Return to Transcripts main page
CONNECT THE WORLD
World Cup Update, Instant Replay coming to FIFA?, Musicians boycott of Israel, Oliver Stone on Latin America
Aired June 28, 2010 - 16:00:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
MAX FOSTER, HOST: A constitution that would make Kyrgyzstan the first parliamentary democracy in Central Asia. But the country's ousted president tells CNN the process is illegitimate.
Tonight, that news, as well as positive counterpoints from Europe and the U.N. praising the vote after the recent ethnic violence and political turmoil.
On CNN, this is the hour we connect the world.
Central Asia is a region dominated by authoritarian presidents. But one country may turn a troubled year into a chance to become a parliamentary democracy.
With the story from Kyrgyzstan and an exclusive interview with the country's ousted president, our Max Foster in London.
Also tonight, an alarming report from Uganda that suggests the window of Western generosity toward AIDS programs is closing. It has implications for Africa and the whole world.
Political trouble for Israel -- why an increasing number of artists are refusing to perform there.
And he's won Oscars for films inspired by his own military experiences. Oliver Stone is answering your questions tonight. He's our Connector of the Day.
First, though, a monumental shift from Central Asia's long history of authoritarian rule. Voters in Kyrgyzstan have overwhelmingly approved a new constitution that slashes the power of the president and slows -- and sets the stage for parliamentary elections every five years. Interim leader, Roza Otunbayeva, will continue holding the presidency, now a largely symbolic role, until 2011. Her administration soared to power in April after Kurmanbek Bakiyev was ousted in a violent uprising.
Otunbayeva calls the weekend referendum a victory for the people. But perhaps no surprise, ousted President Bakiyev believes it was illegitimate.
He met with our Matthew Chance in Belarus, where he's been living in exile.
Matthew joins us now from Minsk with the details -- Matthew.
MATTHEW CHANCE, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Max, thanks very much.
Well, first of all, we did speak with Bakiyev about this -- this referendum that's been held in Kyrgyzstan, the country from which, of course, he was ousted as president back in April. He described it as illegitimate, saying that he was the rightful president of Kyrgyzstan and only the president of the country or the country's parliament had the legal right, under the constitution, to call a -- a referendum.
And so he said that the -- the results of this should not be given much validity by the international community.
We quickly, though, turned to some of the allegations that have been leveled against Mr. Bakiyev over the past several weeks, particularly the - - that he was involved in fomenting the terrible violence that we saw between ethnic Kyrgyz and ethnic Uzbek people in the south of -- of Kyrgyzstan. And he took the opportunity to deny any responsibility for that.
Let's take a listen to what he said.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
CHANCE: What do you say to the people of Southern Kyrgyzstan, who have been so terribly affected by this ethnic violence?
KURMANBEK BAKIYEV, OUSTED KYRGYZSTAN PRESIDENT (through translator): Firstly, I would like to send my deepest condolences to all the families on both sides, Uzbek and Kyrgyz. It was a big tragedy for both. It vividly demonstrates that the interim government has no ability to control the country and maintain law and order.
CHANCE: You say it's a big tragedy, but, of course, you are accused of being behind that violence. The interim government says you fomented the violence in order to destabilize the country.
BAKIYEV: For me, as Kyrgyz's president, the Uzbek people are just the same as my own Kyrgyz people. We grew up among Uzbeks and every Uzbek living in Kyrgyzstan knows perfectly well how good I was to them as president. No one Uzbek would believe I was behind what happened.
CHANCE: Do you deny categorically these allegations that are being announced by the interim government that you and your family, particularly your son, Maxim Bakiyev, paid armed gangs to instigate the violence that took place and left so many people dead and homeless in Southern Kyrgyzstan?
BAKIYEV: It's an absolute lie. It could only have been imagined by those who came to power in an armed coup.
CHANCE: Well, answer me this, are you working to overturn the interim government in Kyrgyzstan from your exile here in Belarus?
BAKIYEV: No, I'm not conducting any activity whatsoever to influence events there. I only ever tried to talk to people urging calm to stop the bloodshed.
CHANCE: You and your family are accused, additionally, in Kyrgyzstan, by the interim authorities there, of embezzling tens of millions of dollars from the state coffers.
How do you respond to that allegation?
Have you brought the money with you here to Belarus?
Good question. I would not wish that anybody had to leave their country the way I had to. I was on the verge of being killed. They could have shot me.
How can you take any money one of the country under these circumstances?
I barely managed to get myself out.
(END VIDEO TAPE)
CHANCE: Bakijev's having -- he was sort of laughing off those allegations that he had embezzled -- along with his family -- tens of millions of dollars. But, basically, (INAUDIBLE) figure here, is still insisting, again, that he's technically still the president of -- of Kyrgyzstan; but also acknowledging, it seemed, that he was no longer in charge and that the country had moved on -- Max.
FOSTER: Yes, Matthew.
Stick around with us just a moment.
I want to talk a bit more about this in a moment with you.
