maybe many people listening go, no, this is about Trump's frenzy. This is all about him turning up and wants to do things a different way. You know, shoot first, ask questions later in his new doctrine. So how do you account for the Trump factor versus the power of these long term trends?

Sir Lawrence Freedman (18:35)

Well, it is a combination of the two in some respects. For example, concern about the rise of China. Trump raised it in his first term, followed up by Biden. If Anything. Trump has played that down a bit. The difficulty, and we have many with Trump, he's sort of an unreliable commentator on his own administration, is you're never quite sure what's going to happen next with him because he turns on a sixpence on a particular issue. One day he's crossed with Zelenskyy, the next day he's crossed with Putin, is say to take the example of Venezuela last weekend. So with Venezuela, we find out first thing that Maduro and his wife have been taken to New York. This is done in a way that Americans have done things before with Noriego in Panama, for example, and it's at the behest of the Department of Justice. He's accused of various crimes under American law and so on and so forth. Then in the afternoon, Trump says he's running the country. Well, he clearly isn't running the country. And the more we found out over the past week, the more we've discovered the problems the Americans are going to have in running Venezuela and getting the benefits of its oil assets and so on. So there's this particular problem with Trump as a personality and as a leader, but he does take action. He is quite decisive, he can be very tough and he can get things done that Pops Biden couldn't get done. But you're never quite sure where it's going. And you get the impression he's never quite sure where it's going because it's sort of made up as he goes along. And that's true with Venezuela, probably true with Greenland and then with Iran. He says that the US will intervene if demonstrators are killed, but demonstrators are getting killed and it's not clear how the US can or will intervene. Who, what are they going to bomb and why?

Paddy O'Connell (20:37)

So there's a realignment, isn't there? Because there's a very famous apocryphal story of LBJ, the US president in the 60s talking to the French President Charles de Gaulle in a row over NATO. And de Gaulle is said to have said to lbj, get your troops out of France. To which LBJ replies, does that include the ones buried under her soil? And what seems to have happened, Sir Lawrence, is a real disengagement of the American led Western alliance which has kept the peace in Europe. That's real, isn't it? And also you've been speaking on your substack to John Bue, former foreign policy adviser to four prime ministers. Adam mentioned this, where John says, we're at the sort of foothills of the Fourth Great Structural Strategic challenge since the French Revolution. Can you talk to us about what you think he means?

Sir Lawrence Freedman (21:27)

Well, I think so. Just going back to the question of the transatlantic alliance, I don't think it's over, but it's obviously under tremendous strain. And one of the problems I think we've got at the moment, and this is relevant to what John is talking about as well, is you've got a very different international economy, an international power structure with big tech in a very dominant position, and we're all trying to adjust to the meaning of the digital age, combined with the sense that the sort of structures that were put in during the Cold War, that made sense in the Cold War, that their origins lie in the Second World War, can't work in the same way anymore. Now there's a question of whether we just announced this as ended, which I think will be very, very difficult for European countries because they can't themselves look after their own security for some time properly, or we try to make it adapt. And now the question is, are we going back to the Trump factor? This is how these sort of great big international trends combined with sort of big personalities. Are we just talking about Trump and Vance's disdain for Europe and the wariness about the transatlantic relationship? When a lot of the American public, a lot of the American Congress, are still quite happy with the transatlantic relationship, they don't want to lose it. So can we adapt? I think is the challenge, and I think we can, but it takes a long time. And the problem is that events keep on coming through.

Laura Kuenssberg (23:09)

Sir Lawrence, many people will remember your name. And I remember seeing you at press conferences of the Chilcote Inquiry after the Iraq war, when, you know, you were one of the expert panel that spent years looking at the. Well, you. You give a. A bit of a rye laugh there. I don't know if that's a memory to think about or. Or seven years. Yeah, I remember sitting through quite a lot of the sessions, but I certainly didn't sit through as many as you did. But do you think that the British government has yet absorbed the scale of the change that we are living through? And bluntly, are they therefore making the kind of decisions that they ought to be? Because elsewhere in that conversation with John Bu, who advised Kam, Boris Johnson and all sorts of people, it's pretty clear that he and some others think, you know what, this government says they're going to spend a bit more money on defense, but they haven't really worked out how to rejig things around the brutal reality that we are going to have to spend a lot more in future to protect ourselves because of this very significant change that we're living through. Is it your view that the government's really grasped that yet?

