Return to Transcripts main page
Connect the World
Britain Ramps Up Libya Efforts; A Year After America's Worst Environmental Disaster
Aired April 19, 2011 - 16:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: These are not fighting forces. They are not going to engage in battlefield activity.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BECKY ANDERSON, CNN ANCHOR: Britain ramps up its efforts in Libya but the British foreign secretary tells me that the U.K. is not putting boots on the ground.
Under attack, rebels say they need help and need it now. So what is it that the international community is prepared to do next.
Plus, a year on from America's worst ever environmental disaster. Has the oil industry managed to clean up its act?
And all heads back to Buckingham Palace, to see how preparations are going for the imminent royal wedding.
Those stories and more tonight as we CONNECT THE WORLD.
Well, Britain insists it isn't (INAUDIBLE) but its announcement of new help for the Libyan opposition is raising questions tonight, about whether U.N. mandate is being stretched from protecting civilians to taking sides in a civil war where Britain says it is sending its senior military officers to the rebel stronghold of Benghazi to help the opposition improve military organizational structures, communications and logistics. Well, Britain's foreign secretary says that does not amount to training or arming the Libyan rebels.
William Hague also says the military assistance does not violate the U.N. resolution that authorized force in Libya. Well, that resolution prohibits any and I quote "foreign occupation force on Libyan soil." I talked earlier with Secretary Hague, asking him to explain exactly how the deployment of British military officers does effectively amount to boots on the ground.
Just listen.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
WILLIAM HAGUE, BRITISH FOREIGN SECRETARY: Well this is helping them to organize themselves. This is mentoring rather than training. This is not training the fighting forces of the opposition. It's not training people how to use specific pieces of equipment or what to do in the battlefield. This is organizational assistance and expertise. And so this is how you organize your structures. This is how you organize your communications or your logistics on the basis that if they can do that, they will be in a better position to protect civilian life.
ANDERSON: Forgive me, that sounds like training.
HAGUE: It's not training the fighting forces. It's very clear. It's helping with the organization of the headquarters but it's not training or arming the fighting forces of the opposition. So there are very clear distinctions between those two things.
ANDERSON: If those British officers, who are involved in this, your contingent were to be attacked by Gadhafi, will they fight back in self defense?
HAGUE: Well, their protection really comes from the opposition side. They are working--
(CROSSTALK)
HAGUE: So these are not fighting forces. So they are not going to engage in battlefield activity. These are advisers. These are people who know about organizational aspects. They are not people who are there to fight the war themselves.
ANDERSON: Wouldn't you be safer to go after another resolution which would give you more scope at this point.
HAGUE: Well, I don't think there's any need for that to do this because as I said, I'm confident this is well within the United Nations' resolutions, the provisions to take all necessary measures in order to protect the civilian population of Libya. I think that is well within that. What the resolution rules out is an occupation, a foreign occupation of any part of Libya. And clearly sending a small number of people to give advice is not an occupation.
ANDERSON: Do you expect our allies to follow suit?
HAGUE: I think there will be other countries that take similar measures, clearly there are other European countries with a diplomatic presence in Benghazi and they have also continued to increase that presence. So yes, there may well be one or two other countries that take the same step.
ANDERSON: How long do you think these British officers will be on the ground?
HAGUE: Well, they will be there for as long as it's necessary. This is not overall something where you can say it comes to an end tomorrow or next week. We have to take urgent action last month. It wasn't possible to say as we were quite clear about then to say how long this will take. I think time is against the Gadhafi regime however. I think diplomatically the coalition is strengthening. The military tempo of the NATO commanded activity has been stepped up in recent days. We will give this additional assistance and it is necessary to give it. Time is against the Gadhafi regime and I hope the people still supporting that regime now realize that.
ANDERSON: What constitutes success for you?
HAGUE: The implementation of the resolution, certainly our military activities defined by the UN resolution but I think it's also clear that there is no viable or peaceful way forward for Libya while Colonel Gadhafi remains there and the entire Arab world and most of the rest of the world is united in saying that he should go.
ANDERSON: Are you getting enough support from Arab states?
HAGUE: Well, we're getting a lot of support. More support is always welcome, but there is a lot of support. And actually this is a remarkable thing, and I really noted it and spoke about it at a NATO meeting in Berlin last week. There we were the NATO nations, sitting there with six Arab nations. This is the first time such nations have ever been engaged in a military or humanitarian operation together. And if we can carry this through to success, if again but I believe we will do so, then it will be quite a milestone in world affairs that Arab nations and NATO nations have brought something about successfully together.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
ANDERSON: William Hague speaking to me earlier today while Britain takes pain to stress that it's not putting boots on the ground. That is exactly what some rebels are now begging the west to do.
An opposition spokesman in Misrata says that the foreign troops must intervene to protect residents under siege, saying I quote "If they don't come, we will die."
Reza Sayah is following all the day's development from Benghazi and joins us. Now, you've heard what the British foreign minister said to me today, "we're not putting boots on the ground," he says simply advise for those military operators on the ground, for the rebels (INAUDIBLE) is that enough?
