Loading summary
Transcript128 lines
- [00:00]
A
Hello. Do you remember a few weeks ago when the Keir Starmer leadership crisis was in full swing and the Home Office Minister, Jess Phillips, resigned? And in her letter, she specifically said one of the reasons she was resigning was the Government dragging its heels over the introduction of this new technology on phones that could prevent children from taking and sharing nude pictures of themselves. Well, today, Keir Starmer, who's still Prime Minister, announced the Government's going ahead with it. So we'll find out what's going on and get just Phillips reaction to it on this episode of Newscast, Newscast, Newscast from the BBC.
- [00:35]
B
Humanity's next great voyage begins.
- [00:37]
A
We are in the midst of a rupture.
- [00:39]
C
Nostalgia will not bring back the old order.
- [00:42]
A
Six, seven.
- [00:44]
D
Yeah, it's supposed to be me as a doctor.
- [00:46]
A
Daddy has. Has also a special connotation.
- [00:48]
C
Ooh la la.
- [00:49]
A
Thinking about it like a panto helped.
- [00:52]
B
Do we play music now or what do we do?
- [00:54]
A
Hello, it's Adam in the newscast studio. And later on in the podcast, we will get the latest on what's happening between Israel and Iran, because over the weekend, for a period, it looked as if the ceasefire and the war was back on. But we will bring you all the latest and the latest implications of it as well. But first of all, today, Keir Starmer, the Prime Minister, was doing a speech for the start of Tech Week and he basically said to the tech companies, and particularly the phone manufacturers, you have got three months to introduce this technology which will stop under 18s taking and sharing naked images of themselves with their phones. And if the tech companies do not introduce this technology by the deadline, the government will introduce legislation, a new law that. That will compel them to do so. Now, you might remember a couple of weeks ago, this was the centerpiece of Jess Phillips resignation letter when she left Keir Starmer's government. So I wonder how the former Safeguarding Minister is now feeling about this going ahead as a government policy. Well, she's here. Jess Phillips.
- [01:52]
D
Hello.
- [01:53]
C
Hello.
- [01:53]
A
Your first appearance on newscast as a free person, a free human being. Although it does feel like you're doing a media round today. I've seen you popping up in various places, so it's a bit like being a minister again.
- [02:03]
C
It is like doing a media round, but I don't have like 13 people all standing around me organising it and passing me bits of paper about what I should and shouldn't say. So in many ways it's much better.
- [02:14]
A
And you haven't had to memorize a folder about the price of milk and things like that. Although I'm sure you know the price of milk. Anyway, we digress. So this announcement, I suppose it's not. Is it an announcement from Keir Starmer today or like a sort of hint of a direction of. How would you. Do you think this is a sort of nailed on government announcement?
- [02:29]
C
Now look, I think that they announced absolutely what they could today and I think it is fair to give the. Not, actually I don't care about being fair to tech companies, but I think that legislation doesn't happen quickly and so giving tech companies three months will give the government that three months to really work out the legislation and the vehicle for that legislation. And I asked the Home Secretary and Home affairs questions if that work was ongoing and she confirmed to me that it was. So both things can run at once. You. So the tech companies can go away and, and make this work from a technical point of view, which, if I'm honest, I think they could all they could do overnight if they wanted to. But.
- [03:14]
A
And you said you've, you've seen the technology in action already, just explain how it works.
- [03:18]
C
So I mean like, you know, from a completely layman's view is that what I have seen is a phone that has this built into its operating system and when it went over an image of a naked child, it, what, the screen went black. So that I've seen it with my own eyes. So that is exactly what we want to happen. So that when any kid, boy or girl, is asked to send an image, and whether that's through social pressure or, you know, much more sinister grooming and pedophile rings who really have a targeted way of finding these children through social media platforms and then grooming them in encrypted spaces. Like if, if they can't take the image or live stream their abuse, then that tool is gone from those pedophiles.
- [04:10]
A
And so just to get talk a bit technically then. So the idea would be that this would be into the phone operating system.
- [04:16]
C
Yeah.
- [04:16]
A
And it would apply to your, your front and your back camera.
- [04:20]
C
Yep.
- [04:20]
A
And it would also apply to what images you got sent by messages as well.
- [04:24]
C
Yes. So if you're sent images and you also can't send them. But the, the most important of this announcement is stopping the ability for children to take the images because 91% of all child sexual abuse material online in the UK was made by children themselves. So stopping it from being made.