Sir Lawrence Freedman (24:22)

I think it has, to a degree. I mean, I give the government some credit for how they've managed to cope with Trump so far. I think the idea that you should have this sort of love, actually moment where the Prime Minister denounces the President in front of his face and everybody feels better, I mean, given the stakes at the moment, that would be irresponsible, because Ukraine, to me anyway, is the main priority. We need to do what's best for Ukraine at the moment, because our security really depends on sorting that out, not letting the Russians win. So I don't think they've done too badly on. On that side. They've worked pretty closely with other European governments. We've seen lots of joint statements now with Britain, France and Germany, so there's some clear tripartite leadership coming. I think that's good. But you mentioned the real problem at the moment, which was we've committed to increases in defence spending, but it can't be seen at the moment. And everybody you talk to in services or in defence industry is really frustrated because there are lots of things that need to be done. And it's all good that in five or ten years time we'll be spending 3.5%, but the money needs to start flowing now. Even a bit more would help.

Paddy O'Connell (25:47)

We mentioned earlier your work looking into Iraq. Britain managed to attack Iraq with no clue what was going to happen if they deposed Saddam Hussein. Is there a read across that? Basically our system is not good at planning, it's not good at thinking what happens tomorrow.

Sir Lawrence Freedman (26:03)

I think that there is sometimes a danger in thinking that there is a big idea that can solve all our problems. It is a. As discussion has shown, it's a very messy and complicated world with events happening that don't all fit together, that are cross purposes. So, you know, I think there is. I think government struggles because everybody's got a bandwidth problem, but you've got to have the resources. I think part of the problem just comes back to resources. Now, the issue with Iraq, as you mentioned, was an issue that you see all the time, which is the first big bold move against a big target, whether it's Saddam Hussein or Maduro or even Russia and Zelensky, is you try to work out how you can win decisively straight away, but then you don't and you're in for a long haul and Nobody ever plans for the long haul because they like to think it'll all be sorted quickly. And that, I think, is the big difficulty. Now, the answer to that problem is don't do something unless you're pretty sure you're going to succeed. This is why Russia is in such a mess with Ukraine. It's why many of us are skeptical about what will happen with Venezuela. And it's why there was skepticism, including by me before the invasion of Iraq. Not necessarily about weapons of mass destruction or the ability to defeat Saddam Hussein, but how do you run a country where you're not very welcome? And this is a perennial problem of international politics, of governments taking what they think is bold and decisive steps, perhaps with a very bold and decisive strategy, and then discovering it doesn't work and they're stuck with a problem they don't know how to solve.

Laura Kuenssberg (27:55)

And yet there are two types of politicians. Well, there are lots of different kinds of politicians, aren't there? But there are two in this regard. There are two sort of dominant types of politicians. There are politicians for whom action is better than a lack of action. The kind of do something politicians. And I think Donald Trump is certainly one of them. I think Tony Blair is probably one of them too. I think we can say quite fairly that K Star is not instinctively a doing something is better than doing nothing. He is by nature cautious, although he can be ruthless. That's a different question. But maybe where fallen foreign policy comes to bear, that is actually the most exposing thing for politicians about where there are doing something is better than nothing. Or actually let's always be careful, let's be incremental and let's not take a risk. And politics is, is about risk and we're in a very risky time. And the man who's in the White House is someone who is prepared to take risk and also seems to actually think that risk is a good thing. And his supporters would say actually he's achieved more in the last seven days and more in the last six months than many other politicians have managed to. When it comes to Maduro or it comes to Gaza, he managed to, you know, unpick that conflict, although it's certainly not solved. I'm not saying that for a second. But doing something his supporters would say is a risk worth taking rather than the risk of doing nothing and allowing these situations to continue without end.

Sir Lawrence Freedman (29:13)

But I think the problem that Trump has is he is prepared to take risks. But if you look at the military actions he's taken, they've been all pretty limited though he said he was prepared to put boots in the ground in Venezuela, he wasn't, and now says he isn't. But because that is precisely what leads to these long hauls, the forever wars, which are very unpopular with his base and which he sort of pledged not to get involved in. Well, that's fine. It's best not to get stuck in these places, but then that limits what you can achieve.

Paddy O'Connell (29:51)

I'd like to tell our younger newscasters that they can be optimistic that people in different generations have faced bigger challenges than our podcasters talked about, and through bravery and smarts, they've got our country through. And would you join me in telling that to our younger newscasters? Don't give up.

Sir Lawrence Freedman (30:09)

Yeah, don't give up. And also, we've been through these sort of situations that have seemed very bleak before. I think there's a lot to play for at the moment. And I think it's also just worth bearing in mind that the country that's probably feeling most irritated at the moment is Russia, because it's seeing one ally after another, first Syria, now Venezuela, possibly even Iran falling. So you've got to recognize that in the complexities of international affairs, there's always opportunities as well as dangers.

Laura Kuenssberg (30:44)

Certainly that's a nice optimistic note to end on, and certainly there are thousands and thousands of people on the streets in Iran who might be feeling optimistic about being able to bring an end to a brutal regime. Sir Lawrence, thank you so much for helping us through all of that. It's been great to have your wisdom with us this afternoon.

Sir Lawrence Freedman (31:01)

Good talk to you.