REZA SAYAH, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, look at this point, the rebels are going to take any help they can get but if their goal remains a military victory for the Gadhafi regime, removing Colonel Gadhafi from power, I don't think mentors is going to be enough. Mentors is kind of vague phrase. We're not clear exactly what they're capable of doing but if they wanted to achieve military victory over the Gadhafi regime, at the least right now, they're going to need some heavy weapons and they're going to need some military trainers. Trainers who come here on the ground and teach these mostly amateur soldiers how to use these weapons.
And realistically if they wanted to achieve military victory right now, they're going to need boots on the ground, which is obviously a notion that they have flatly rejected. So that's why you have these stalemate on the battlefield and it's the worst kind of stalemate because the fighting continues and you have people dying including civilians. And until and unless the international community, NATO, U.N. changes its position, either backs off or gets more aggressive, there's no sign that things are going to change. This U.N. resolution 1973 is very limited. It has some wiggle room but I think you're also seeing the challenges of multi-lateralism. NATO mission where you don't have all member states agreeing on the same strategy, some do want to get more aggressive, some don't.
So a lot of questions remain, Becky, on the battlefield.
ANDERSON: All right.
SAYAH: Again, it's a stalemate. Every day people are getting hurt. People are dying.
ANDERSON: Very briefly, what is the situation on the ground, as you understand it?
SAYAH: Yes, the eastern front remains pretty much the same. The front line is somewhere between Ajdabiya and Brega but much of the focus is on Misrata where the fighting continues. Heavy shelling again today and opposition officials telling us over the past 48 hours, more than 20 people have been killed. More than 100 people injured. Again, that port area is being targeted with shelling about 4,000 or 5,000 migrant workers remain. These humanitarian ships are continuing missions there but it's getting tougher for them.
One, they're running out of money. Two, it's getting more and more dangerous for them to conduct these missions.
ANDERSON: Reza Sayah, on the ground in Libya, for you this evening. Reza, thank you for that.
Well, France is one of the biggest international backers of the Libyan rebels, as you know. But it's sending ground troops to help them would be a bad idea. Well, today foreign minister Alain Jupee said he was "entirely hostile to any such deployment." Prime Minister Francois Fillon said "France is respecting the United Nation's mandate to the letter." Russia though says that it's clear that the U.N. mandate to protect Libyan civilians is being hijacked by countries that want regime change.
Today foreign minister Sergey Lavrov also said that western opposition to Moammar Gadhafi is encouraging the rebels to refuse negotiations that could led to a cease-fire.
Let's get some perspective now, what we've learned tonight, whether the Libyan war might be entering a new phase where we could see perhaps possibly greater western involvement. We are joined tonight by our expert guest Carne Ross, former British diplomat and director of the diplomatic advisory group, Independent Diplomat. He spent nearly five years in the U.K. delegation on the United Nation's Security Council.
So if you are advising the U.K. foreign minister ahead of my interview, what would you have thought the most prescient lines or narrative were?
CARNE ROSS, FORMER BRITISH DIPLOMAT: Well, that's a very good question because I think he is walking a very, very thin line in terms of how this works presentationally. Clearly, there's going to be a lot of domestic concern about what is clearly an escalation of British military involvement and secondly there is a lot of international questioning. You heard the Russians have raised objections already as to whether a military deployment like this on the ground is actually mandated by the security council resolution that had been passed so far. He walked that line very carefully, I thought.
ANDERSON: Yes. I mean, he says to me, no boots on the ground. No foreign fighting forces effectively. This is not even training. This is about advising the rebels. But I mean, this is clearly, certainly, some would say a sort of an intelligent interpretation of what resolution 1973 allows at this point. There is no doubt there are increasing numbers of people, British military officers on the ground on one assumes things could get worse before they get better.
ROSS: Yes, I think the line between advise and training is not one that will be barely appreciated outside of the U.K., particularly by non- English speakers. But the authority given by resolution 1973 is quite broad as long as it's about the protection of civilians. It allows no fly zone. It allows for any military intervention to protect civilians, short of occupation. So clearly that does allow some kind of ground deployment but the British challenge and the challenge for NATO and it's allies is to present this deployment as being about the protection of civilians rather than about the overthrow of the regime.
ANDERSON: I felt that Britain, to a certain extent went out on a limb today. I asked the foreign minister whether he has spoken to President Sarkozy, for example, of France, and whether they were sort of on-board. He said they were aware of what the British were doing. Do you believe that the international community is singing from the same song sheet at this point, with regards to Libya?
ROSS: Not unanimously at all. I mean, the international community is anything but unanimous about it. 1973 was passed with five abstentions from five of the major countries of the world. So there's no unity among the international community. Amongst the coalition, clearly there's a great deal of sort of behind the scenes concern about how this should be presented and where this is going. But equally one is sympathetic to the requirement for further military engagement by the allies because clearly the rebels are having a great deal of problems in defending Misrata and in making any progress against Gadhafi and the U.S.-French-U.K. objective is very clear, which is to get rid of Gadhafi. And so if you want that to happen, clearly more is going to be done militarily to support the rebels.