- [04:47]
A
And is the idea that this would be the default in every operating system of every handset sold in Britain? And then me as an over 18, I would have to sort of do something to opt out of it.
- [04:57]
C
Yeah. You know you would do age verification and you can say I want to see naked images. I think I'm going to stay opted in because lots of people send me naked images that I don't want to see. So I think I like in many things I'd like in life I'm going to stay 17 forever.
- [05:17]
A
Okay. Because it's interesting when you then start digging into this because you realise a lot of these tools actually already exist on existing phones. So Google's got this thing called Safety Core where you can turn this on for your children. I'm not sure if it really applies to the cameras though. It's more to do with image sharing.
- [05:35]
C
Yes, it is.
- [05:35]
A
But it makes you realize actually there's a lot of this stuff kind of buried away in the settings already.
- [05:39]
C
So the idea that, and I've seen some people saying it and I don't blame people for not understanding the technicality. The idea that the government is going to put something on people's phones, it's already on your phone. There is already nudity blockers on every single phone in the country. Maybe not my father in law's 3210, but I don't think he can send naked images in it. But it already exists. So when people send me naked images they are already filtered out and I have to say that I want to see them. So this technology already exists on, on almost every single handset. What we're going to do, and we will be the first country in the entire world that does this is we're going to say that for under 18s by default it cannot, it has to be turned on. This is not about asking parents to. And also the argument that kids will just get round it. The only way to get population level, both cultural change and direct ending of the ability for children to take and share these images is by doing that by default on every device.
- [06:46]
A
Yeah. Because when you go onto the Google Safety Core bit of its website, it says it's about putting speed bumps in and one of the options is still to view the photo. So if you're under 18, you just have to click through a few things. Things and you still get to see the photo ultimately. So yeah, yeah, it's toughening that up.
- [07:00]
C
Yeah, exactly that, exactly that. And also like, you know, there are other systems that prompt kids who are sending these images and say do you really want to send this? And obviously, you know, if you're being groomed and somebody's threatening that they're going to groom your sister if you don't send the photos. Literally cases that I've seen, you're just going to click through. You shouldn't ever be a child should never be allowed to click through.
- [07:24]
A
Hmm. I've mentioned Google a few times and a spokesperson today has told the BBC that they're deeply committed to protecting children online. And they added, we're working constructively with UK partners to find effective privacy preserving solutions that deter the spread of harmful content while ensuring a safe digital environment for young people. Now is this, does Google ever see these photos that people are taking or is this all happening on the phone? I'm just thinking about the like, are the tech companies sort of getting into your life here?
- [07:53]
C
Yeah. No, no, no, no. This is complet preserving. I mean certainly on the take bit, it's just stopping you taking it. There's nothing to say but if people are sending the images, again, it's not going to Google. But let me tell you, people who are sharing images of naked children amongst themselves, there are undercover police officers that are very much working to crack those groups and we've seen a massive increase in the number of convictions in that space. So this is nothing. Google will not be looking at your images. The government certainly will not be looking at your images. The policy is completely privacy protecting.
- [08:30]
A
And are there any kind of privacy safeguards that we need to put in here? Because as a country we do believe in freedom of speech and freedom of expression and the government tends not to be in the business of clamping down on people's expression. Are there things, safeguards that need to be put in place? If you're looking at this from the other end of the telescope, I have
- [08:49]
C
to say, whenever anyone raises privacy with me, the idea that the tech companies don't already know exactly how old everybody is who is using their devices, they do know that. That's why, you know, how much menopause material have you got sent to your phone?
- [09:06]
A
Zero.
- [09:06]
C
Yes, well, I have quite a lot. So like the, the idea also, like, you know, like I once joked at the European Parliament in front of a member of the royal family that Elon Musk knows where my period is. The, the idea that our privacy is currently in any way protected from these enorm organizations, I've got to say, is for the birds. I mean just to use Vinted, I had to upload my passport. So like that, that. Which I'm more than happy to do, I would, I'll. I'LL carve out in any bill protection of vinted. Of course there are privacy concerns and no doubt they will be quite an organized lobby. But like anything, what I'm going to say is if people had seen what I have seen with regard to how this technology that parents hand their children for their birthday present, they literally give them a tool and, and a key to a door full of paedophiles. Now that is we safeguarding trumps everything. And if we can, if there are tools that can be used. So, and I have to say we worked so hard on this policy for a long to make it privacy protecting. There is no issue of privacy in this. This is not anybody's files being looked into unless you're a paedophile, in which case the police are looking at your files.
