Into domestic law. Also on the programme donald Trump Defends his decision to pull troops out of syria and insists the ceasefire is holding. President Obamas National Security advisor susan rice joins us to discuss the moves. Prince william admits hes concerned for his brother and meghan after the couple acknowledged they were struggling in a revealing interview broadcast last night. We will always be brothers. We are certainly on different parts at the moment but i will always be there for him as he will always be there for him as he will always be there for me. We dont see each other as much as we used to. And you may know him as mitt romney but thanks to a secret twitter account Pierre Delecto has been defending the senator online. Hello and welcome im Michelle Fleury in washingto and Christian Fraser is at college green. The uk is due to leave the eu in 10 days time, and although borisjohnson has negotiated a new deal setting out the terms, mps are yet to give the agreement their approval. The government had been hoping that mps would get a simple yes or no vote on the deal tonight, allowing the legal formailities to be worked though later. But Commons Speakerjohn Bercow refused to allow the vote saying that it was too similar to the question put to mps 48 hours ago on saturday. Todays motion is in substance the same as saturdays motion and the house has decided the matter. Todays circumstances are in substance the same as saturdays circumstances. My ruling is therefore the motion will not be debated today as it would be repetitive and disorderly to do so. Mr bercows decision was important because if mps had had that vote and it had passed the path for Boris Johnson to fulfill his do or die pledge to deliver brexit by the end of this month would have been clearer. But now theres no time limit for the legal too ing and fro ing, although the government says its pushing ahead to get laws through by the end of the week. Perhaps crucially, mps will be able to change the law as it goes through possibly adding a second referendum or changing the nature of our future customs relationship with europe. Im joined now by lucy frazer mp, minister of state forjustice in Boris Johnsons government. Good evening. Lets just good evening. Letsjust quickly look back on the day, a lot of mps very angry about the speakers decision. What did you make of it . It is frustrating because it would have been an opportunity for the house to say it was happy with the deal and amend me house to say it was happy with the dealand amend me unamended and that would have been a great signal to start the legislation in the right place. But such a vote wouldnt have meant anything because Oliver Letwins amendment withheld approval pending the legislation, it would have been a meaningless vote. It would have been an important signal but now we will press on with the legislation and hope we get that legislation through the house. Jacob rees mogg, leader of the house, set forward a fairly ambitious schedule this evening. The second reading of the bill will be tomorrow then a second reading, Committee Stage tomorrow night, Committee Stage on wednesday, third reading to bounce it onto the house of lords on thursday. You cant really be serious that a bill that fundamentally changes our way of life can be rushed through the house in three days. We are up against a deadline. But also we have been discussing this issue for over three years. We have been discussing all the bill for over three years and we need to get the legislation through. We have seen in the past you can get legislation through the house of commons in pretty short order, the benn act went through very quickly so benn act went through very quickly so it is possible to achieve. That was a i page motion. In this bill it is going to change the way our courts relate to the european courts, that is fundamental to our way of justice in courts, that is fundamental to our way ofjustice in the uk. You happy with it going through in under three days . Youre right to identify this isa very days . Youre right to identify this is a very important piece of legislation. Some of the provisions in that legislation were set out in the previous Withdrawal Agreement and that has been around for some time. Many of the documentation of the Northern Ireland protocol, the political declaration, were produced at the end of last week so there has been some time to look at those. The key point is that people have been looking at this issue for three years. People who care about particular points in the legislation would have thought about any angle that can have been thought about. There have been papers, discussions, there has been conversations with numberten and others there has been conversations with number ten and others about all these issues. This is not coming the fore at the last minute. One of the things that labour mps like to amend is to put a Customs Union and the bill instead of the Free Trade Agreement that Boris Johnson bill instead of the Free Trade Agreement that borisjohnson once. They were to put that in the Withdrawal Agreement part of the bill, the legally binding part of Withdrawal Agreement, what does the Prime Minister do . Will he have to pull it . There are a number of points in relation to that, we had some indicative votes. It didnt pass even at the indicative motion stage. We now have a bill and a deal that i think will command the majority of the house and i hope it is that bill that goes forward. Ok, thank you very much for being with us. Thank you very much for being with us. I