with a speech and news conference running nearly an hour. he touched on a number of world issues, including china. mr biden says he and chinese president xijinping have had an open line of communication since the chinese balloon incident over the us last year. speaking about vladimir putin, president biden said he had no good reason to speak to putin, until the russian president changes his behaviour. he also spoke about his own prospects for re—election, saying he was prepared to deal with world leaders for years to come. now, a future american policy is up to the american people. this is much more than a political question. it's more than that. it's a national security issue. don't reduce this to the usual testament that people talk about issues of being a political campaign is far too important. it's about the world we live in for decades to come. every american must ask herself or himself.

is the world safer with nato? are you safer? is your family safer? i believe the american people know the answer to all those questions is yes. and i believe the american people understand that america is stronger, stronger because of our alliances. i believe the american consensus from truman, to reagan, to me still holds today. america cannot retreat from the world. we must lead the world. we're an indispensable nation. president biden�*s speeches are being closely watched after concerns arose about his mental fitness over his performance at the recent presidential debate. while several prominent democrats have defended biden since the press conference, three more party members have called for biden to withdraw. top—ranking democrat jim himes, along with two other congressmen — eric sorensen and scott peters. biden delivered scripted remarks where he praised nato

and the work being done. but during questioning from reporters, he mistakenly misnamed his vice—president, kamala harris. reporter: my question for you is how are you incorporating these developments into your decision to stay? and separately, what concerns do you have about vice—president harris�*s ability to beat donald trump if she were at the top of the ticket? look, i wouldn't have picked vice—president trump to be vice—president if i didn't think she was qualified to be president. so, let's start there, number one. the fact is that — the consideration is that i think i'm the most qualified person to run for president. i beat him once, and i will beat him again. for more, here's our north america editor sarah smith. president biden didn't exactly have the best start to this press conference. at an event immediately before, he accidentally called president zelensky of ukraine "president

putin", then quickly corrected himself. at the very beginning of this event, he accidentally talked about vice—president kamala harris by calling her "vice—president trump". so everybody was a little bit nervous about how this was going to go. but i have to say, after the course of what was then nearly an hour of taking questions, there were no other slips like that, and president biden was discussing in—depth the situation in ukraine, the war in the middle east, his domestic economic policy here in the united states, at great length on some occasions. he was asked again and again about his fitness for office, if he was really up to the job, and whether he will consider dropping out of the democratic race. on that, he was very, very clear. he said that he thinks that he is best—placed to govern and best—placed to win this election, and that's why he's going to stay in the race. he was asked — what if he was shown polling evidence that said that vice—president kamala harried would also beat donald trump. he said he wouldn't drop out then either unless he was shown evidence that he wouldn't beat trump. and he says he certainly hasn't been shown any

polling that laid out anything like that. he said his years in the senate gave him the experience that allows him the experience that allows him the experience to get things done, that he's proud of the legislation that he's had passed already, and that he wants to finish the job. and with age, he said, comes a little bit of wisdom. he was actually trying to make the case for why he's not only able to win this election, but would definitely be the best president afterwards. that doesn't mean that all these questions about whether he's going to stay in the race or not, how many other democrats might call for him to pull out - i might call for him to pull out — i don't think that they have been completely answered by this event tonight. but he certainly hasn't damaged himself in any way. for more on president biden�*s press conference, i spoke tojeff mason, white house correspondent for the reuters news agency. we played the chip a short while ago of the president misnaming his vice—president as "vice—president trump". that was your question — the first question after statements wrapped up. can you tell me what the reaction was like,

with expectations so high there? ~ with expectations so high there? , ., , there? well, expectations were certainly high- _ there? well, expectations were certainly high. that _ there? well, expectations were certainly high. that was - there? well, expectations were certainly high. that was the - certainly high. that was the second time tonight that he had mistaken a name. he did that earlier at an event during the nato conference, where he mistakenly said "president putin" when he was trying to introduce president zelensky. i did hearfrom his campaign, who said this is something that president biden has done for years, he messes up names — you shouldn't make too much of a big deal out of it. so i think that's the biden campaign's interpretation of that. the trump campaign certainly took off with it and used it as a clip to show that biden is not with it, which is an argument that they've been making. i think the white house and the biden campaign think, aside from that flub and maybe some other flubs that he had, that it was a fairly strong night for president biden. it's not myjob to make that determination — we'll see how democrats respond in the coming days. that's who he has to