- [10:39]
A
And when this was getting batted back by number 10 Downing street and by the Prime Minister, as you said in your, your resignation letter a few weeks ago, what arguments were they using for not pursuing it?
- [10:48]
C
I mean, it would be wrong of me to say that these were coming from the Prime Minister directly because they, they weren't. But there is obviously a lobby in Parliament that, that is more favorable to tech companies. And so some of the kinds of questions that I have had to answer are about, you know, what about if it mistakes an adult for a child, which frankly it, it won't, but if it does, and I'm like you, genuinely, you're concerned that somebody might not be able to send a dick pic when I'm talking to you about child rape. So there's one example. But like the, you know, they, they have to balance from the center our investment into our country, tech jobs and all that. And my husband works in tech, so, you know, I can totally see why that is important. But all I ever asked for was to say who do we stand for? What, who are we here for if we're not here for stopping this? And look, the population of our country is with me.
- [11:55]
A
So I was thinking back to the Keir Starmer point. So when we all read your letter and thought one of the reasons she's resign resigning from government, Keir Starmer's government is because he vetoed this policy, that was a misreading of your letter.
- [12:05]
C
Well, look, he didn't. He, he initially the, the Prime Minister was going to take some convincing on doing any sort of tech regulation is the truth. But you know, like in the last meeting I had with him about this, he had come round to my way of thinking. But being round to my way of thinking, like you know, like it's like motherhood and Apple piece no one likes child abuse is not the same as making something happen.
- [12:34]
A
Right.
- [12:35]
C
And that so like never once him of not wanting to do this. I do think he wants to do it but it was delay after delay that had frustrated me. I mean like I said, this policy was meant to be announced in March and actually we'd be at the end of the three months now, wouldn't we had it been and actually could have been announced long before. And so I look in resigning it was a kick up the bum. That was what I was hoping to do. And here we are.
- [13:05]
A
Yeah. And you don't regret resigning now that this is actually happening?
- [13:08]
C
Absolutely not. I don't regret resigning at all. I resigned over something that I care about and also just quite like my freedom.
- [13:19]
A
I can sort of tell. Yes. And in terms of. So if the companies don't do that and also, I mean is there going to be a threshold? Because imagine some companies do do it, but not all of them does that at the end of the three months. How do you judge if enough have done it?
- [13:33]
C
The fundamental is, is that actually there's only really two tech companies that are going to have to do this. That is Apple and Google. Because what we're talking about and what the government has launched today is a device level, operating system level and that as you have identified there's either Android or iOS so that Apple and Google are the two companies who have to do this so that you know. And actually what I have found with organizations like meta or TikTok or Snapchat or those organizations is they want it to be on the device level because doing it at app level will mean we'll get. I mean there are 7 million apps I think. But even if you go to another
- [14:14]
A
app that doesn't have this feature, if you're doing it.
- [14:16]
C
Yeah, exactly, exactly. And the only way to get popular regulation coverage on this is to do it on device level. So there's actually only really two companies and it's very good to hear that Google are stepping forward. I have to say Apple, seeing the writing on the wall already have put in age verification into all Apple devices. That happened in March, so maybe they thought the announcement was coming then.
- [14:38]
A
Well, and also you do realize with Apple that it might not happen instantly, but then when you upgrade your iOS you then notice maybe something is maybe.
- [14:45]
C
Yes. So you don't. It doesn't have to just be new devices either. It is in any upgrade as anyone with a mobile phone will Know how annoying it is how much it asks you to upgrade.
- [14:56]
A
Suppose you could always just turn down the upgrade and then you won't get this fix.
- [15:00]
C
I mean, potentially. But like you, you know, what you're talking about here is a child in this circumstance who wants to be abused. So I think it's quite unlikely that, you know, there are children, there isn't like a big thirst for children to be taking these images. They are, are put under pressure to do it and so. Or you're talking about an adult who is abusing that child by making them keep a device that way. And those are both matters for the police.
- [15:32]
A
And then so in terms of the timeline of this happening, so imagine then the tech companies haven't done it and we're then in the world of doing legislation. Yeah. Would this require a new bill, as it were, or could you amend some existing legislation? And what I'm getting at is, is because we hope you and I both know that passing laws can take a very long time.
