Analysis

The autocratic regimes of North Africa & the Middle East enjoyed many years of military, political and financial support from the United States government. Dr Maha Azzam looks at the recent history of US involvement in the region, including the brief shift in policy during the presidency of George W Bush, and the role that Israel plays in US/Arab relations. As violence & unrest spread throughout the region, will US policy vary state-by-state depending on its own interests or will President Barack Obama embrace the pro-democracy protests wherever they emerge? What expectations do the protestors have of American support and what levers can the US pull in order to assist them? And if it is seen to falter in its support for the protestors will this seriously undermine US influence in the long-term? Dr Maha Azzam is an Associate Fellow of Chatham House.Contributors Dr Shadi Hamid, Brookings Institute, Qatar Shashank Joshi, Royal United Services Institute, London Elliott Abrams, Council of Foreign Relations, Washington Roger Hardy, Woodrow Wilson Center, Washington Carl Gershman, National Endowment for Democracy, Washington Jonathan Spyer, Global Research International Affairs Center, Israel Abdel Moneim Abou el-Fotouh, Muslim Brotherhood, Cairo Prof Khaled Fahmy, American University, Cairo Alexandros Petersen, Henry Jackson Society, London.

The Orange Book, published in 2004, is a collection of political essays by leading Liberal Democrats. Although the writers come from a range of viewpoints, the book has been seen as an attempt by party right wingers to reclaim the party's economic liberal origins in the nineteenth century and give it a new modern emphasis. But for some leading Liberal Democrats these ideas are now closer to tenets of Conservative thought. So will the Orange Bookers bind the coalition ever closer together or lead to fractures and even splits in Liberal Democrat ranks? Edward Stourton talks to one of the leading Orange Book Liberal Democrats, David Laws MP, about the philosophy behind the book and why they were so keen to publish it. He discusses the consequences for the party of the gap which has now emerged between public perceptions of where the party stands on major issues and where its leadership's inclinations lie. And he discusses what the longer-term implications of the Orange Bookers' relationship with David Cameron's Conservatives will be.Among those he talks to are Baroness Williams of Crosby; the former Conservative Shadow Home Secretary, The Rt. Hon. David Davis, MP; the historian and newly-elected Labour MP, Tristram Hunt; the expert on political leadership, Professor Peter Clarke; and the former Liberal Democrat policy director and Orange Book sceptic, Richard Grayson.

The "big society" - the idea that volunteers should take over some of the functions of the state - is the most over-used policy phrase of the moment. But how will the theory work in practice? Chris Bowlby looks at the big society on the ground in Oxford - from the affluent streets of the City's North to the deprived estates of Blackbird Leys - and tries to figure out the consequences of expecting communities to do more for themselves.

The role of credit in the build up to the global financial crisis is well known - but what has our reliance on credit been doing to the wider economy and to human behaviour? The expansion of consumer credit has been encouraged by social democratic as well as centre right governments. But some on the left believe that the growth of the financial sector has given birth to a novel form of capitalism and with that a new kind of worker exploitation. Paul Mason meets the economists of "financialisation" who believe that credit has become the defining relationship between workers and employers, citizens and public services. Paul Mason is Economics Editor of Newsnight and the author of Meltdown: The End of the Age of Greed.

Was the economic crisis caused by fundamental problems with the system rather than a mere failure of policy?Over two weeks, Analysis investigates two schools of economics with radical solutions.This week, Jamie Whyte looks at the free market Austrian School of FA Hayek. The global recession has revived interest in this area of economics, even inspiring an educational rap video. "Austrian" economists believe that the banking crisis was caused by too much regulation rather than too little. The fact that interest rates are set by central banks rather than the market is at the heart of the problem, they argue. Artificially low interest rates sent out the wrong signals to investors, causing them to borrow to spend on "malinvestments", such as overpriced housing. Jamie Whyte is head of research and publishing at Oliver Wyman, a management consulting firm. He is a former lecturer in philosophy at Cambridge University and the author of Bad Thoughts: A Guide to Clear Thinking. Contributors: Prof Steven Horwitz, St Lawrence University, New York Prof Larry White, George Mason University, Washington DC Prof Robert Higgs, Independent Institute, California Philip Booth, Institute of Economic Affairs Steve Baker, Conservative MP John Papola, co-creator Fear the Boom and Bust Lord Robert Skidelsky, economic historian and biographer of John Maynard Keynes Tim Congdon, founder, Lombard Street Research Producer : Rosamund Jones Next week, Newsnight's Economics Editor Paul Mason meets the economists of "financialisation" and asks whether the growth of credit has given birth to a new kind of capitalism.

Trust was the subject of moral philosopher Professor Onora O'Neill's acclaimed Reith Lectures in 2002. Enron, political sleaze, the foot and mouth crisis, the Bristol heart babies scandal and the collapse of Equitable Life had contributed to a perception - challenged by Professor O'Neill - that we were living through a crisis of trust in our institutions. Eight years on, the subject is no less topical and so Professor O'Neill returns to Radio 4 to be interviewed about her latest reflections on trust by Edward Stourton. The intervening years have seen no let-up in the stream of highly publicised political scandals, financial crises and blunders by state officials. Yet levels of trust have remained remarkably consistent. Furthermore, argues Professor O'Neill, the public debate about building trust misses the point: we should be more concerned about levels of trustworthiness rather than levels of trust in society. Attempts to restore trust in certain professions or organisations do little to help individuals with the practical difficulty of placing and refusing trust wisely. In addition, she points to clumsy "accountability" schemes designed to raise levels of trust but which in fact encourage an increase in untrustworthy behaviour. Edward Stourton discusses these notions with Onora O'Neill and explores their topicality. Her arguments are also commented on and challenged by John Haldane, Professor of Philosophy at St Andrews University and current chairman of the Royal Institute of Philosophy.