I got the sense listening to William Hague today, really the U.K. is betting in for the long term. Clearly, this military campaign is going to take a long time and the rebels are going to be a lot more militarily effective if they are to make progress against Gadhafi in order to support that military effort diplomatically, the U.K. and others are going to have to do a lot of work to keep the coalition together. So far, they've been successful but this is going to get tougher before it gets easier.
ANDERSON: More questions than answers this evening but we thank you for joining us. You're an expert on this subject tonight.
ROSS: Thank you.
ANDERSON: - about Libya for you.
15 minutes past the hour. Out of London, you're watching CONNECT THE WORLD. I'm Becky Anderson. After the break, a familiar face reappears in Cuba. We're going to tell you why Fidel Castro was out in public and examining some proposals that could mean change.
And later our focus is on the Gulf of Mexico where top environmentalists take a look at the state of the coast one year on from the BP oil disaster. You're with CNN. Stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
ANDERSON: Getting tough on offshore drilling. The U.S. government says it will propose new rules to make it safer. The announcement comes on the eve of the one year anniversary of the largest offshore oil spill in U.S. history.
And on CONNECT THE WORLD, we'll bring you the results of a surprising new poll and asked one year on, have the right lessons been learned? I'm Becky Anderson in London. You're watching CONNECT THE WORLD here out of London.
Here's a look at the other stories that we are following with you this hour.
New moves from the Syrian government following the latest eruption of violence there.
Witnesses tell CNN three or four protesters were killed when security forces fired on activities in Homs. Many other people were reported wounded. President Bashar al-Assad's cabinet now approved a draft decree to abolish the country's controversial emergency laws which had been in place since 1963 but new proposed law would mean citizens now need a permit to protest.
Some 17,000 people in northern Nigeria have fled their homes amid deadly post election riots there. The violence erupted following claims that the vote that saw incumbent Goodluck Jonathan win the presidency was rigged. The Red Cross says it has treated 360 people for injuries and is reporting deaths, the numbers have not been confirmed. Mr. Jonathan has appealed for unity (INAUDIBLE) deeply divided nation.
Well, the Communist Party in Cuba approved sweeping changes in the country's economy today, including massive layoffs in the pubic sector. And despite a promise from President Raul Castro that they would rejuvenate the government's top post, the gathering was full of familiar places.
CNN's Shasta Darlington reports.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
SHASTA DARLINGTON, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Cuba's former president Fidel Castro made a rare, unexpected appearance at a summit of the Congress party today, convenes to approve sweeping economic reforms. Perhaps even more unusual was seeing Fidel and Raul Castro together ever since Fidel handed power to his younger brother in 2006, the two have barely rarely been seen in public. So this sends a strong message of unity on a day that the party had elected Raul to succeed Fidel as its head, as its first secretary.
And it was also important because it showed support for these deep economic changes that were approved. We're talking paving the way for more private enterprise, implementing massive layoffs in the public sector. The Congress also approved changes to allow Cubans to buy and sell homes and cars for the first time in decades.
Now on the political front, Raul Castro proposed limiting politicians to two five-year terms in office, is a pretty unusual move from a man whose family has been in power for 52 years. Now on the other hand, the Congress also elected another member of this historic generation. Jose Ramon Machado Ventura to the number two spot. And that may come as a disappointment to some who hoped and expected to see some younger faces, some new faces elevated to show signs that the country is thinking and moving ahead.
Shasta Darlington, CNN, Havana.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
ANDERSON: All right. Up next, a disaster which claimed the lives of 11 men, released 200 million gallons of oil into the sea. It was the worst oil spill in U.S. history. One year on, how much progress have been made. That, up next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
ANDERSON: Plumes of black smoke rising into the sky. These are the images all over our TV screens a year ago. I'm sure you remember. Wednesday marks the first anniversary of the BP oil disaster in the Gulf of Mexico. 11 men were killed in that explosion but destroyed the Deep Water Horizon rig and unleashed the worst offshore oil spill in the U.S. history.
You're watching CONNECT THE WORLD here on CNN.
One year on, some good news. All federal waters affected by the spill are now open to fishing. That's (INAUDIBLE) on the fish, oysters, crabs and shrimps were practically all clear of dispersants. However, as Philippe Cousteau discovered, it will take years to assess the full environmental effect of the disaster.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
PHILIPPE COUSTEAU, (voice-over): These are the clean beaches of Gulf Shores, Alabama. They are regularly maintained to make sure the tourism industry here that was devastated last year can bounce back. But the beaches in Alabama are not all clean. A fact that concerns environmentalist Casi Calloway who grew up in this area.
CASI CALLOWAY, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MOBILE BAYKEEPER: We are known for sugar white beaches. So fine, so pure with nothing but shell in there and not even a whole lot of shell but what we're seeing now is oil and goo and tar and who knows what else that's all inter mix and intertwined, not just in the sand but often right behind the first wave line, right behind the dune.
COUSTEAU: Because of the dispersants used during the Deep Water Horizon oil spill, the oil takes the form of small tar bars, about 35 kilometers to the west of Gulf Shores, we find a beach that is covered in them.