- [15:49]
C
Yeah, yeah, yeah. So look, there's two ways that the could do this is to add, add in a legislative. It will be brand new legislation. This is, it doesn't sit as easily, for example, funnily enough as banning social media would. There are powers to do that through the Online Safety Act. This would need a specific piece of legislation. But you can do that, you know, through any bill that might be going through in the rear number that have been announced in the King's Speech that would be, that could be suitable or you undertake emergency legislation, just standalone emergency legislation. So either one of those things is totally possible. And as I said, I asked the Home Secretary today to confirm that her department was working on that legislation so that at the end of the three months, it's not like now we've got to work on the legislation that, that legislation will be good to go as soon as either the vehicle or the will to put in emergency legislation is there. But as you know, in three months time, gosh only knows.
- [16:52]
A
Yeah, I mean the Online Safety act only took what, five years, I mean
- [16:56]
C
10 years of my life I gave to that piece of legislation. So. Yes, but look, that where there is a will, there is a way. And actually it, this is quite a small piece of like the Online Safety act is reams and reams and reams. What this is that we are talking about is quite a small amendment to a law. So it, it shouldn't take anywhere near that amount of time.
- [17:18]
A
Although this is a slightly nerdy point, but based on what you were Saying there, I remember when the government launched their consultation on social media, which include the proposal or the idea of should we have a ban for under 16s? And at the same time the Prime Minister patted himself on the back by saying, we're also giving ourselves powers to implement lots of this stuff via existing legislation so that the Culture Secretary or whoever can just sign. Sign up to what we decide really quickly. But actually, it turns out there's quite a few things that we might like as a society. For example, that this. That you can't do that way.
- [17:49]
C
No, not this. This. You, you. The, the. I mean, maybe I. Look, I'd be lying if I said it was a legislation there.
- [17:55]
A
This is like the Hands Heart Society podcast now.
- [17:57]
C
Yeah, yeah.
- [17:58]
A
Tuning up on it.
- [17:59]
C
But you're right though, but the, the piece of legislation that went into the Crime and Policing bill and I was part of putting it in there, that means that because of what is already in the Online Safety act, which is about it, specifically about the companies, the, the platforms. The Online Safety act is about the platform. Yes, really specifically about the devices. So that's why that, that, this, that legislation can't just be used for that, but you can easily. If the Prime Minister decided tomorrow he currently has the power to ban social media, like that could be done. That could be done very, very, very quickly.
- [18:34]
A
And on the ban for social media for under 16s, what way is the wind blowing in the government, you reckon?
- [18:39]
C
I reckon it's blowing towards ban.
- [18:41]
A
Right. What makes you think that?
- [18:44]
C
I just chatting to people. Yeah, yeah, yeah. Like it seems like that's the way it. But then the devil in that will absolutely be in the detail of what car votes people then come for or what.
- [19:02]
A
Yeah, because a ban. A ban isn't necessarily a ban.
- [19:05]
C
Yeah. And also like what. Where they went wrong in Australia, although I have to say, all power to the elbow of Australia for leading the world on this. But where they went wrong is sort of like a prescribed list of. Of platforms that doesn't include things like, for examp, called Roblox, which I have literally seen used to give small amounts of money to children who have uploaded live sex feeds in encrypted spaces found on Roblox and paid in Robux. So like we are going, like there is going to have to be like, which platforms and like, what are we talking about when we say ban social media? What does that actually mean?
- [19:48]
A
Yeah, so we'll have to find forms of words that capture things that might not necessarily look like social media services, but might be Doing the similar sort of thing.
- [19:57]
C
Yeah.
- [19:58]
A
So it's actually a huge job.
- [20:00]
C
It's not that big. Do you know how many people work in the government? I mean, thousands. When I first arrived at the Home Office, I was like, that. Does one of you do nails? Like, that's like. There is a phenomenal. There is. And you know what? There is a phenomenal will. And I must absolutely pay credit to some amazing civil servants who have worked specifically on this, what is being announced today. And, you know, sometimes banging heads against the wall in frustration.
- [20:28]
A
And then I was talking of social media. I belatedly signed up to Wes Streeting's Instagram a few days ago, which I'm slightly regretting. Cause he pumps out a lot of content.
- [20:37]
C
Oh, God, too much.
- [20:39]
A
And I saw a video in your kitchen the other day.
- [20:41]
C
He came to my house, so it was great.