But it -- it's easy to overlook Kyrgyzstan, overshadowed as it is by much larger neighbors. But to make no mistake about it, it plays a key strategic role in Central Asia. Russia still considers the former Soviet republic to be part of its sphere of influence and has a military base there. So naturally, it's no surprise that the U.S. does, as well, one that's vital to supplying troops to Afghanistan.
Then there's China bordering it on the east. Beijing has, in the past, enlisted Bakijev's help in -- in fighting separatist Uyghurs operating on both sides of their border.
To the west, the Ferghana Valley crosses the border with Uzbekistan. The fertile but poor region is considered a regional source of Islamic militancy.
On that, we bring Matthew back in, because, Matthew, I'm interested in hearing a bit more about the comments that President Medvedev of Russia has made about this, because they seem quite bizarre, on one level.
Just take us to what the Russian response to -- to what happened on Sunday was.
CHANCE: Well -- well, first of all, I think (AUDIO GAP)...
FOSTER: OK. Problems, clearly, there with Matthew's signal.
We'll have more on Russia's response a little later in this program.
Although Kyrgyzstan is a newcomer to democratic elections, international observers say the vote was a remarkably transparent and peaceful process.
But can the country now follow through with its revolutionary mandate?
Let's bring in Lilit Gevorgyan.
He's an analyst with IHS Global Insight.
He's here in London with us.
Maybe -- sorry, by the way, just explain to us, if you can, I was just wondering if we could get back in touch with Matthew there.
But in terms of Russia's perspective on this, just tell us why the Russians are set on this, because, as I say, some people have found that quite confusing.
LILIT GEVORGYAN, IHS GLOBAL INSIGHT: Well, the Russian government made it clear that they're not as enthusiastic about creating a parliamentary republic in Central Asia as the Western capitals were and largely because they believe that the Southern Kyrgyzstan remains very volatile and they would need a strongman approach to regain control over these parts of Kyrgyzstan.
And Medvedev, in Canada, talking to reporters, he actually said that if -- if there is no strong leader in -- in the capital, this may lead to actually a breakup of the -- of Kyrgyzstan.
FOSTER: But that seems bizarre when, effectively, the Russians were supporting Roza Otunbayeva and ideally this is their perfect outcome, isn't it?
Why are they, then, criticizing it?
GEVORGYAN: I think they are criticizing the way Otunbayeva is handling the situation. And I think the cracks in the relationship appeared back on a 20 -- on the 10th of June, when the first ethnic violence broke out in Southern Kyrgyzstan.
What happens, then, Roza Otunbayeva called for a Russian convention and not once, she repeated twice the appeal. But Russia distanced itself from Kyrgyzstan because they didn't want to venture into unilateral intervention like in the case of Georgia. And, also, Russian authorities decided that probably Roza Otunbayeva and her cabinet, they themselves should find the political will and power to gain control over the situation in -- in Kyrgyzstan.
And from Russian perspective -- and we should remember that Russia is presidential -- strongly presidential power -- I mean a state -- they -- they wouldn't really want to see a blossoming parliamentary republic in Central Asia.
FOSTER: OK. And let's talk about Kyrgyzstan then, because many people are saying what happened on Sunday is a positive move, away from regional (INAUDIBLE). But Mr. Bakiyev seems intent on staying involved in the politics of that country.
How damaging is that?
How much unrest will there be in Kyrgyzstan, looking ahead, as people fall into line between the different leaders?
GEVORGYAN: It really depends on how the -- the -- the current government will manage to legitimize its power. At the moment, it seems that Roza Otunbayeva has chosen the parliamentary government as a way of resolving a number of issues -- bringing security into place, bringing ethnic Uzbeks into the parliament and trying to resolve all these problems through the parliament.
Now, if this -- this path fails, then Bakiyev and his supporters in the south may find an excellent opportunity to exploit the weakness of the interim government and show that the whole experiment has failed and it was good to have, albeit authoritarian, but, yes, a leader rather than the current chaos.
Thank you so much for joining us.
GEVORGYAN: Thanks for having me.
FOSTER: Lilit Gevorgyan, thank you very much, indeed, for joining us with your insight there on Kyrgyzstan.
FOSTER: Now, once hailed as a success story, Uganda's HIV and AIDS clinics are now closing. Find out what that means for more than a million people infected with the virus there and millions more across sub-Saharan Africa and, indeed, the world.
FOSTER: Taking a royal tumble -- this was the moment Queen Elizabeth's grandson, Harry, fell off his horse and onto his back side during a charity polo match in New York. The 25-year-old British prince was competing against Argentinean Nacho Figueras, a top star in the sport of kings. They were raising money for AIDS sufferers in the tiny African nation of Lesotho. Prince Harry is the co-founder of AIDS charity Sentebale.
Now, the fighting against AIDS is a global one. And within it, Uganda has long been seen as a standard bearer -- once ravaged by the disease, the nation has managed to stem its tide, largely with the help of U.S. funding.
But cracks in care are now starting to show.
David McKenzie investigates why clinics have begun to shut their doors on the sick.