CALLAWAY: This beach hasn't been "deep cleaned." But every day something new washes ashore. So some new layer. And if you just (INAUDIBLE) you might think it's just pebbles but what it is, all of these, are tar balls.
COUSTEAU (on camera): And here we go. Just mushy, gross.
CALLAWAY: And you can smell it.
COUSTEAU: You can smell the hydrocarbons which means there are still some toxicity to these.
CALLAWAY: Potentially, yes.
COUSTEAU (voice-over): Tar balls like these will be a presence on the Gulf Coast beaches for decades but scientists say they are relatively non- toxic. The greater concern is the unknown. After the introduction of so much oil to the Gulf Coast, scientists are still not sure how the ecosystem will respond.
MONTY GRAHAM, MARINE SCIENTIST: Once you take the system that's going and productive and producing fish and all of a sudden, you say, OK, now you're going to behave like this, there's not a very large amount of time for things to compensate, to deal with new sources of energy and new pathways within food chains and so you can have a short term effect, actually cascade out into a long term problem.
COUSTEAU: A long term problem that affects so many livelihood along the Gulf Coast. Lynn Wickman's shop in nearby Dolphin Island took a hit during last year's tourism drop off but she did not have to close. Thanks in part to money from BP.
LYNN WICKMAN, OWNER, TREASURE TROVE: Well, the summer was very slow. I don't think we made as much in June, July and August as we did in March.
REPORTER; She hopes the U.S. can learn some lessons from this disaster.
WICKMAN: I know that we have to have energy and I know that we're not prepared at this time to switch to wind or to switch to water, switch to (INAUDIBLE). We don't have enough of it. So we're stuck with some of the dirty energy. And I think we're just going to have to start making that move now toward clean energy.
COUSTEAU: The change that can help protect this environment for future generations.
For CNN, I'm Philippe Cousteau.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
ANDERSON: Well, despite calls for clean energy push, like the one you just heard in Philippe's report, support for increase offshore oil drilling is on the rise. According to a CNN poll, 69 percent of Americans, that's more than two thirds say the increase drilling - with just over three in 10 opposed. That's up 20 points from last June.
Government today announced new rules to strengthen offshore drilling safety, to some though, it's image will always be tarnished. More on how offshore drilling has been affected and some of the lessons learned perhaps. I'm joined by energy expert, David Pumphrey, live from Washington.
I talked about the lessons learned, have we learned anything?
DAVID PUMPHREY, CENTER FOR STRATEGIC AND INTL. STUDIES: I think we've learned a lot to this whole process. I think we've learned one thing about how complex engineering systems can fail and what we need to do to prevent them and to understand better and feel like we can just proceed on the basis if we haven't had an accident is impossible. So we are proceeding and really putting in place systems that will allow us to both prevent and then clean up future oil spills if they actually happen.
ANDERSON: Were you surprised as I was by the CNN poll today which shows that two-thirds of Americans are actually in favor of increased offshore drilling. I mean, you know, let's just sort of reflect on where we were a year ago. I can't believe that would have been the result of a poll that way back then.
PUMPHREY: I think that's right. I think a year ago, you would have found perhaps the reverse in terms of the public opinion. I'm a little surprised that the opinion in favor is so high. I think that's driven by the fact that we're now looking at the insecurities that we have in our energy systems, with the high prices, high gasoline prices that we're facing and also the disruptions we've seen in Libya and other places.
ANDERSON: Yes.
PUMPHREY: And so there is an increased recognition that we need to proceed but safely.
ANDERSON: I get a sense (INAUDIBLE) to a certain extent. A sort of massive theory on when it all happened but the fact from the ground equal that one must go on to a certain extent. If our viewers took anything from this year anniversary tonight, what would it be?
PUMPHREY: For this past year that we can make our systems better, we can move ahead, we just had a session today at the place where I work. We've been studying energy and had a session with the new director of the management office for the offshore and it was clear that they've learned a lot about how to put in place containment systems, how to make certain that as they issue new permits in the new future, we would be able to respond and so I think that's the lesson that we've learned that while we have to proceed this is something that we need to develop. We can proceed in a way that's better and safer and provide access to these resources without the kind of damage that we're shown in the package that you showed earlier.
ANDERSON: Out of Washington for you this evening, energy expert David Pumphrey, we thank you.
You're watching CONNECT THE WORLD here on CNN. I'm Becky Anderson in London.
Coming up, wedding bells in Britain mean alarm bells for the London Police Force. What officials are doing to keep spectators and royals alike as safe as possible on April 29th. That and your headlines follow this.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
ANDERSON: You're back with CONNECT THE WORLD here on CNN. I'm Becky Anderson in London.
Coming up, a royal celebration is just days away. How things are shaping up outside of Buckingham Palace.
And remember the white jacket Michael Jackson wore on his hit album "Thriller"? Well, up next, we meet the artist who gave him that famous look.
That all ahead in the next 30 minutes. First, as ever at this point, let's get you a quick check of the headlines.