- [20:43]
A
It was like through the keyhole. It was brilliant. Very nice kitchen. Thanks. But I was then also listening to another daily news podcast today, the Newsagents, where Wes has done a very long interview with Lewis Goodall. And they talk for a bit about what to do about social. And Wes talks very passionately about how he wants to do something to help children's lives, but he doesn't actually spell out any things that he would do. And I know you're a pal of his and supporter of his. Has he got some ideas that he's working on?
- [21:11]
C
Well, look, I mean, obviously the whole thing is complete influx. I mean, Wes has very clearly said that he is in favor of a social media ban. But also, I mean, look, I worked with Wes very closely when we were back when we were both in government on really specifically the sort of health needs that children who are, whether they're abused or that they're like, suffering from mental health issues because of online spaces. And he was a total ally and advocate. But I mean, I'm. I'm not sitting writing Wes Streeting's policies, but I have absolutely no doubt that he has complete clarity of thought and he definitely wants to ban social media.
- [21:50]
A
Okay, Jess, thank you very much.
- [21:52]
C
No worries.
- [21:53]
A
And we've got a statement from a spokesperson for Roblox saying safety is a top priority and we have advanced safeguards and filters designed to prevent harmful content and communications on our platform to keep all our users safe. Now, as promised, let's get the latest on the situation in the Middle East. And the situation over the weekend seemed particularly tense as Israel and Iran exchanged missile fire with each other, which looked like the ceasefire was over. The ceasefire is now back on, although both sides reserving the right to retaliate if it's broken again. And we've got to remember this is also linked to Israeli strikes on Hezbollah in southern Lebanon and southern Beirut, the capital of Lebanon, where, of course, Hezbollah is backed by Iran. And then Donald Trump has been getting involved at various points in this situation over the last week or so. So there was so much to unpack here, especially as it sounded for a brief moment, like it was gonna get really scary. And the person who's gonna help us unpack it here in the studio is BBC diploma correspondent James Landale. Hi, James.
- [23:01]
B
Hello, Adam.
- [23:02]
A
And joining us from Washington, D.C. is Katrina Perry. Hello, Katrina.
- [23:05]
E
Hello to you both.
- [23:07]
A
Right, James, I'm just wondering where's a good place to start in understanding where we are on Monday evening? Is it with the Israeli strikes on southern Beirut a couple of days ago, maybe?
- [23:18]
B
Well, it's a good question, because where you start is a crucial position in, in many stories about the Middle east, because if you start at one place, then somebody else will inevitably say, no, you should have started earlier because that caught, caused that, you know, that begat that, to use the biblical phrase. So, look, I think you should just look in general and just say, look, we're in the war. It's the ceasefire in this war is what, about two months old? The ceasefire has broadly held, give or take the odd confrontation skirmish in the straight of Hormuz, and broadly held in terms of overt war between Israel and Iran. There's obviously been fighting in Lebanon, and that has been contested. And what's happened here is the Lebanese battlefield has now escalated in a way that has broadened the conflict. So instead of it just being confined to as a battlefield to southern Lebanon and northern Israel, it has led to escalation, and we can discuss who, who fired first, but it has now led to escalation, direct confrontation and missiles flying between Israel and Iran over the last, you know, 24 plus hours. And that's got us into the place we're in now.
- [24:48]
A
And Katrina, there's a few ways of looking at Donald Trump's involvement in all of this. And I'm just thinking back to a few weeks ago where he basically had said to Benjamin Netanyahu, do not strike southern Beirut, the Lebanese capital. Why was that so important to him back then?
- [25:03]
E
Donald Trump is looking for this whole thing to end and be tidied up, for the Strait of Hormuz to be reopened, for the economy to go back, all of that to improve his positioning here in the US as quickly as possible. Anything that he sees any party in the region doing to extend the war or alter the sort of telling of his own narrative on this, that the war is over. Remember, both he and Secretary of State Marco Rubio have said the war is over. When you see fresh strikes like this, clearly there's a war ongoing. Right. So he is doing whatever he can, which in this case is at least trying to strong arm the Prime Minister of Israel, Benjamin Netanyahu, into dialing down his role in all of this. Donald Trump and the Americans sought for so long not to have the Israel Hezbollah war in Lebanon tied to the talks they were having with Iran that were being brokered by Pakistan. That failed a couple of weeks ago. And that's when things got even more sticky, if you like, from an American perspective, because Donald Trump wants this over. He wants it to go away, and he wants his version of events, which is that he's in charge. There's a peace deal about to be done to be the only version of events.