should just say there is one other amendment that is likely to go out tomorrow and that was around the timetabling motion. The schedule for the week. They might try to amend that tomorrow. That would be the first battle royale. Plenty to watch out for. The question is where that leaves us by the end of this week. In syria, angry residents in a kurdish controlled city pelted departing us troops with potatoes as they hurled insults. The departing forces are headed to iraq to regroup as the president continues to face plenty of criticism for the way he ordered the withdrawal of troops from northern syria. Overnight there was speculation that the white house was considering keeping a limited number of us troops in syria to protect Syrian Oil Fields and keep a foothold against isis. But a short while ago, in a cabinet meeting, donald trump suggested that wouldnt be necessary when we went to turkey and when we went to the kurds, they agreed to do things that they never would have done before the shooting started. If they didnt go through two and half days of hell, i dont think they would have done it. I think we couldnt have made a deal. And people have been trying to make this deal for years. Well, this weekend President Trump attacked his critics including this tweet. We are pleased to say that ambassador rice joins us now to discuss the situation in syria and her new book tough love. Ambassador, thank you forjoining us on the programme. We have to start with turkey and syria. You have this idea that troops are going to stay on the ground in syria or at least in neighbouring iraq. How much has this decision undermined American Foreign policy . I think the consequences are almost incalculable when you add them up. In the first instance we have taken our foot off the neck of isis. We see prisoners escaping, sleeper cells reactivating, new attacks. In the next instance, we have undermined a very important relationship with our kurdish partner to have taken the fight to isis and sent the message not only to the codes that we are prepared to sell them out, see their ethnic homeland to the turks but to anybody who might be interested in partnering with us around the world that our word cannot be trusted. And we have ruled out the red carpet for Vladimir Putin and iran to take back territory but they were not being able to seize and given turkey a green light to ethnically cleanse the northern part of syria. Set about abandoning an ally. There has been lots of debate or discussion is about what promises were made to the kurds when they agreed to partner with the us. The president said there were no promises made. You are there were no promises made. You are the National Security adviser at the time under the obama administration, what promises were made . They were not formal promises. We said we would support them in the fight against isis and we would be there as they tried to sustain their national homeland. It wasnt a treaty but it was a moral obligation and everyone understood it to be so which is why there is bipartisan outrage here in washington over the president s decision to abandon them. It is where you hear reports of American Forces who have spent years on of American Forces who have spent years on the ground with a kurdish partner is feeling we betrayed our friends and allies. It is outrageous when you think about it. The kurds have been through so much in that whole region, whether in iraq or syria. The United States has traditionally come to their rescue, whether after the first gulf war or as president obama did. So for president tramp on a whim reasons that nobody understands, to absolutely counter to National Security and through them under the bus, it not only makes no sense but it isa bus, it not only makes no sense but it is a shameful breach of our moral responsivity. I was watching an interview with the chair of our Foreign Affairs committee today and he was making the point that the relationship with the United States goes much deeper than this white house and its president , but he was asking what kind of alliance is it, what kind of special relationship is it when our interests come second to america first. That is exactly the question. Historically our alliances and partnerships have been two way st and we have been there for each other, the special relationship with the United Kingdom being the most important example of that in many respects but now all that is called into question is, when you have an american leader who is not pursuing even an american first foreign policy, whatever that means and however detrimental it may be, it is really in the first foreign policy. There is nothing about his decision to withdraw us forces unilaterally in us interests, it runs directly counter. It makes you wonder what he was given in that phone call with erdogan . What was the quid pro quo. Im going to pick you up on the idea ofa im going to pick you up on the idea of a two way street. You might know oui of a two way street. You might know ourformer prime of a two way street. You might know our former Prime MinisterDavid Cameron has a book out at the moment and when he was interviewed about it he talks about the first chemical attack in syria and he said he called the white house when president obama was there and he didnt get a call back for four days. I dont recall that at all. I do recall them speaking repeatedly including about the chemical attack and Prime Minister cameron had committed tojoin and Prime Minister cameron had committed to join with united and Prime Minister cameron had committed