Return to Transcripts main page

Prism

High Court Blocks BA Crew Strike But Union Warns The Issue Is Not Resolved

Aired December 17, 2009 - 12:00   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

STAN GRANT, CNN INT'L. ANCHOR, PRISM (voice over): The planes will keep flying. London's high court blocks the British Airways holiday strike.

Climate talks in Copenhagen are gridlocked as world leaders arrive to face a serious divide between rich and poor countries.

And there has been a lot of renewed diplomatic pressure to impose additional sanctions on Iran. In our "Prism Segment" tonight, sanctions, when do they work? And what do they accomplish?

From CNN Abu Dhabi in United Arab Emirates, this is PRISM, where we take a story and look at it from multiple perspectives. I'm Stan Grant.

United Nations climate conference is winding down in Copenhagen and despite impassioned protests and initial high expectations it look like there won't be a significant agreement for the arriving world leaders to sign tomorrow. Phil Black joins us now from Copenhagen with the latest.

And, Phil, despite some last-minute pleas to try to get some sort of a resolution and outcome here, it looks it's coming to nothing.

PHIL BLACK, CNN INT'L. CORRESPONDENT: It is looking that way at the moment, Stan. Certainly not achieving the big ambitious deal that so many had come to Copenhagen with the hope of thrashing out here. It is just not looking like that. There is just over a day to go and these talks remain significantly deadlocked. We are still told that on all the big issues there is very little movement.

The United States tried to come to the party, to a degree, today. U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is now in Copenhagen. She made a significant announcement. She said the U.S. would support a $100 billion annual fund from 2020, to go to the developing world to help them deal with the impacts of climate change. And also to help them develop into being low-carbon societies, so that the continue to develop and grow without burning fossil fuels, as the West and the industrialized world has done.

There are rules that apply to this, as with all U.S. involvement in this deal, or potential deal, generally. They are talking about transparency. This, they say, is a deal breaker. Listen to Hillary Clinton, earlier today.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

HILLARY CLINTON, U.S. SECRETARY OF STATE: We have presented and discussed numerous approaches to transparency, with a number of countries. And there are many ways to achieve transparency that would be credible and an acceptable. But there has to be a willingness to move toward transparency in whatever form we finally determine is appropriate.

So, if there is not even a commitment to pursue transparency, that is kind of a deal breaker for us.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BLACK: A deal breaker. That is a message specifically to China. The United States is insisting that there be some mechanism by which all countries commitments here can be measure and verified over time. So, if a country goes away and says we're going to cut commitments by so much, that can be verified by the international community. They are saying that is especially necessary when a lot of countries are going to put vast amounts of money to ensuring other nations do just that.

There is still some optimism here. We have world leaders who are still addressing the conference on the regular basis. We have had the Iranian president, the German president, and just recently the French president as well. Take a listen to French President Nicholas Sarkozy as he really tried to rally world leaders and get an agreement here in Copenhagen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

NICHOLAS SARKOZY, PRESIDENT OF FRANCE (through translator): Time is of the essence. Let' stop posturing. Let's really get down to negotiating. Some people want to keep Kyoto, OK, let's keep Kyoto. Others love the (CROSS TALK). But let us agree on an overall political umbrella, which will include all of the political (CROSS TALK) let's negotiate hard tonight, and tomorrow, all together we can adopt the agreement we will have thrashed out.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BLACK: A very passionate appeal there from the French president to try to come together for an agreement, but as I say, Stan, with just over a day to go, it is not looking very likely.

GRANT: It doesn't look that way. Phil, thank you very much for that. Phil Black joining us live there from Copenhagen.

Tonight on "AMANPOUR" a collapse or a last-ditch deal in Copenhagen? What is the impact either way? Christiane talks to the U.N.'s point person on energy and climate change. That is "AMANPOUR" midnight in Abu Dhabi, 2100 in Central Europe, right here on CNN.

Now, London's high court has blocked a threatened strike by British Airways cabin crews that would have played havoc with holiday travel. Jim Boulden is standing by in London with that story.

Jim, take us through this ruling and what it means for passengers.

JIM BOULDEN, CNN INT'L. CORRESPONDENT: Well, Stan, it means that British Airways will not have to be grounded next Tuesday. The union, the cabin crew union had voted on Monday, overwhelmingly voted, to go on strike for 12 days over Christmas and New Year. British Airways is very upset about that, of course, and it went to the high court here to ask for an injunction. And in fact the judge ruled in favor of British Airways and said the union, it would be illegal for the union to strike because of the way the ballot took place.