- [26:18]
A
And in terms of Donald Trump's multiple phone calls with Benjamin Netanyahu, talk us through how they've gone and how. How the temperature has gone up and down on those.
- [26:28]
E
Well, there was a conversation, famously last week, of course, where Donald Trump was initially reported to have used an expletive on one of those phone calls to Prime Minister Netanyahu, which he later confirmed, as did Prime Minister Netanyahu, that that phone call had gotten really heated about ceasing those bombs in Lebanon and abiding by the ceasefire deal between Israel and Lebanon.
- [26:50]
A
And we can hear Donald Trump's version of that phone call when he was asked about it by the New York Post's Miranda Devine, who, discussing it with him on her podcast Pod Force One,
- [26:59]
D
Axios reported that you had a phone call with Bibi Netanyahu, the prime minister of Israel, in which you were angry with him. You said, are you effing crazy? What are you effing doing? I helped you stay out of jail. Is that true? Did you speak to him in those terms? I did. I wouldn't say angry. I was a little bit perturbed at his constantly fighting with Lebanon. On, you know, at some point, I said, maybe we got to stop this. We got to stop it.
- [27:30]
E
We're told there was another phone call yesterday, as in Sunday and another one again today, actually, between the two leaders. We saw many posts from President Trump as well, where he was putting Israel almost in the same bracket as Iran, saying, you both have to stop shooting, which could be viewed from an Israeli perspective as somewhat of a downgrading of, you know, the sort of special position that Israel holds in the White House and in the mind of Donald Trump. But things were just getting too close for comfort for him when he thinks peace deal there and suddenly there are bombs dropping this way he gets to sort of present it as a win for all. Iran got to have their strike, Israel got to have their strike and Donald Trump got to come into the middle, tell everyone to strike, stop, and then they did. He looks like the winner from his perspective.
- [28:18]
A
Although James, to a lot of commentators Trump is kind of losing power in this situation because this is proof that he can tell Israel to not do something and Israel go ahead and do it anyway.
- [28:28]
B
I think one of the interesting things about this war is just how much it's demonstrated both the strength and the weaknesses of, of the key belligerents and in particular the United States. Because as you say, Donald Trump started this war. He had the capacity to start this war. He has demonstrated America's perhaps, you know, unparalleled ability to project force around the world. I'm not sure there are many other countries that would have both the power and the will to do what the Americans have done in this war. But equally what's been become apparent is that the, the tactical gains, you know, the numbers of things destroyed etc have not translated into strategic victory. Is, and now Donald Trump is trying to extract himself from a conflict where the, the two main belligerents are, are refusing to play ball. So you have Iran basically undeterred, surviving, still willing in an emboldened regime. And you, you know, despite the fact that Israel has, has assassinated the vast swathes of the leadership, there's this sort of new cadre of Revolutionary Guards and others who have just picked up the pieces and are, and, and have a different attitude to the pre, because they're younger, they're sort of post revolutionary. They're not people who've grown up during the 79 revolution. And, and so they are much more, you know, the era of strategic patience and slow and gradual retaliation by Iran. This is, this is immediate retaliation.
- [30:04]
A
You know, they think more headed, well,
- [30:07]
B
no, it's not so much hot headed. It's just they are willing to act more ruthlessly and quicker than their predecessors. And Donald Trump is finding it hard to sort of, you know, use some leverage on them despite the talks that are going on at the moment. And at the same time, as Katrina was pointing out, we, we've, we've seen, you know, some, perhaps some of the limitations of the influence of an American president over an Israeli leader. And you know, this is not a new phenomenon. There are many examples of past American presidents losing their patience with Israeli, in particular, Mr. Netanyahu. But Donald Trump is struggling to extract himself from a conflict. And that is in part because his priorities, his interests, I. E. Ending the war, reopening the Strait of Hormuz, getting the world economy going again, are not the same interest as Israel or Iran and Katrina.
- [31:03]
A
When you talk about this so called peace deal that Donald Trump is working on, do we know what the components of it are?