Greenlight Advertiser (31:12)

Wallet Feeling light after the holidays? Recovery starts with TikTok slash and free. Pick products, share the link and watch the price drop to zero. Download TikTok search slash free and start slashing today.

Orangetheory Fitness Advertiser (31:26)

Ready to change your Life. For just $2 a day, Orangetheory Fitness delivers one hour workouts that combine strength and cardio to help you burn f, build muscle and feel unstoppable. Right now, get a full month of unlimited classes for just $62. Don't wait. This offer ends soon. Visit orangetheory.com or your local studio and start your transformation today. Offer ends January 31, 2026. New members only. Premier membership performance monitor and monthly billing required. Discount applies to first month only. Other terms apply.

Homes.com Advertiser (31:53)

C Studio for details homes.com knows having the right agent can make or break your home search. That's why they provide home shoppers with an agent directory that gives you a detailed look at each agent's experience. Like the number of closed sales in a specific neighborhood, average price range and more. It lets you easily connect with all the agents in the area you're searching so you can find the right agent with the right experience and ultimately the right home for you. Homes.com, we've done your homework.

Greenlight Advertiser (32:21)

Did you know that parents rank teaching financial literacy as the toughest life skill? That's where Greenlight comes in, the debit card and money app made for families. With Greenlight, you can send money to kids quickly, set up chores, automate allowance and track spending with real time notifications. Kids learn how to earn, save and spend responsibly while parents have peace of mind knowing smart money habits are being built with guardrails in place. Try Greenlight Risk free today@greenlight.com iheartra that's greenlight.com iheart.

Laura Kuenssberg (33:00)

So what are you doing on Broadcasting House on radio for tomorrow morning?

Paddy O'Connell (33:03)

Well, we are speaking to a former detainee in Iran to ask similar questions that we've been asking today. How believable is the end of the regime? Also, we are going to do some Radio 4 gritter names.

Laura Kuenssberg (33:16)

Oh, I love that.

Paddy O'Connell (33:17)

So we've got John Humphreys and from our blown correspondent and we're looking for suggestions. What about, what about you? What have you got?

Laura Kuenssberg (33:27)

Oh, well, I was just busy trying to think of a gritter name that rhyme like had something to do with Paddy.

Paddy O'Connell (33:31)

It's quite hard.

Laura Kuenssberg (33:32)

It's quite hard. Paddy.

Paddy O'Connell (33:34)

You've got to start the bleak Paddy.

Laura Kuenssberg (33:36)

Snow Connell got there very quick. We are doing the latest in our leaders interviews to start our box set of leaders interviews that are starting 2026. We're talking to Cami Bednock, the Tory leader tomorrow who's in a better place than she was a few months back. So it'll be very interesting to see what she's got to say tomorrow. And we've done an interview that I can't tell you about yet.

Paddy O'Connell (33:57)

Right. But it's a news making interview?

Laura Kuenssberg (33:59)

I think so.

Paddy O'Connell (34:00)

And it's with someone of interest in the public conversation?

Laura Kuenssberg (34:03)

I think so.

Paddy O'Connell (34:04)

And they have spoken on. They haven't spoken, have they? This person? They may have. We may have seen them.

Laura Kuenssberg (34:10)

You will have seen and heard this person probably on many times unless you live on the moon. But they have not spoken anywhere near a microphone for a while for a good reason.

Paddy O'Connell (34:24)

Right. And in that while there was a change in their circumstances.

Laura Kuenssberg (34:28)

Well, I'm not going to be drawn by a scurrilous interviewer into speculating on.

Paddy O'Connell (34:34)

Who the I'm not going to give a running commentary on my running order.

Laura Kuenssberg (34:38)

God, who'd be a politician Crike having to take questions from people like us.

Paddy O'Connell (34:43)

I can't wait to nightmare how that unfolds. But we to you listening, especially our younger newscasters that you know who did hear a very big brain say we can get through these difficult times, especially by informing ourselves, by trying to ask.

Laura Kuenssberg (34:57)

The right questions and not always getting it right. But do also get in touch with your questions cause we love hearing from you and you're a very smart bunch and it's always lovely to have your company on Saturday and Sunday's newscast.

Paddy O'Connell (35:07)

Thank you for listening and goodbye.

Laura Kuenssberg (35:09)

Goodbye Newscast Newscast from the BBC.

Chris Mason (35:12)

Thank you so much for making it to the end of Newscast. You clearly Copyright Chris Mason Ooze Stamina Can I gently encourage you to subscribe to us on BBC Sounds? Don't forget, you can email us anytime. It's newscastbc.co.uk and if you would like to join our Discord community to talk about everything newscast related, there is a link in the description of this podcast and don't be scared. It's super easy to click on it and then get set up. Or you can WhatsApp us on 033-01-239480 and I promise you we read and listen to every single message. Thanks for listening to this podcast by.