Now with me is Derek Simpson, he is a senior member of the Unite Union.

Clearly, you are very disappointed by this ruling?

DEREK SIMPSON, GENERAL SECRETARY, UNITE UNION: Well, slightly disappointed. I'm not disappointed for the people that can get away at Christmas. It was never our desire to hurt those people. What we wanted to do was force a negotiated settlement. I'm afraid that this decision probably has hardened management's attitude. Remember that they imposed changes of terms on our members, without agreement. Incidentally, when we tried to ask the court to stop that, amazingly, the court didn't stop them from imposing. They managed a way of stopping us from defending. Which shows an imbalance in employment law, but notwithstanding that, all that means is that the problem still exists.

BOULDEN: Well, let's talk about that, because even though there will not be a strike now, over Christmas, you, the union are not giving up. What will be the next step for you?

SIMPSON: Well, with the strength of feeling shown by 92.5 percent majority, 92.5 percent majority of people that are usually very moderate, uncharacteristically (UNINTELLIGIBLE) shows that there is a serious problem. And the only way to resolve that is through negotiation. As I say, regrettably, with management probably now cocko (ph), macho management to start with, so you can imagine what they'll be like now. They probably not be too interested in resolving this. But we will re-ballot. And with that strength of feeling, I'm confidence that despite the frustration here, that our members will vote for industrial action. And unless this management come to terms that they have got to get off the macho-male train and negotiate a settlement. And the imposition is not going to be accepted, not now, and not in the future, then there will be industrial action in the future.

Now, quite frankly, if BA wants to have it hanging over them a threat of industrial action, which will be the case, that will damage them. It will damage our members. And the best answer is to get around the table and negotiate a settlement. We're still up for that.

BOULDEN: It did seem that some of the members who voted yes in the last few days sort of regretted that because they didn't realize it was going to be a 12-day strike and they didn't realize the reaction. Do you think that was the case, that some people will now, union members, with actually vote no?

SIMPSON: No, I don't think that at all. Because I think the idea of 12 days was because we knew that management was expecting two or three days and it would have been prepared to ride it. In fact, Willie Walsh, actually, in a meeting with me said, you know, we are not going to end (UNINTELLIGIBLE). We are not going to end -bring it on.

BOULDEN: That is the CEO of British Airways?

SIMPSON: Yeah. Yes, absolutely, so he were up for it. He wanted to take us on. He didn't obviously expect 12 days and I'm sure that the reaction, which I think many people might have thought, wow, 12 days over Christmas. Christmas, itself, chosen by the timing of management, not by us, but there we are, forced into it as it were. That in point of fact, it was all about trying to force the discussions. Now, we have had discussions. But as I say, very, very difficult because the management very insistent, meet us anytime, anywhere, providing they don't have to change their mind. No preconditions, of course.

BOULDEN: Derek Simpson from Unite Union.

I have to say, Stan, I was quite surprised as well, on Monday, when they announced the 12-day strike. It was expected to be just 24 hours or 48 hours. But it certainly caught the attention of travelers all over the world. And the chaos that ensued the last few days, we should say. Next Tuesday British Airways will be flying as normal, Stan.

GRANT: Jim, thank you very much for that. Jim Boulden joining us live there from London.

A defiant Iran continues to pursue its nuclear program in the face of international objections. In tonight's "Prism Segment" we'll take a look at when and if sanctions actually work.

Plus the latest on Dubai's 2010 debt challenge. Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

GRANT: Iran has shown the world an upgraded medium-range missile from its arsenal, capable of hitting Israel and parts of Europe. The Iranian military released this video Wednesday of what it called a successful test firing. It has renewed concerns about Iran's nuclear intentions and talk of sanctions. British Prime Minister Gordon Brown said, "This is a matter of serious concern to the international community and it does make the case for us moving further on sanctions."

In our "Prism Segment" now, what do sanctions accomplish? The long- time head of the U.N. nuclear watchdog agency Mohammed ElBaradei advises against sanctions. Before leaving office last month he referred to sanctions as a dead-end street.

"I would hate to see that we are moving back to sanctions, " ElBaradei said, "Because sanctions at the end of the day really don't solve issues."