DAVID MCKENZIE, CNN INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Ahmed Bukanya (ph) is on a mission. For more than a year, he has come to this clinic in Uganda. Each time, he asks for AIDS drugs that could save his life. But the doctors can only tell him no, all the treatment slots are filled.
"I'm desperate," he says, "I see the change that the drugs have made in other people's lives. I saw how people got better. It's just bad that I came too late."
In the recent past, most patients could get free treatment here. But doctors say they just don't have the funding to give drugs for new patients.
DR. PETER MUGYENI, JOINT CLINICAL RESEARCH CENTRE: We are beginning to see it coming back. We are -- we use -- we -- over the last few years, we've not been seeing as many sick persons as we are seeing today. There are some in our ward right here and these patients are very, very sick.
MCKENZIE: In the '90s, Uganda had more than one million HIV/AIDS sufferers, with just 10,000 on treatment. Since then, the country has made huge strides, largely because of U.S. government funding. In 2003, U.S. President George W. Bush announced his emergency plan for AIDS relief, PEPFAR, during his State of the Union Address -- a multi-billion dollar fund diverted to fighting AIDS.
In Uganda, it increased treatment by 95 percent. But experts say prevention efforts never took hold here and every hour, 13 new Ugandans are infected with HIV -- straining funding budgets. This year, PEPFAR was increased by its smallest amount yet -- not enough to meet demand, critics say.
The head of PEPFAR says that the financial crisis has hurt funding prospects and that the U.S. is doing all it can.
ERIC GOOSBY, U.S. GLOBAL AIDS COORDINATOR: We are not turning our backs to the unmet need. We have responded more than any other country to that unmet need and will continue to respond and do everything we can to find the resources to respond to those who still need these services.
MCKENZIE: But those who need services aren't always getting it. Health workers say that patients on drugs stay on drugs, but new patients only get a slot when someone dies. So Margaret (ph) has been on drugs and healthy for six years, but her friend Jardensia (ph) grows sicker by the day.
"I didn't have the money," she says, "so I didn't even go back to the clinic. It's unfair. I want the same advantage as others."
An advantage that has spared so many in Uganda. Now the others must wait, but they could run out of time.
In Uganda, they fear the old face of AIDS will return.
David McKenzie, CNN, Kampala, Uganda.
(END VIDEO TAPE)
FOSTER: Well, the World Health Organization says HIV remains the world's leading infectious killer. But Uganda may not be the last country where major clinics routinely turn patients away. According to a recent report by the medical charity, Doctors Without Borders, PEPFAR isn't the only donor to reduce its drug funding.
UNITA Aid (ph) and the World Bank have announced reductions to drug funding in Malawi, Zimbabwe, Mozambique and the Democratic Republic of Congo. In addition, Kenya is suffering drug shortages and the number of patients able to start drug treatment has been trimmed in South Africa.
It seems the golden window of Western generosity toward HIV and AIDS programs is closing. That has implications not only for Africa, but also for the world.
Let's bring in Paul Zeitz.
He's executive director of the Global AIDS Alliance.
Thank you so much for joining us.
Is -- you know, those examples we just gave there, they're rather depressing.
But is that a true picture of the situation across Africa and other parts of the world, in fact?
PAUL ZEITZ, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, GLOBAL AIDS ALLIANCE: Yes, thank you, Max.
That is an excellent accurate report of what's going on. We're in touch with and partnering with African activists in many of those countries and other countries. And there's been a -- a turning back of the commitments that were made from the international community, particularly President Obama and his government, on the commitments that he himself made during the campaign. And it's a tragic setback on progress.
As you had shown, there was a lot of momentum and positive response. But we're -- we're seeing a slowing and a reversing of progress. And, you know, we hope that the blunder of that rever -- policy that Obama is implementing can be fixed still.
FOSTER: We're focusing here on the United States, because they're, by far, the biggest funder of this sort of work, particularly in Africa, right.
What are you saying, in layman's terms, about what the Obama administration has done in comparison with the Bush administration?
Are you saying they're basically putting less money into it or they're not increasing the money?
What are you saying?
ZEITZ: Well, I mean as you said -- as you reported, President Bush announced $15 billion over five years and then Congress actually provided more than what Bush asked for. They were providing $25 billion over the first five years of the initiative.
Obama, Clinton and Biden, during the campaign, all committed to increasing the spending by at least a billion dollars a year throughout the course of this first term.
And, unfortunately, when they came into office, they reversed that intention and they only -- they basically, essentially, flatlined. There's been a very small crease -- increases in funding. And they also cut funding for the global fund to fight AIDS, T.B. and malaria, which is an international partnership where the U.S. provides one third of funding and leverages funding from other international partners. And that -- the global fund is funding programs in all those countries that you reported on.
FOSTER: This is your new reality, though, isn't it?
Because every country in the world -- in the Western world, at least - - is cutting back on all sorts of types of spending. And this is one area -- foreign aid, where, unfortunately, the same applies as all the other areas of government. So this is your new reality.