- [31:09]
E
I mean, in truth, we don't know how close it is to being a done deal. I saw posting on X today the Pakistani prime Minister saying, you know, the final objective is just about to be achieved. He was appealing again to Israel and Iran to sort of keep their weapons down. But we keep hearing about a deal that's almost there, but the component parts of it are not something that really any of the parties are in agreement on. The first, most important, important point at this part from the US Perspective, is reopening the Strait of Hormuz. And as President Trump likes to say, making sure that Iran does not and cannot have a nuclear weapon. And that involves, he was even floating last week going into Iran to remove nuclear material there, or nuclear dust as he likes to refer to it. Iran has said time and time again that won't be happening. U.S. troops will not be coming into Iran, Iran to do that. And the Strait of Hormuz is kind of their golden tool that they're holding onto. It's a secret weapon. If you speak to analysts here in the US they'll say that Iran actually has the upper hand at the moment because it has this power now, control of the Strait of Hormuz that it didn't have before Iran, before Israel and the US launched this war effort 100 or so days ago. So we keep being told, particularly from the present, that, that this deal is close, but we're not seeing any tangible evidence of that in the various contradictory mutterings that are coming from the parties here. And you have to remember that it's in President Trump's interest to keep saying that there is a deal there. For all of what we've been saying there about how he's losing control of this situation, he just wants to get out of it and have it be over as quickly as possible.
- [32:49]
A
And I suppose, James, as we've been discussing, Donald Trump can't really do anything about Hezbollah. Cause they can just do whatever they like, like, and keep throwing kind of like sand into the gears of this so called peace process.
- [33:00]
B
Yeah, it's absolutely right. The fact that there are, you know, this is not something that the United States can just decide in its own gift. And I think that the Americans are learning that as a hard, a hard lesson of what it is to be a sort of a superpower that doesn't have quite the unipolar heft that it used to have in, in, in, in times past. I think the problem we've got at the moment is that, you know, America wants a deal. Iran actually wants a deal. It's, you know, America's under political pressure, but the Iranians are under economic pressure to get a deal. They don't want to be close, reaching a point where they have to close down their oil fields because if that happens, you know, it all gets very complicated and messy and it's not as if you can turn these things on and off again. So they do, they do want to deal if there's one there. But, but they are insistent at the moment on making, trying to put pressure on the Americans to use their leverage over the Israelis. And the point is, is that other than, you know, angry telephone calls, the, the American side at the moment are not putting leverage on the Israelis in a way that they could in theory.
- [34:09]
A
And that's why, because for example, Israel's anti missile defense is based on American technology in America.
- [34:14]
B
Yeah, well, I mean, Katrina will correct me, but I, but I think, you know, by law, law as in a law agreed by Congress, America gives Israel 3 billion plus worth of military kit per year based on the principle, the argument that is that America wants Israel to always have the military upper hand over its Arab enemies in the region. That was the sort of rationale before, before it, you know, that that's a special relationship if you're talking the one that we don't share with. And so there is leverage that could be used, but that doesn't happen. And so that's why, you know, last week we had the Iranians saying, look guys, you've got to put, you got to restrain Netanyahu. And if you do, if you don't, well, we're gonna, you know, the state, state media announced that the Iranians had, had stopped all negotiations with the Pakistanis mediating with the Americans. That didn't have any impact. So now they're slowly but surely ratcheting up the pressure. And just the last 24 hours should be seen as part of that attempt by the Iranians to say, look, you know, Lebanon has to be part of the peace deal. We're not going to get any sorting out of an extension of the ceasefire, the opening of the Strait of Hormuz, any kind of negotiated language over the nuclear issue and all the other stuff, the timing of that, unless there is a ceasefire in Lebanon too, and the fact that the Iranians are making that linkage, the rate the Americans are saying to the Israelis, look, just stop complicating things. But at the moment, Netanyahu is not accepting that argument.
- [35:47]
A
And of course, being tough on Hezbollah is very popular across the political spectrum in Israel. Whether you're a fan of Netanyahu or not.
- [35:55]
B
He, he is facing accusations from his political opponents that he is, you know, the, the being, he is the tail being wagged by the American dog and the, that he, he is basically putting Israel's relationship with the United States ahead of defending people on the ground in Israel from Hezbollah rockets and also as we've seen today, missiles from Iran. That is a difficult position to be in for a, you know, so, so called security leader in the run up to an election that may or may not took place later on, later on this year. So there's a tension there, there between how much does Netanyahu want to defy America, but how, how much does he want to kind of keep the Americans on side? What's really interesting is, is that I've yet to see evidence that the Americans are using that tension very well at the moment. It's sort of expressions of frustration that things aren't happening rather than actually, you know, using some real leverage in that space.
- [36:56]
A
And Katrina, are there any hints in Washington D.C. where you are that the American administration is prepared to do more than just, just have sweary phone calls with Netanyahu?