Now, listen to what Russian President Dmitry Medvedev has to say about sanctions.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DMITRY MEDVEDEV, PRESIDENT OF RUSSIA (through translator): I do not think that sanctions are the best way to reach one's result. Sanctions were used on a number of occasions against Iran, but we always say that we have doubts as to the results it brings in Iran. Nonetheless, when all possibilities, all instruments have been used and failed, on can use international, legal sanctions.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

GRANT: Now, sanctions can be imposed unilaterally, by a group, or a recognized international body, such as the United Nations. We are talking essentially about three types of sanctions, economic, diplomatic, and military. Some of the countries that currently have sanctions imposed on them include Cuba, Myanmar, North Korea, Iran and Sudan. Nations that have faced sanctions in the past include Libya, Iraq, South Africa, the former Yugoslavia, and Somalia.

Zimbabwe and the government of President Robert Mugabe have faced sanctions as far back as 1998. The early sanctions were economic, imposed by the International Monetary Fund. Initially they were imposed over Mr. Mugabe's highly controversial land reform policy. But sanctions were added by the U.S., Britain, the EU, and included travel bans, trade restrictions, and an arms embargo. Despite the pressures Mr. Mugabe remains in power. He talked about the sanctions in Rome last month.

ROBERT MUGABE, PRESIDENT, ZIMBABWE: There is also the challenge of punitive policies of certain countries, who interests stand opposed to our quest for the equity and justice of our land reforms. We face very hostile interventions by these states which have imposed unilateral sanctions on us. This has had a negative impact on our farmers.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

STAN: Now, through the years the imposition of sanctions has had varying degrees of success. Sanctions against the former Yugoslavia, South Africa and Libya are considered to have been successful. In an article on sanctions last year, "The Independent" reported that sanctions have been imposed on at least 185 countries since the Second World War. About one in three have worked. That is according to academics quoted in the report.

Now sanctions can take time to work effectively. Thirteen years of sanctions on Iraq failed. They have been imposed on Myanmar for more than a decade now. Earlier this year U.S. President Barack Obama struck a different tone from the Bush administration. And in September announced a new policy on Myanmar.

"Despite years of good intentions, neither sanctions by the United States, nor engagement by others succeeded in improving the lives of the Burmese people," he said.

Democratic Senator Jim Webb offered his thoughts on why the method hasn't worked in Myanmar.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

U.S. SEN. JIM WEBB, (D) VIRGINIA: The sanctions that we have had in place, with the United States, have not shut off economic investment in Myanmar. What they have done is they have allowed the Chinese to increase their level of investment and their level of influence, in a country that is vitally important to the future of the United States. And sanctions don't work if you have countries like China, that are pouring of billions of dollars into a place like Myanmar. They have shut off the contact with the very people who can raise the level of consciousness among the Burmese citizens and actually assist in the evolution of the political process.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

GRANT: We want to turn to our guest, Stuart Holliday, of the Meridian International Center in Washington, now, to answer our question, what do sanctions accomplish?

Now, you have worked as an ambassador, you work in public diplomacy. Given the patchy history of sanctions the, the largely ineffective, is it time to ask, why bother at all?

STUART HOLLIDAY, MERIDIAN INT'L. CENTER: I think in the absence of something else sanctions are still a useful tool in the context of other things. They have seldom been effective by themselves. In the case of South Africa, for example, where there was a government that was actually looking to actually reestablish normal economic and trade relations, there was an incentive. But in the case Iran, where the government isn't accountable to the people, it is very, very tough to effect a behavior change unless, of course, the people see that there is a cost. And in this case, there is a reluctance to, in effect, put the Iranian people on the other side of popular opinion with respect to the impact that sanctions might have on their economy at a very delicate point in their political evolution.

GRANT: Also, given that sanctions, if they are going to work, they are better carried out multi-laterally, better if it has much wider support in the international community. Given that, it is difficult, isn't it, to try to get tougher sanctions against Iran; sanctions against North Korea, when they have friends such as China and Russia.

HOLLIDAY: It is absolutely difficult to get the sanctions in the first place and then it is also difficult to make the sanctions have teeth, as they say. In the case of many of the sanctioning regimes a committee gets created and lists get developed in terms of what kinds of goods should be sanctioned, individual travel bans, and so forth, but unless the sanctions involved hard-hitting economic measures - for example, the U.S. House just passed a resolution relating to the import of petroleum into Iran for production -they could really have a significant impact.