ZEITZ: Well, I -- I'm not quite sure about that. I mean, as you know, the U.S. Government -- President Obama released his national security strategy on May 27th, just a few weeks -- a moment ago. And in that, he talked about development, diplomacy and defense. And we've seen dramatic increases in the defense spending and trillions of dollars being spent on a financial bailout for Wall Street and the gap on funding that the U.S. committed to provide.
This is now what I think is actually needed. It's the way Obama -- President Obama said he would provide is several billion dollars. It's not that much money in the realm of what they're putting out for other priorities.
So Obama has lost, basically, the integrity of his word. And that is a serious threat to his credibility and the credibility of the United States. And African stakeholders are grieving at the loss of his leadership. They're shocked.
But now it's moved into like a trouble phase. We're troubled by his failed leadership and this isn't...
FOSTER: Just very quickly...
ZEITZ: -- I'm -- I'm speaking...
FOSTER: -- Paul, we have -- we have to move on.
But just very quickly, the Obama administration, nevertheless, is, by far, the biggest funder of this very good work. And to write it off completely would be rather negative, wouldn't it?
It's just as -- he just isn't able to increase the funding as much as you would like.
ZEITZ: Well, the AIDS response that you reported on was like an airplane that was on the ascent. The effort that you described took years and years to create. When you -- when you stop funding it, you're like chopping off the wing of an airplane. And so the momentum that creating the kind of program response on the ground that Dr. Mugyeni and the people that you were talking about refer -- is being lost. The ground that's being lost is very severe and Obama has a chance to fix that over the next several months. And we're hoping that he looks at this issue and -- and fixes his policy.
FOSTER: OK. Paul Zeitz, thank you very much, indeed, for -- for your perspective on that.
ZEITZ: Thank you.
FOSTER: Now, one athlete involved in the AIDS awareness cause is Kobe Bryant. The basketball superstar might not be the most obvious guest at a soccer facility in South Africa, but the Nike complex also offers AIDS education, counseling and testing. It's part of an effort to combat the disease in a country with the world's largest HIV positive population. Of course, HIV and AIDS awareness are global issues, as we've been saying. And Sunday was National HIV Testing Day in the United States.
A Center of Disease Control estimates that a quarter of a million people living with HIV or AIDS in the U.S. are unaware of their status.
Up next, a new beginning from a year of tragedy -- in our latest I- List special, we focus on how Poland is redefining its future with a focus on innovation, technology and investment.
Stay with us.
FOSTER: Each month, we've been showcasing a nation's people and places, focusing on what shapes a country's economy, culture and its social fabric. We began our I-List series in France, where one of its trendiest cities, Marseilles, is getting a modern makeover, opening a window to its younger generation.
Then we headed to Bahrain. Its new International Circuit is a drawing card for most sports fans in the Middle East.
In Georgia, we looked at the revival of fortunes of the port of Bat'umi. It has an ambitious plan to restore its status as the city for trade and tourism in the Black Sea.
In May, we traveled to Macedonia, where one successful wine maker has been bringing a Napa Valley twist to the country's ancient vines.
And this month, the I-List scene is in Poland. After a year of disasters, including the plane crash which killed its president, Frederik Pleitgen that's a look at how its economy may be turning the country's fortunes around.
FREDERIK PLEITGEN, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Polpharma is Poland's largest producer of pharmaceuticals and most of its production lines are running at full capacity. Its management says the firm was not hit by the worldwide economic crisis. Instead, it's expanding.
TOMASZ MOYS, BU PHARMA DIRECTOR, POLPHARMA: We are investing a lot into our capabilities, into new technologies, into the (INAUDIBLE), into the assets just to -- to introduce new products and launching in different countries.
PLEITGEN: Polpharma says Russia and other former Soviet bloc countries are its biggest growth market. And it's not the only polish company to thrive in the face of the crisis. Poland's economy has remained fairly robust in the face of the international downturn. It was the only country in Europe not to dip into recession, thanks, in part, to very low private debt levels, robust domestic demand and a flexible currency.
But growth did slow to a crawl and the international credit agencies have warned that Poland's credit rating may suffer unless it tackles its debts. This year, the deficit is expected to be 7 percent of GDP.
LESZEK BALCEROWICZ, WARSAW SCHOOL OF ECONOMICS: We have to look at what (INAUDIBLE) reforms and such (INAUDIBLE) reforms is everything which raises the unemployment, including postponing the (INAUDIBLE).
PLEITGEN: In the past years, many such reforms fell victim to political infighting and many economists see the upcoming second round of the presidential elections as crucial to breaking that logjam.
But something else could play an even bigger part in Poland's future. This is a drilling tower for gas exploration in the north. International gas companies believe the country could hold huge reserves of shale gas.
KAMLESH PARMAR, COUNTRY MANAGER, LANE ENERGY, POLAND: We have a million acres in this part of the world. And, you know, we hope that our testing will prove that a lot of that is prospective.
PLEITGEN: The exploration has just started in Poland. No one knows whether there is actually gas under the surface. But in light of recent gas disputes between Russia and its customers in Europe, a major discovery would be a game changer for Poland's energy security.