Presenter Chris Bowlby asks whether a state welfare system can ever distinguish between those who deserve help and those who do not. As the recession bites and public spending cuts loom there have been calls, on both sides of the political debate, for a re-moralisation of welfare. Some say that the entitlement culture has gone too far, others that the hard-working poor should not be footing the bill for those who choose not to take a job. When did the language change and what does a change in vocabulary really mean? And even if desirable can distinctions between welfare recipients be made in practice? If there are time limits on the receipt of welfare will more people end up better-off in work or worse-off unable to work? Analysis will look at what history can teach us about making moral distinctions between the poor - both when the economy is booming & when it's contracting. And what of those, such as the children of welfare recipients, caught up in the debate : can it ever right to reduce the money which may give them a better future? Contributors : Will Hutton Executive vice-chair The Work Foundation Author Them & Us Mark Harrison Professor of Economics, Warwick UniversityTim Montgomerie Co-founder Centre for Social Justice Editor, ConservativeHomeHazel Forsyth senior curator, Museum of LondonJose Harris Emeritus Professor of Modern History, Oxford UniversityAlison Park Co-editor British Social Attitudes SurveyPhilip Booth Editorial & Programme Director, Institute of Economic AffairsGordon Lewis Community Project Manager, Salvation ArmyRod Nutten Volunteer, Salvation ArmyWolfie Client, Salvation Army Major Ivor Telfer Assistant Secretary for Programmes, Salvation Army UK & Republic of Ireland Presenter : Chris Bowlby Producer : Rosamund Jones.

Ken Clarke has promised a "rehabilitation revolution" in which private investors will fund projects aimed at cutting the re-offending rate. If the projects succeed, the government will pay those investors a return. But if the projects fail, the investors will lose their shirts.You can see why the idea is attractive to ministers. In a period of spending restraint - and with a huge and hugely expensive prison population - a 'payment by results' system promises to fund rehabilitation projects from future savings.But will it work? After all, rehabilitation is hardly a new idea. And so far, it seems, most attempts have made little difference. So the question is whether a new way of paying for criminal rehabilitation might deliver better results. There's unrestrained excitement among some of those working with offenders. And deep scepticism among some criminologists. Emma Jane Kirby investigates.Interviewees include: the Justice Secretary, the Rt Hon Kenneth Clarke MP; criminologists Professor Sir Anthony Bottoms and Professor Carol Hedderman; Geoff Mulgan from the Young Foundation; the welfare expert Professor Dan Finn; Toby Eccles from Social Finance; and Rob Owen, chief executive of the St Giles Trust.Producer: Richard Knight.

To take successful military action, you do not only need soldiers, aircraft or warships. The support of the society and political leadership is crucial in sustaining armed action. Yet public involvement in current debates about the future of the military has been very limited, as old ideas of 'leaving it to the professionals' prevail.So what happens when society becomes divorced from the business of defending itself? In liberal Britain, some sections of society seem more and more alienated from military action. Using force clashes with modern concerns about human rights and risk-avoidance. New forms of media have cut through the more sanitised portrayal of war in the mainstream media, adding to public concern. And politicians, scarred by the unpopularity of recent military actions, noting the grief which every single casualty prompts, are likely to be ever more wary of future warfare. Within the military too there is change, and friction. New technology is taking armed action further away from old ideas of heroism and codes of conduct. These days lawyers sit in army headquarters challenging military decisions. Many in the military appear frustrated by what they see a lack of popular and political understanding of their role.In this programme Dr Kenneth Payne, military specialist at King's College London, explores how deep these tensions run, and what they mean for Britain's military future. He asks too whether Britain's experience is different from that of other countries, such as the US. Contributors include distinguished military historian and commentator Hew Strachan, and former soldier and senior politician Lord Ashdown.Producer: Chris Bowlby.

Analysis celebrates its 40th birthday by making its own history the subject of its trademark examination of the facts. The Director General of the BBC, Mark Thompson, recently told the New Statesman that in decades past the organisation's current affairs output had displayed a left wing bias. He could not have had in mind the early years of Analysis. "We tried to avoid received opinion like the plague," says the programme's founder editor George Fischer. He required his producers to look at issues from scratch and to go beyond the bien pensant agenda. In doing so they spotted issues that others missed. Amongst the themes they identified as important were the depth of the Thatcherite project before the term Thatcherism was coined; the tensions likely to emerge in the feminist movement; and the potential for disaster in Zimbabwe if expectations over land reform were not fulfilled. The programme's willingness to question fashionable assumptions attracted some accusations of political bias. Was that fair? Michael Blastland, an Analysis producer from the 1990s and now a regular presenter, looks back at the programme's history and meets some of its early staff and contributors. Follow Analysis on Twitter: @R4AnalysisContributors: George Fischer, founder editor of Analysis Ian McIntyre, founder presenter of Analysis, later Controller of Radio 4 Rt Hon Tony Benn Gillian Reynolds, radio critic, The Daily Telegraph Michael Green, former Analysis producer, later controller of Radio 4 Caroline Thomson, former Analysis producer, now Chief Operating Officer for the BBC Fraser Steel, former Analysis producer Hugh Chignell, Associate Professor of Broadcasting History, Bournemouth University Lord Griffiths Producer: Linda Pressly.