Britain says it's sending senior military officers to Benghazi to advice the Libyan opposition. It says they'll help organize military structures and improve communications, but they will not arm or train the rebels.
Syria's cabinet has approved a draft decree to repeal the current state of emergency law. It's been in place nearly half a century. The move is an attempt to appease demonstrators and end protest, but a new bill required Syrians to obtain permission if they want to stage a rally.
The Nigerian government has imposed strict curfews and deployed the military to the northern state where post-election riots erupted. Residents are protesting presidential vote results that handed victory to incumbent Goodluck Jonathan.
Eighty-four-year-old Fidel Castro makes a rare appearance at the Communist Party conference in Havana. Delegates elected Cuban president Raul Castro to take over leadership of the party from his brother.
And a milestone for gold. Futures for June delivery hit an intraday record of more than $1500 an ounce. The unrest in the Middle East and a weak US dollar have sent investors rushing to buy a safe haven asset, such as gold. Makes me feel old I remember when it was at $400 on the ounce.
Those are your headlines this hour.
Well, every moment we are inching closer to the royal wedding of Britain's Prince William and Kate Middleton on April the 29th. As you can see here on CNN's official countdown clock -- there it goes. Number of days exactly stand at 9, 13 hours, 26 minutes and, as I speak, 56 seconds.
But just as royal enthusiasts all over the world are watching the countdown clock, some would-be protesters in London are doing the same thing, and British police, in turn, are carefully watching them. CNN's Atika Shubert explains.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
ATIKA SHUBERT, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): The big date is drawing near, and the royal wedding route is under constant watch. The Metropolitan Police check everything, from street lights to drains along the route, while London's closed-circuit TV cameras, more than a million of them, silently monitor the city.
Tens of thousands of well-wishers are expected to flock here, and police have a message for anyone hoping to disrupt the wedding by infiltrating the crowd.
LYNNE OWENS, METROPOLITAN POLICE: You think you're coming to use -- to come London and you intend to use those crowd as a shield, just don't come. My police officers will spot you in the crowds and they will take quick and decisive action to remove you. We won't let anybody disrupt this very exciting day for the royal family and for the country.
SHUBERT (voice-over): So, what are the threats police are looking for? Well, a terror threat is on the top of the list. Sniffer dogs will be used to check for explosives along the wedding route and inside Westminster Abbey. Police say they have no specific intelligence of a terror attack, but are watching for threats from both Islamic extremists and dissident groups from Northern Ireland.
But this attack on the car of Prince Charles and his wife, Camilla, last year also put police on alert. Their car was splattered with paint and a window smashed in, but the royals were unharmed. Police don't want to take any chances with so-called black bloc tactics by anarchists.
OWENS: There's no specific intelligence in relation to this event, but we'd be really naive, wouldn't we, to ignore some of the chatter that you see on some of the social media network sites.
SHUBERT (on camera): So, we checked the chatter online and reached out to several known anarchist groups that are clearly anti-royal, and one of them agreed to talk to us on camera.
SHUBERT (voice-over): Martin Wright and Yodet Gherez are not fans of the royal family or the wedding.
MARTIN WRIGHT, WHITECHAPEL ANARCHIST GROUP: I'd like to see direct action, anything from paint to hand grenades but, quite honestly, there's nothing being planned. There's going to be no march on the royal wedding, no attempt to disrupt it.
SHUBERT (voice-over): They say as much as they'd like to protest, they won't do it on the royal wedding day.
YODET GHEREZ, WHITECHAPEL ANARCHIST GROUP: Sure, I'd like to turn around now with a lighter and set alight all of these flags, but I'm not going to do that, you know?
WRIGHT: It would be simply suicide. They're going to have armed police, snipers on the rooftops, armed plainclothes police in the crowd. You'd probably get torn to pieces by the crowd themselves if you attempted to do anything, never mind shot dead like a dog by the police.
SHUBERT (voice-over): There will be 5,000 uniformed officers on the street. Stop and search tactics might also be used at rail stations and other areas. The royal wedding is a happy event for many, but underpinned by police determination that nothing will disrupt the festivities. Atika Shubert, CNN, London.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
ANDERSON: And while police focus on security, palace officials are tackling more unusual problems, like the uniquely British predicament of what to do when the royal fiancee's family doesn't have a Coat of Arms, for example. Earlier today, Max Foster explained what's going on.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
MAX FOSTER, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, I've been to the College of Arms, a building you might not know about here in London. Been going for 500 years doing exactly the same thing. And their latest commission is this. It's the Middleton Coat of Arms.
I have to say, it's been sort of rushed through. Kate's father's had to create one, basically, because as a proper family in the United Kingdom -- we're sure you've got one, Becky -- you have to have a Coat of Arms, because William, when he marries his wife, will create a new Coat of Arms, it has to merge with his wife's Coat of Arms. She hasn't got one, so they rushed one through. And this is it.
ANDERSON: OK. Well, this is it.
(LAUGHTER)
FOSTER: Yes.
ANDERSON: What is it?
FOSTER: Just to explain --
(LAUGHTER)
FOSTER: They had to make one up. So, the Middletons have basically designed it, the parents. And Kate's had some involvement. Acorns, representing oak trees, common around their family home in Berkshire, of course.