Fred Pleitgen, CNN, Warsaw.
(END VIDEO TAPE)
FOSTER: Well, tomorrow, the enduring legacy of one of Poland's musical icons.
FOSTER: This year marks the 200th anniversary of the birth -- the birth of Frederic Chopin. Find out why his work is still inspiring millions around the world.
That's part of our I-List special tomorrow right here on CONNECT THE WORLD.
That complaining made the difference. England might still be in the hunt. They obviously scored a goal against Germany on Sunday. But the referee didn't see it.
Should football join other sports in adopting the instant replay?
MAX FOSTER, CNN HOST: You're back with Connect The World. I'm Max Foster in London. Coming up, technology is the World Cup buzz word of the day. You can watch football in 3-D on your television, so why can't referees watch instant replay or have goal line technology?
Thank politics for a different tune. We look at how some high profile musicians are choosing to defy the cultural boycott by performing in Israel. And one of America's most celebrated movie directors, Oliver Stone, answers your questions as our Connector of the Day.
All those stories ahead in the show for you. But first, we're going to check the headlines this hour. A remarkable, peaceful process. That's what international observers are saying about weekend elections in Kyrgyzstan.
More than 90 percent of voters approved a new constitution. It reduces the powers of the president and sets the stage for parliamentary elections. Turn out was high despite fears of violence after this month's deadly ethnic riots.
Iran's president is forcing the west to wait until the end of August. At that time, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, can sit down for nuclear talks. The delay, he says, is to punish the west for new sanctions against Iran.
Israel has launched an official probe into last month's deadly raid on an aid ship to Gaza. Turkey, meanwhile, says it will allow Israeli military flights into its airspace only a case-by-case basis.
The Netherlands advance to the quarter finals, Slovakia doesn't. The Dutch scores two goals to Slovakia's one. It was all Brazil in the first half of their matchup with Chile. By halftime, the score was two-nil. At the end of the match, it was Brazil three, Chile, nil. The Netherlands now face Brazil in the semi-finals.
A look at highlights of today's round of 16-play let's go to Johannesburg and Alex Thomas, what do you reckon to be the Brazil game first of all, Alex, just finished?
ALEX THOMAS, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Yes. Hard to believe that Brazil coach Dunga was under fire from the Brazilian media before this tournament, Max. They said he wasn't playing to Brazil's traditional strengths, entertaining and playing with flair. But you know, they got plenty of excitement as we can see from the highlights of their action against Chile in their round of 16 match.
Took place at Ellis Park here in Johannesburg. It took Brazil to the 35th minute to open the scoring when Juan rose above the Chile defense to head home Maicon's cross. You can see from the replay, Brazilians just as good with their heads as they are with their feet. And it became two no later in the first half with good work from Robinho down the left, quick passing, Kaka onto Louis Fabiano, the Sevilla striker beating the offside trap and hitting the back of the neck. A quality finish from Fabiano as it was with Robinho in the second half.
Ramires doing the build up play here. Robinho when he gets the ball a nice finish from the edge of the air, it's the sort of the thing he wasn't doing with Manchester City at the start of the season, but a different animal when he gets together with the Brazilian side. Brazil, three-nil winners over Chile.
Let's take you through the action from the earlier round of 16 game taking place in Durbin between Holland and Slovakia. Slovakia knocking out world champions back for the Dutch, and you know it was Robin who made an instant impact after the 18th minute cutting in from the right and scoring with his left foot. An excellent goal.
Slovakia didn't get a shot on target until the second half. This chance for Miroslav's stock needed a good save from the Dutch goal keeper. Poland increased their lead to two-nil six minutes from time when dirk count passed to Wesley Schneider for a confident finish from the Inter Milan midfielder. Than a penalty incident towards the end. Going Slovakia's way, going down in the box and up stepped Robert Bisek to start the ball home from the penalty spot. Not enough though. Holland beating Slovakia two-one setting up a blockbuster quarter final match Holland against brazil. We believe they last played in the 1998 world cup and that's when Holland reached the quarter finals last time.
FOSTER: That's good stuff. Alex, thank you very much indeed. Now to err is human, but err during the World Cup is unforgiveable, certainly at least to the side that comes out of the losing end of the slip up. On Sunday, England scored a goal against Germany, but the referee and the other officials missed it.
So is it finally time for some sort of instant replay? Terry Baddoo looks at the option of taking a second look.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TERRY BADDOO, CNN CORRESPONDENT: When is a goal not a goal, and when is a goal a goal? According to FIFA, when the referee and his assistants say it is regardless of what the thousands of people inside the stadium and the millions watching around the world can see by instant television replays.
But should Frank Lampard's disallowed goal for England against Germany and Carlos Tevez's blatantly offside goal for Argentina against Mexico be a watershed that prompts FIFA to change its mind?
FABIO CAPELLO: It's incredible, the power of technology, the power of some games. We played with five referees that can't decide if it's goal or no goal. We have just a hair to speak about one goal and probably the game was -- would be different after this goal.