tojoin with United States and france in responding militarily to that attack and unfortunately, took the vote to parliament and lost the in parliament. In part that influence president obamas decision to consider the necessity of congressional support to ensure we have a sustainable back in the United States to pursue what could be an extended military engagement and as you know, congress did not provide that but nonetheless a deal was reached to remove 1300 metric tonnes of chemical weapons from syria, which at the time we understood to be the bulk of their stockpile. In your book you write about many things, including how to accept failures in foreign policy. You also talked about political divisiveness that we see right now on both sides of the atlantic. Catching your eye forward to 2020, how does political divisiveness open up how does political divisiveness open up the way for further foreign interference, especially as we saw in 2016, as we now know that the russians on social media . That is an important point and what i say in the conclusion of the book in the final chapter is in myjudgment our domestic political divisions our our greatest National Security liability. Not least because it gives an opening for adversaries like Vladimir Putin to pour salt in out like Vladimir Putin to pour salt in ourwins, to go like Vladimir Putin to pour salt in our wins, to go on social media and exacerbate distrust between americans whether it is on issues of race, americans whether it is on issues of race , gay americans whether it is on issues of race, gay rights or gun control, these are all hot button divisive issues in the United States. We see russia working to exhibit divisions are both sides. It is a problem United States has an opportunity to rectify. As we have overcome many divisions in a past from the civil war to vietnam but it takes focus and commitment and it means our leaders in particular are going to have to rise above the narrow political interests and put National Unity and the strength of our democracy and Global Leadership first. If set at the un and the National Security council, when you look at the situation in libya and the way that imploded anyway syria imploded, either any lessons over how the west does this, if you are removing someone how the west does this, if you are removing someone like gaddafi. How the west does this, if you are removing someone like gaddafim how the west does this, if you are removing someone like gaddafi. In my judgment, the decision by the United States, france, the uk, nato, to protect civilians in libya was the right choice. The intervention i think was the right decision but we all collectively failed to consolidate the piece. In libya gaddafi had run a one man government, there were no institutions of state, the place was extremely fragile and we do not organise ourselves with the international community, the un and others swiftly enough and effectively enough to try and consolidate things and help the libyans form a National Unity government. I dont know for sure, i dont think anybody can that had we been more ready and more active in that effort that we might have succeeded and that libya would be a unitary state now but what i do regret is our collective effort was insufficient to try to know if we could have made that difference. Thank you so much for your time today. Thank you very much. Fascinating. The uk government has published the text of the Withdrawal Agreement bill the piece of legislation that begins to put the governments new brexit deal into uk law. If the government is take the uk out of the eu by october 31st it is crucial that the legislation passes swiftly. On saturday mps refused to vote on the principal of the deal itself until the laws delivering it were in place. We are hearing that legislation will be published in the next hour. We are hearing that legislation will be published in the next hour. Tomorrows second reading of the bill will also be the first opportunity to see whether there might be a majority for the new deal in parliament. But even if that passes there are still multiple stages before it becomes law including an opportunity for mps to vote on potentially significant amendments which the government may be unable to oppose, like a commitment to staying in the eus Customs Union. Lets speak now tojoe owen, Programme Director at the institute for government. We are in for an almighty bonfire this week over this legislation. Particularly over the programming of it because tonight jacob particularly over the programming of it because tonightjacob rees mogg sending out a 3d schedule, that is incredibly quick. The programming is likely to be the first big battle. Three days is astonishingly quick, if you compared to legislation implemented in previous eu treaty changes, it is the shortest by some distance in terms of the amount of scrutiny they have. If the meaningful vote had taken place and happened and been successful today or even in the Oliver Letwin amendment had fallen on a saturday and the meaningful vote had passed, the Programme Motion would have been necessary. They could have said the benn act could have fallen away and they could have done it in three days or it is no deal on october the 3ist. Days or it is no deal on october the 315t. Now they cannot argue that so the debate about programming is likely to be couched about the debate between scrutiny in one hand and mp5 wanting more time and on the other hand, they need to hit the deadline are not have to ask for an extension. I want to remind our view is that whe