ANDERSON: Right, yes.
FOSTER: Three children, three acorns. Chevrons in the middle, representing a mountain. They enjoy hill-walking in the lake district here in the UK. Also, skiing. And the gold. Carol Middleton's maiden name was Goldsmith.
ANDERSON: Oh, all right. That's gorgeous. We do have a Coat of Arms.
(LAUGHTER)
ANDERSON: What else?
FOSTER: OK, so the first time we're going to see that is on a souvenir wedding program, which is going to be sold by scouts on the wedding day along the route.
And within that, you're going to have the order of service. It's only two pounds, but it'll be very much in demand because they'll become collectors items. You had one for Charles and Di's wedding, of course, as well.
So, that's the traditional stuff, if you like.
ANDERSON: All right. So, it's the order of service --
FOSTER: Yes.
ANDERSON: We'll know what they're going to sing.
FOSTER: Yes.
ANDERSON: The message, I believe, in that --
FOSTER: Yes.
ANDERSON: -- as well.
FOSTER: A new photo from Mario Testino's photo shoot with them.
ANDERSON: Fabulous.
FOSTER: People looking forward to.
ANDERSON: But I also know, they've gone rather sort of 21st century in all of this.
FOSTER: It's amazing, isn't it?
ANDERSON: The royal family -- we know much about so far as their sort of multi-media skills are concerned in the past, and they've really sort of gone digital.
FOSTER: Yes. And you've experienced it as well. Their media handling is so traditional and so controlling, isn't it? But maybe this is about controlling it. They're going absolutely social media crazy. They're going to be issuing photos on Flicker, they're going -- they're going to have a commentary on Twitter.
But what's particularly interesting is the relationship they set up with Google and YouTube. They're going to be live streaming the whole wedding service on YouTube, but they're going to have a commentary coming from St. James's Palace at the same time. So, they're going to be blogging, giving exclusive information.
ANDERSON: Competing with us.
FOSTER: Well, that's one bad. But they've got us, you know. We'll have a lot more.
But that's -- it is very interesting. And also, there's going to be an opportunity for people to send in video messages for a YouTube wedding book which, we're told, Kate and William will be looking at.
ANDERSON: Very good. Thank you.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
ANDERSON: Max Foster for you.
Now, not long to wait. Over the next nine days, we will, of course, bring you extensive coverage of the pending nuptials. To find out more about CNN's coverage, head to our special unveiled website. It's your one- stop shop for everything you need to know about William and Kate and their big day.
Still to come on this show tonight, after a ten-year fight, the censored internet suffix that is now open for business. It's a move that has attracted controversy from unexpected circles. We're going to debate that, up next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
ANDERSON: Triple-X (XXX). There is little doubt as to what we are referring to, here. But did you know that this universal code for pornography was banned as an internet suffix, until now at least. Phil Han explains the controversial approval of what is being touted as an online red light district. And this story, I've got to say, has explicit content that may not be suitable for kids.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
PHILL HAN, CNN DIGITAL PRODUCER (voice-over): In an industry estimated to be worth billions, the purveyors of porn are finding their own online home. After ten years of legal wrangling, the web domain .xxx is officially live on the internet.
Porn and sex.xxx went live on Friday and are being used to promote the new domain for potential buyers. But could it be ten years too late?
JOHN ABELL, WIRED.COM: People that sell pornography online have had no trouble doing so. The joke about the internet is really it's just pornography with a few sort of legitimate sites on there thrown in for laughs.
So, the notion that the business of pornography needs an easy way to remember where they are is kind of ludicrous.
HAN (on camera): ICM Registry, the company behind the domain, says it will start selling addresses in November. Then, it will be up to more established porn sites, which currently use .com, to decide whether they want to use the optional XXX for $70 a year. Now, that's small change for big porn companies, but it's still about seven times the price of the average .com sites.
HAN (voice-over): The XXX domain was first proposed in 2000 and was quickly attacked by conservative groups and rejected after pressure by the Bush administration. While some might expect the porn industry to celebrating the approval, they're actually its biggest critics.
They acknowledge it will make it easier for parents to protect their children from adult content, but they worry it would allow countries with strict internet policies to ban the domain altogether, something Saudi Arabia has already said it will do.
But, in order for that to happen, companies would first have to buy the XXX address, which is far from guaranteed.
ABELL: I personally don't think they're going to be beating down the doors. People will be beating down the doors to cyber squat various "your name here" .xxx domains in the hopes that it will be worth something to -- in a scalping environment.
HAN (voice-over): But with as much as $200 million a year at stake for the domain, buyers and sellers of adult content will be watching the process closely. Phil Han, CNN, London.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
ANDERSON: Well, this is about as polarizing as it gets. Let's bring in a representative from the adult entertainment industry, Diane Duke, who heads up the Free Speech Coalition. Diane joining me tonight from Los Angeles. And from our Washington bureau this evening, we're also joined by Bob Corn-Revere, who's the legal counsel for ICM Registry, who lobbied for the domain to be approved.