Of course, Sunday's incidents were not the first to raise questions about FIFA's no technology policy. During the 2010 World Cup qualifiers, the playoff game between France and Ireland was decided by a highly controversial goal from France's William Galast who scored after a blatant handball from Thierry Henry that prompted a storm of protest but no action from FIFA which decided against using technology goal line or otherwise at this World Cup.
SEPP BLATTER, FIFA PRESIDENT: And I think it is too complicated. It's too complicated, one with the commercial part and the other one is the technical part. The hawk eye, even the producer of the hawk eye, Mr. Hawkins, he was there, they have to admit that even with seven cameras if the ball is in a bunch of players, a camera cannot see the ball, then you cannot say it is in or out.
FIFA's refusal to use technology is all the more mystifying because the precedent has been set in so many other sports. In North America, football, basketball, ice hockey, and baseball each use video replays to help officials make crucial decisions.
And tennis was among the first to embrace technology by the use of hawk eye for line calls. A system the inventor claims is cost-effective and accurate.
DR. PAUL HAWKINS: The fact is, is that we've been tested independently both by the league and secondly by FIFA themselves, the technical committee and they very thoroughly tested the key issue for the camera system of many players around the ball. And we showed it to work in 100 percent of cases, in crowded penalty boxes, we showed it to work.
So the fact that they don't understand how it can work is irrelevant. They don't need to. They're not technology people. They don't need to work. All they need to do is look at the evidence that shows that the system is 100 percent accurate.
No one's saying that headlines like these would have been avoided had Lampard's goal been allowed because England was simply beaten by a much better team on the day, and as were Mexico in their game. But surely in a sport with so much riding on the outcome, reducing human error would be a good thing. When is a goal a goal? When everyone can see it's a goal. Terry Baddoo, CNN, London.
FOSTER: This one's going to rumble. Certainly in London. Now Israel sparked international outrage when its commandos stormed an aid ship bound for Gaza. Now some high profile musicians say they won't perform in Israel. But others say art and politics should be kept apart. We'll explore this hot topic next.
FOSTER: A deadly raid at sea may close the skies to Israeli war planes over Turkey. A Turkish government official says Israel will have to request permission before any more Israeli war planes are allowed into Turkish airspace. Ankara is still furious over Israel's raid on the Gaza aid flotilla last month that killed nine Turkish activists. Civilian flights are continuing though.
Israel, meanwhile has launched an investigation into the May 31st flotilla raid. A commission headed up by a retired Supreme Court judge, a retired general, and a law professor began proceedings today. It plans to call top Israeli officials to testify, including Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Ehud Barack.
The raid sparked international condemnation and a number of musical artists are voicing their voices now by not making noise in Israel. But some high profile musicians are defying the cultural boycott. Let's get more now from Paula Hancocks who is in Jerusalem.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
ELTON JOHN: Shalom. We are very happy to be here. Ain't going to stop me coming here, baby.
PAULA HANCOCKS, CNN CORRESPONDENT: A defiant Elton John plays to thousands in Tel Aviv refusing to heed calls for an artistic boycott of Israel and his fans appreciated it.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Music is music. Politics is politics, and you shouldn't mix the two together.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Other people have cancelled and it seems that we're the lepers of the world today and he hasn't, and he's stuck to his guns. He came here for music, not politics.
HANCOCKS: Big names have cancelled over recent months. Elvis Costello cancelled in May, he says as a matter of instinct and conscience protesting Israel's treatment of the Palestinians.
Singer-songwriter Santana cancelled a concert this year. He said it was a scheduling issue, but it is assumed here in Israel that it was political.
And U.S. rock group The Pixies cancelled just days after the deadly Israeli raid on a Gaza-bound aid flotilla. They blamed "events beyond our control." Omar Barghouti is part of an international group that tries to convince artists to boycott Israel.
OMAR BARGHOUTI: People are starting to see, as in South Africa and the apartheid struggle, that Israel should be held accountable to international law, and artists have a responsibility to do their part by refusing to entertain apartheid Israel.
HANCOCKS: Roger Waters, a member of legendary rock group Pink Floyd made a documentary with the United Nations criticizing Israel's security fence or separation barrier.
ROGER WATERS: I may be speaking out of turn, but I believe that we, the rest of the world, need this generation of Israelis to tear down the walls.
HANCOCKS: In 2006, Waters rejected a chance to perform in Tel Aviv, instead choosing Neve Shalom, an Israeli village with both Arab and Jewish residents. It is held up as an example of co-existence.
Israeli music promoter, Shuki Wiess believes artistic activism is misplaced. SHUKI WEISS: Artists got a lot of power, and I think they should use it, but not by boycott, but by saying what you want to say at the heart of the conflict.
Weiss calls these boycotts cultural terrorism and welcomes artists like Elton John who ignore the politics of the region with open arms. Paula Hancocks, CNN, Jerusalem.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
FOSTER: One of Britain's largest trade unions now is also calling for a boycott of Israel and expulsion even of its Israel Ambassador to the U.K. So do these boycotts even work? Well I'm joined now by David Makovsky in Washington.