- [37:04]
E
None whatsoever at this point, Adam. And you know, he's had these sweary phone calls before. If we think back to June of last year, almost exactly this time last year, Operation Midnight Hammer, Donald Trump was about to get on an aircraft and use the F bomb, as Americans like to call it when referring to Israel and Iran. And we're kind of back in that same place again, but it never lasts for very long. And then President Trump is sort of back cozy, cozy with Benjamin Netanyahu again. But I think James point about the pressure that's on Netanyahu domestically is really the key here. I mean, even the statement that he put out was sort of a retort to this apparent harsh phone call that he and Trump have had again today when he said in there, Israel has a full right to self defense and we exercise it to the extent necessary. I say this to you as in the Israeli people, people, as I say it with appreciation and respect in my good conversations with my friend President Trump, which kind of means, you know, you can talk nasty to me all you want, President Trump, but ultimately I'm going to do what I have to do for the Israeli people. And we have seen that. And you know, James is right saying there's a law there that protects how much military aid the US Gives to Israel each year. And there's no suggestion of that changing anytime soon. There is a shift in terms of terms of public support for Israel. We've had a few polls recently that shows pretty substantial drop offs, depending on what poll you look at, anywhere between 7 and 15% of a change into the unfavorable category in terms of how Americans view Israel and view Prime Minister Netanyahu particularly. So that eventually will start bubbling up and we're starting to see American politicians really focusing on the midterms. It's going to be very tight in some districts, so any little margins like the, that has the potential for pressure, but not yet at a national level.
- [38:58]
A
So, yeah, the fact that there's two very important elections coming up in the next few months in Israel and the US gives us a little bit of, a bit of a potential timetable for the story. Right. Talking of timetables, Katrina, you are already booked for the newscast Edinburgh shows, I understand.
- [39:14]
E
Yes, yes, I cannot wait to be there. I'll be in person.
- [39:18]
A
Great. That's amazing. Thanks for coming all this way. And James, you're invited too, because we're going to take newscast to the Edinburgh Festival to the Fringe, 10th to 14th August. There's a chair there for you.
- [39:30]
E
Be there or be square.
- [39:32]
B
Thank you so much for the kind invitation.
- [39:34]
A
Diplomatic correspondent through and through.
- [39:36]
B
I must consult my diary.
- [39:38]
A
Please do. Yes, please. And any other stakeholders in your movement at that time, particularly the BBC News foreign desk.
- [39:44]
B
Well, they're not the only person who controls my life.
- [39:49]
A
Anyway, this is where we're kind of in the process of designing the poster at the moment. I've got the old one from last year where there's a picture of me and we had those pull out quotes you know, you get, which are normally like the reviews and it was Paddy o' Connell saying, sometimes quite good. Chris Mason saying, crikey, blimey, ooh. And Laura Kuenssberg saying, unmissable and unruly. But this year we would like newscasters to write the pullout quotes. So we would like you you to send us a quote we could use for the poster and we would like it to be where and when you listen to Newscast. I think that's the idea. So it could be Margaret, I listen while I'm walking the dog. And the best ones we will put on the Newscast poster, which will be appearing in all sorts of lamp posts in Edinburgh and probably as a flyer that I will desperately hand out on the Royal Mile. Does that make sense?
- [40:42]
B
That sounds fantastic.
- [40:44]
A
James continued to be diplomatic. So, yeah, send us your where and when you listen to Newscast in a way that would look good on a poster, send it to newscastbc.co.uk or you can WhatsApp us on 033-01-2390. And James, you can use those methods of communication to send us your rsvp, either positive or negative. We won't take it personally. James, thank you very much.
- [41:10]
B
Thank you very much.
- [41:11]
A
And Katrina in washing, thank you to you too.
- [41:13]
E
Thank you. See you soon.
- [41:15]
A
Right, that's all. We'll be back with another newscast from the normal studio with no live audience very soon. Bye bye.
- [41:21]
C
Newscast, Newscast from the BBC, from one
- [41:24]
F
newscaster to another, thank you so much for making it to the end of this episode. You clearly do, in the words of Chris Mason, ooze stamina. Can I also gently encourage you to subscribe to us on BBC Sounds? Tell everyone you know and don't forget, you can email us anytime@newscastbc.co.uk or if you're that way inclined, send us a WhatsApp on 440-3301-239480. Be assured, I promise we listen to everyone.