Diane, you are, I believe, calling on the sex industry to boycott .xxx. Why?
DIANE DUKE, FREE SPEECH COALITION: We've launched a "Just Say No to .xxx" campaign. We don't believe it's a good business decision for adult industry, and we also don't think that it's serving the purpose that it originally planned on serving.
ANDERSON: And what was that?
DUKE: One of the things that ICM suggested -- one of the same things that ICM suggested when it applied for this was that this was about protecting children.
We think it would be dangerous -- more dangerous for children. We don't want them accessing our materials, and anybody can type in -- kids can type in whatever.xxx and get -- immediately get adult entertainment.
ANDERSON: Bob?
BOB CORN-REVERE, ICM REGISTRY: Well, Diane, I find that just startling that you would make that argument that kids can type in whatever they want and find anything on the internet.
I mean, the whole point of this is to allow people to make a choice. For those in the adult industry that want to use the .xxx domain to do it, it's a voluntary domain, nobody's being forced into it. And for those who don't want adult material in their home, it is yet another way, one of many, that people can choose not to access it.
ANDERSON: Diane?
DUKE: I was just on an interview with Bob Peters, who's the ex- president of Morality in the Media, and what we both agreed was that there were adequate filtering systems already in place for the adult entertainment industry.
This is nothing but a money grab, Bob, from ICM. The industry doesn't want it, the -- Morality in the Media, safe kids proponents don't want it.
ANDERSON: All right --
DUKE: It's a money grab. The only people that will be benefiting from this --
CORN-REVERE: Well, I --
ANDERSON: There's an accusation. Bob, isn't it going to cost the sex industry money to take up this .xxx suffix? Why would they do that? What are the benefits?
CORN-REVERE: Well, they will make their own value -- assess the value proposition for themselves, but the benefit is that you will be in an environment where there is something of a, for lack of a better time, a good housekeeping seal of approval.
It should be win-win for both sides, where those who sign onto the domain guarantee that there will not be any child porn, any spam, any viruses for their websites.
And before Diane says "you're accusing us of doing those things," that's not the point. We all know that there are some out there who do. This is one way of certifying that you're not one of those sites.
Now, it does cost money to be part of it. I don't know when we became all socialists in this matter. Everyone who's doing business in this area is doing it to make money. The point here is, people will make a decision whether or not the money for a .xxx domain is worth it.
And for those who complain that the price is too high, it pays to remember that .com used to be many times more than it costs now.
ANDERSON: All right.
CORN-REVERE: As the volume of people who participate in a domain goes up, the price goes down.
ANDERSON: Diane, you know, it's pretty easy for parents to block things these days, isn't it?
DUKE: Yes, it's really easy. There are already wonderful filter systems set up. And actually, one of the concerns was that it's going to give a false sense of security for parents.
But I do want to address the issue around the voluntary part that Bill -- that Bob was talking about. Yes, it is voluntary, but a lot of our business members are thinking that it's important to protect their brand and their traffic, and by adding another -- by adding a sponsor top-level domain, which is supposed to be supported by the industry, they feel they're almost trapped into having to buy it.
And especially, you said in your story before, Saudi Arabia's going to block it, India's going to block it. There are a number of other countries that are going to block it, so as soon as they purchase it, it's going to lose value.
ANDERSON: Let me step back from this argument --
DUKE: It's a bad business decision.
ANDERSON: -- for just a moment, because I've got two people, here, who are, effectively, working within the industry. What about for those viewers who are watching and saying, "I don't want to encourage more porn on the internet."
It's probably the biggest industry that the internet has at this point. Why should we be working with the industry rather than against it? Bob?
CORN-REVERE: Well, to begin with, it's a common misconception, and sometimes used by those on the religious right of arguing that this is somehow going to encourage more adult material online. It's not going to. It's simply going to provide another domain for sites that are already out there if they choose to use it.
With respect to Diane's point that some countries have announced they're going to block it, first of all, India, there have been some news stories, but absolutely no confirmed reports.
But secondly, for countries like Saudi Arabia, it's hardly news that they block sites of all kinds. Political sites, lifestyle sites and, yes, porn sites. So, to suggest that foreign countries that already have repressive regimes are going to be doing something new because ICM approved the .xxx domain is a fantasy.
ANDERSON: Last word Diane.
DUKE: Well, it -- as far as the fantasy is concerned, the concern that ICM itself had was blocking to the right of the dot is a concern that ICM had about fragmenting the internet. And so, I think it's very clear that, yes, there are some sites that are already blocked. But blocking entire top-level domains is a significant worry.
ANDERSON: With that, we're going to leave it there. Got to take an advertising break. This could go on forever, I can see you nodding your head, Bob. I'm sorry, we're going to have to wrap it up. Bob, Diane, we thank you very much, indeed, for joining us this evening. It's an important point.