He's a former executive editor of "The Jerusalem Post" and a senior fellow and director of the Washington Institute Project on the Middle East Peace Process. He's also the co-author of Myths, Illusions, and Peace: Finding a New Direction for America and the Middle East.
Thank you for joining us. I mean what do you make of these boycotts? I mean how does Israel interpret them? What sort of impact do they have there?
DAVID MAKOVSKY, AUTHOR: Well I think it's going to just kind of add to a siege mentality that says the world is against us so hunker down. And I think that's the wrong message. The message is you got to build bridges, not destroy them. Imagine if the British trade union would say we're going to help build links between the Histadrut, the Israeli trade union and the Palestinian trade union. And we're going to invest in peace.
That would be an important message. Just to tell people lift the blockade. Well the blockade has already been eased, all consumer goods is going to be going in, thanks to an understanding worked out between the United States and Israel. It's not going to do anything.
If the Israelis think that lifting as opposed to just easing the blockade means that all the missiles could come into Gaza that were there before, and 3300 of them were fired against Israeli cities after Israel got out of Gaza, their view is their existence is going to be more important than if a few musicians play in Israel.
So I think that we've got to be smarter about this and talk about how to build partnerships. We can't build a two-state solution if we tear down one of those two states.
FOSTER: The younger audience in Israel perhaps would be affected by these stars not coming there. Perhaps they would consider the policy issues here as a result of their heroes really getting involved in the issue as well.
MAKOVSKY: I understand that artists think that they can, you know, will have some cultural influence in these societies. But I think the way to do it is even to have a joint concert of Israelis and Palestinians and bring people together.
Use your influence to be a force for good. Just to tell people to boycott you and say we're going to turn you into a pariah, that's not going to have any positive influence. It's just going to marginalize the very people that could have an influence for the good.
The way is how do we use these cultural performers to build a bridges and bring Israeli's and Palestinians together, not to tear them apart.
FOSTER: Does it make you angry that these people are perhaps making naive judgments about what you think is a very complicated subject?
MAKOVSKY: I don't know that it makes me angry, you know, but I think it's just a shame. It's just a waste. I'm sure these people have good intentions, but they could use their influence for good and trying to build ways that could you know bring these people together.
These issues are complex, and it's very simplistic just to think well I'm not going to perform. That's my statement. It's not going to have any impact, and it's a pity. It's a waste. Let's use these performers to bring Israelis and Palestinians together, rebuild the centers of these societies that in the 90s were critical in building these compromises.
But there's an environment of polarization, and my fear is that things like this just, you know, reinforce this environment of polarization and they don't do peace any good.
FOSTER: Okay, David Makovsky in Washington, thank you for that. Now Vietnam Veteran turned movie mogul, Oliver Stone has won Academy Awards for films inspired by his military experiences. Yet, his portrayal of Latin American leaders like Hugo Chavez, Fidel Castro are nothing if not controversial. See how he defends his viewpoints and criticizes CNN's. Just ahead.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
HANCOCKS: Whether he's mocking a U.S. presidency, challenging Wall Street or touting the virtues of socialism, one thing is certain. Oliver Stone does not shy away from controversy.
The acclaimed director is known around the world for films including "Wall Street," "Midnight Express" and "Natural Born Killers." He has three Academy Awards to his name and branched into writing and producing. Stone's own experience fighting in the Vietnam War provided him the backdrop for some of his most famous films including "Platoon" and "Born on the Fourth of July."
Most recently, he's turned heads with films like "W." and "World Trade Center." This year, Stone spent time delving into Latin American politics. He's incited anger around the world with his controversial new documentary entitled "South of the Border" which condemns the capitalist systems of the west while portraying leaders like Chavez in a sympathetic light.
Pushing boundaries at every turn, Oliver Stone is your Connector of the Day.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
FOSTER: And Oliver Stone certainly becomes a controversial figure too. As to his characters in "South of the Border." I spoke to our Connector of the Day a little earlier and I began by asking him to describe the film in his own words.
OLIVER STONE: Well, look this is a documentary about a social transformation of historical proportions that's being going on for the last 10 years. There are six, actually seven democratically-elected leaders in these countries that have transformed their countries economically and socially.
They have met with a tremendous amount of criticism from the United States and also from their local media which is controlled by rich families inside their countries. They have been hounded mercilessly and their stories have been -- many stories have been false about them, and this is what the movie's about. It shows you a glimpse into that world.
I go to see Hugo Chavez first and then I follow up with six of his neighbors.
FOSTER: We've got lots of questions coming in, a lot of Venezuelans actually angry about your portrayal of Chavez. Jose asks, "what is it about him that you like, and do you really not think the people of Venezuela suffer under him?"
STONE: Yes, listen, generally speaking, when you get -- let's call them the 20, 30 percent that have a fairly good life before the Chavez was elected president would, of course, like anybody who doesn't like the system, gripe about it.