But and large, however, these sanctions provide a context. You saw that the plane that was intercepted with the North Korean arms, if the sanctions had not been passed in May, providing the context for that to be a violation, we might not have heard about it. So, again, it keeps pressure on, but by itself it is very difficult to effect change of a regime like the Iranian regime.

GRANT: Just a final thought from you. It can work the other way, can't it? We saw in Iraq, for example, where Saddam Hussein, during his rule was able to use sanctions to say, look, they are hurting our people. In fact, it can bring support to some of those regimes.

HOLLIDAY: Unfortunately that is the case, especially where there is a false economy in the country and the financial support from the main economic resource, in this case, oil, in both countries is not regulated or flowing to the people, but to the government and to the security apparatus. So in effect, they shift down the economic burden and the pain to average person, when in fact they have the ability to provide those resources. And it becomes a rallying point for them. They can turn to their people and say look what they are doing to us. And our efforts have been in developing the kinds of sanctions that exclude certain humanitarian provisions, food and so forth, so that that kind of dichotomy can't happen.

GRANT: Stuart, appreciate your time. Thank you very much for that.

HOLLIDAY: Thank you very much.

GRANT: Stuart Holliday, our guest joining us there from Washington.

Stuart was saying sanctions don't always work, they are still a useful tool. That is our "Prism Segment" for tonight.

Up ahead, the Dubai bailout, "MARKETPLACE MIDDLE EAST" John Defterios has a look at continuing market anxiety. That is in a moment.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

GRANT: Welcome back.

Despite the bail out from Abu Dhabi, investors remained concerned about Dubai's debt crisis. And we are seeing some cautionary moves in the Middle East. "MARKETPLACE MIDDLE EAST" anchor, John Defterios joins me now from CNN London.

And, John, a lot of activity after the announcement of this so-called bailout from Abu Dhabi, but a lot of questions still remaining. Where is the money ultimately going to come from? Can Dubai restructure the debt? What are investors and what is the marketplace telling us?

JOHN DEFTERIOS, ANCHOR, "MARKETPLACE MIDDLE EAST": I think the markets are telling us something, Stan, toward the end of the week, here, and that is easing off of that big burst we saw at the start of the week, that 10 percent gain in Dubai, that better than 8 percent gain Abu Dhabi. And the reason being you have this cash injection of $10 billion from Abu Dhabi, going into Dubai, that provides liquidity. But I say let's look at 2010, Dubai's debt challenge.

They have 12 debt obligations in 2010, adding up to about $9.6 billion for the entire year. About $7 billion of that comes in the first half of the year. And don't forget 3.5 has already been paid on that Sekook (ph) that we have been talking about. So, come May of 2010 there is going to be some concerns, what Dubai is going to do? So we see that Sheikh Mohammed, the ruler of Dubai, the prime minister of the UAE, is trying to shore up finance within the government any surplus money that exists within a government entity and this may even spill over into the corporate sector. It is not defined yet. He wants it back into the central coffers. Basically to reign in the spending we have seen over the last five years, within the emirates.

GRANT: And this is really in preparation for a visit, next week, by an envoy from the UAE to the United States. Obviously, there will be a lot of questions asked about the future of Dubai, there?

DEFTERIOS: In fact, that story originally ran across the Bloomberg wires and I called a couple of my sources to verify it. There are visits to London and to New York, possibly, including Washington. This is Sheik Ahmed who is now running this fiscal committee, and those groups of people there are below Sheik Mohammed who are trying to do this restructuring.

Now, one source I spoke to said, look, it is nice that they have come forward with that $10 billion and that fund is going to address the restructuring, but they would see the entire picture of the restructuring going forward and that is missing. And I think that is the biggest challenge as we get to the start of 2010, before these debt repayments really have to kick in, in February, one of $2.5 billion, what is the entire restructuring plan going forward?

GRANT: Yes, John, thank you very much for that. John Defterios joining us there from London with his insights on what we have seen over the past week in Dubai. And CNN's "MARKETPLACE MIDDLE EAST" with John, that is every weekend, including Friday night at 23:45 in Abu Dhabi, immediately following "QUEST MEANS BUSINESS."

And that's it for me, Stan Grant, in Abu Dhabi. "MAIN SAIL" coming up next, that is after we update the headlines.

END