Well, he's known as the image-maker. Artist to the stars Dick Zimmerman joining us next for a unique portrait of some of the world's biggest celebrities. Among them, Michael Jackson. He's your Connector of the Day, and he is up next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
ANDERSON: Few people are as well-connected as our next guest. He has worked with some of the world's biggest names. His task, to make them immortal. Fionnuala Sweeney gets us connected with the artist to the stars.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
ANDERSON (voice-over): John Travolta and Kelly Preston. Priscilla Presley. The Archbishop Desmond Tutu. And Michael Jackson. Just a snapshot of some of the famous faces captured forever by artist Dick Zimmerman.
Known as the image-maker, the New York born photographer and painter is sought around the world by the rich and famous. Morgan Fairchild, Tom Cruise, and Nicole Kidman. Paul Newman. Even the great Salvador Dali have all posed for Zimmerman.
He's renowned for connecting with his subjects and famously gave Michael Jackson the white jacket featured on the cover of the late singer's highest-selling album, "Thriller."
Fionnuala Sweeney asks your Connector of the Day about that now-famous shoot.
DICK ZIMMERMAN, CELEBRITY ARTIST: Usually when you do a shoot, I usually have a stylist come in and bring wardrobe and, obviously, we brought a couple of racks in for Michael. And basically, he didn't see anything he liked.
He knew what he wanted, and he basically -- I was wearing my white suit, and he said, "Do you have anything like that?" And I said, well, "No we don't, but you look about the same height as me, and I'm willing to change with you."
No, I didn't change with him, but I gave him my suit, and now it's history, yes.
FIONNUALA SWEENEY, CNN CORRESPONDENT: And what struck you about him, because you say he knew what he wanted. Was he always like that in the years that you worked with him afterwards?
ZIMMERMAN: He -- Michael was one of the most professional people that I have ever met in the business. To give you an example, the day that we were doing the "Thriller" album, he had somebody standing nearby with a clicker counting frames just to make sure that he received all the frames from me at the end. So -- that's pretty professional.
SWEENEY: He knew what he wanted, certainly, professionally. When it came to doing his exclusive wedding portrait with Lisa Marie Presley, was he also as professional about how he wanted that to look, a personal thing?
ZIMMERMAN: He always -- he was always conscious of what -- what visual he wanted to show. He was always conscious of how the light hit him and things like that.
But at the time that we did that, that was my third photo session with him, and he -- he knew that he could trust me. He knew from the past that I was going to give him what he -- always felt good about. So, he let me just do my thing at that point.
SWEENEY: Mohammed Latif from the Maldives asks, "Whose portrait gives you the most satisfaction?"
ZIMMERMAN: I think -- I was commissioned by Salvador Dali to recreate his -- well, to create his 50th wedding anniversary with his wife, Gala. And I think that really has been my favorite piece. And also, my favorite experience, with him.
SWEENEY: But that's quite amazing, because it was he, and correct me if I'm wrong, who inspired you to become a painter.
ZIMMERMAN: And that's very true. When I was five years old, my father took me to the Metropolitan Museum, and there's a big painting of the crucifixion, and I -- as I was growing up, I would go back to the museum and spend hours and hours staring at this piece.
And then, here I find myself years later sitting -- sitting with Dali on a one-to-one basis talking about life. And I -- there was one point where I actually had to put my hand under the table where we were sitting and pinch myself because I didn't quite believe that I was there talking to him.
It was almost like having Rembrandt reincarnated and sitting there with him. Amazing, amazing experience.
SWEENEY: Do you have a favorite actor that you've painted or find yourself painting and thought, this is my favorite actor of the moment?
ZIMMERMAN: Well, I -- Tom Cruise, of course. I enjoyed that one a lot.
SWEENEY: Why?
ZIMMERMAN: John Travolta, I did a nice painting of John and his wife, Kelly Preston. Oh, Josh Brolin, that's one of my favorite pieces right now.
SWEENEY: And what makes it special for you --
ZIMMERMAN: I love that piece.
SWEENEY: -- when you're painting. When you talk about Tom Cruise and Josh Brolin, et cetera, what makes -- what makes it your favorite?
ZIMMERMAN: The favorite is the one I'm doing at that particular time.
SWEENEY: What is it -- what quality do they have --
ZIMMERMAN: You know --
SWEENEY: -- that makes you really connect with it?
ZIMMERMAN: Well, if I capture the individual the way I want to really capture them. If I get the essence of who they are, and I get that three- dimensional quality, which is -- that three-dimensional quality is what I'm really going for.
Most of the paintings back through the ages or whatever are a little more on the two-dimensional level, but I -- my specialty is bringing them off the canvass more. And when I see that spark and I see the depth to it, that's when I'm happy.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
ANDERSON: All right, your Connector of the Day today.
I just want to remind you of something. We have a Facebook site, CONNECT THE WORLD, and a bit of a landmark today. We've just been through 10,000 fans. I think we opened this up pretty late. It was about January of this year, so it's been pretty quick.
I tell you what. Get on board. Sign up as a fan. If you are the 10,500th -- is that how you say it? 10,500th person, we'll send you a picture a mug or something. Anyway, those note, sign up, facebook.com/CNNconnect.
I'm Becky Anderson, that is your world connected. Thanks for watching. The world news headlines and "BackStory" follow this short break. Don't go away.
END