And the opposition in Venezuela is enormously vociferous and colorful and vibrant. They are insulting the president. In 2002, there was what they called a media coup. We show that in our movie. Most of the opposition is owned by private families so they are teeing off on Chavez as is the mainstream media in America.
FOSTER: Okay, another question from a viewer then, in Sardine, says that "people like Chavez and Morales are demigods and that any analysis shows that their actions have failed to eradicate poverty or generate well- being. What's your response to that, because you can't honestly say that they have eradicated poverty.
STONE: You will never eradicate poverty anywhere in the world. In the United States we have poverty. You know come on, let's cut the crap. The World Bank says the poverty rate was cut 50 percent by 2008 from 2003.
The extreme poverty rate was cut 70 percent. What Venezuela was like before 1998 you have to go back to that and see the water protests, I'm sorry, the protests about bus fare increases, all the prices, the inflation rate was much higher back then. It was an untenable situation run by basically oligarchs who did not improve the lot of the people.
Chavez has taken the economy in the direction of the people. There's no question about this. I mean I don't know why these people cite -- what statistics they cite. The end of poverty --
FOSTER: You're clearly in support of Venezuela and Chavez, but are you --.
STONE: Don't say I'm a supporter of Venezuela and Chavez. I'm a supporter of the big picture in Latin America.
FOSTER: But it's not a balance --
STONE: Huge Chavez is one of six presidents.
FOSTER: It's not a balanced documentary. It is trying very much to give their perspective on what you say is an unfair perspective over the years.
STONE: I wish you'd seen the daily press or the weekly press in America about Chavez and how critical it is of him and how critical most of the networks are of him, and it's unbelievable considering in the relative index of Latin America, the murders that are going on in Honduras and Mexico, the human rights violations in Columbia where they have the paramilitaries that have killed close to probably 100 to 200,000 people.
In Venezuela, if one journalist were murdered it would be a headline all over the world because you have such a double standard about Venezuela.
FOSTER: The suggestion is from your documentary is that it's almost romanticized. You've almost gone too far the other way and it's too positive when you're not pointing out any of the negativities--
STONE: Oh come on. Come on, please.
FOSTER: -- of the countries. There's negativity in --
STONE: What are you talking about? Twenty percent of that documentary is criticism of Chavez, starting with the American media tearing him down hysterically and the local media is portrayed in the movie as insulting him constantly, and it's still going on. The opposition is enormous in Venezuela.
It's clear in the movie. Now, whether I bring it up to date. Look, it's an hour and twenty minutes. I'm touring six countries. I'm obviously doing this as an introduction to these countries, but you guys want to drag it down into this place where it becomes a debate and you nitpick but you miss the big picture and that's what I'm trying to say. There is a bigger picture than all the nitpicking.
FOSTER: I'm not nitpicking. I'm just trying to sort of --
STONE: The opposition will drag you --
FOSTER: -- get a balanced view on documentary about a country which has got lots of problems and we want to celebrate the positives, but we also can't ignore the negatives.
STONE: But you don't. But you don't celebrate. When you go and you say one's a negative thing about the Venezuelan economy after another, it's insane because you're not looking at there is the positive, and you don't take the positive seriously --
FOSTER: But the negative and the positive have to be balanced.
STONE: Sir, I wish you'd look at YouTube or you know, look at most of what's written about Chavez. You call that balanced? It's not. It's not even close to balanced. Where do we start here? Somebody's got to be the counterbalance to the madness that's enveloped the situation.
What is it about our western economies or our Western media that needs to attack poor countries when they try for reform. That's what I don't understand, because they go about it in a way that's anti-corporate. They're not interested in corporate interest. They want to get the profits to the people, and somehow that upsets the western media, upsets the rich people, and they go and they hammer them and they hammer them and they hammer.
Every country in the world. I've seen it all my life, again and again. It's going on again. And then you talk about fair and balanced, fair and balanced. Well it's your fair and balanced. It's not their fair and balanced.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
FOSTER: Hear more from Oliver Stone here on Connect The World tomorrow. He'll weight in on Wall Street men and on bankers bonuses. It's a great interview worth watching. Send in your comments. Check out our past cages as well, and who's coming up on the show soon at CNN.com/connect. We'll be back in a moment.
FOSTER: Now after a number of controversies, we've been asking you if it's time for football to embrace technology. JustinM83 writes "Do you really think it's too much to take five seconds to get the call right? Would you rather have riots in the streets over blown calls that cost their team the game?"
Not quite riots yet but possibly a lot of anger, certainly here in the U.K. Another writes first the infamous Thierry Henry hand-ball, then the goals that the U.S. Team got cheated out of. England's clear goal, Argentina's offside, Come on!"
Engineering7 has a solution. "If FIFA keeps complaining about time that video reviews would take, then why not employ another two referees.
Get your voice heard on CNN. It's a fierce debate. Head to our website, CNN.com/connect. That is your show, Connected tonight. I'm Max Foster. Back Story is next. We're going to check the headlines first.