prove it to, and that's who we'll be watching.- prove it to, and that's who we'll be watching. jeff, he did take several _ we'll be watching. jeff, he did take several questions - we'll be watching. jeff, he did take several questions about | take several questions about his mental fitness, take several questions about his mentalfitness, about his age. how did he address those questions? he age. how did he address those questions?— questions? he did. he took several questions, - questions? he did. he took several questions, and - questions? he did. he took. several questions, and didn't show offence at that. i think he was prepared and expecting to get them. one of the interesting things he said — he was pressed later in the press conference about whether or not he would take another cognitive orsee he would take another cognitive or see another neurologist. he said, "if my doctors say i need to, i will." said, "if my doctors say i need to, iwill." he said, "if my doctors say i need to, i will." he seemed open to doing that if it was necessary. otherwise, hejust doing that if it was necessary. otherwise, he just expressed confidence in his abilities, and he talked about being the best—qualified person to govern, and he thought the best—qualified person to run for re—election. he best-qualified person to run for re-election._ best-qualified person to run for re-election. he seems very clear on the — for re-election. he seems very clear on the fact _ for re-election. he seems very clear on the fact that _ for re-election. he seems very clear on the fact that he - for re-election. he seems very clear on the fact that he is - clear on the fact that he is not bowing out of this race, jeff. can you tell us what some of the conversations have been like with the campaign, within the campaign as well — how they're dealing with some of this criticism?—

this criticism? well, they've certainly — this criticism? well, they've certainly had _ this criticism? well, they've certainly had a _ this criticism? well, they've certainly had a rough - this criticism? well, they'vej certainly had a rough couple this criticism? well, they've i certainly had a rough couple of weeks in terms of that criticism, because the criticism, because the criticism was coming from within. the criticism was coming from within the democratic party and from allies of president biden and law—makers and strategists and donors and people who he needs and who would normally be in his corner. so it's been rough for him and, i think, for his campaign. their strategy now is one that president biden actually articulated tonight. he said, "people want to see me more. they want to see me out there more. so that's what i'm going to do." he's going to do a rally tomorrow in detroit, michigan, which is a very, very important swing state. he's doing another major network interview on monday with nbc news — of course, he did the press conference tonight. and i think he's going to keep up that schedule. to get back to your question, i think the strategy is for him to just keep proving himself while doing his dayjob, and see if that reassures democrats that he's the right one.—

he's the right one. jeff, one question — he's the right one. jeff, one question about _ he's the right one. jeff, one question about the - he's the right one. jeff, one question about the polling l he's the right one. jeff, one| question about the polling - question about the polling — because we've seen president biden appear to be pretty dismissive of some of the polls showing him losing, particularly in swing states — at least in that abc news interview that he did. on the other hand, also saying that the polls are wrong. so, how is the polls are wrong. so, how is the campaign? how is president biden taking on some of the numbers that appear to show him, again, really still trailing president trump? yeah - i trailing president trump? yeah - i mean. _ trailing president trump? yeah - i mean. he's— trailing president trump? yeah - i mean, he's always - trailing president trump? yeah - i mean, he's always been - — i mean, he's always been dismissive of polls. part of the biden narrative, and i think part of what's driving him so resolutely to stay in the race right now, is that he's come back from setbacks before. it's kind of in his dna. hejust doesn't before. it's kind of in his dna. he just doesn't believe it when somebody tells him the polls are down for him or that they're down so far that it's insurmountable. it'sjust not insurmountable. it's just not something insurmountable. it'sjust not something thatjoe biden accepts. i think, something thatjoe biden accepts. ithink, in something thatjoe biden accepts. i think, in terms of the campaign strategy, they are certainly also seeing some of these dips, in at least the public polling. but behind the

scenes, they're saying that it's not that bad, the polling, and that somebody else stepping in now — be it a kamala harris or be it another democratic contender — would, even though some of them may be polling better against trump, they say that's because they're not tested. joe biden has already been through all of this — a lot of the sort of common knowledge aboutjoe biden is already out there and baked into these polls. you bring in a new candidate who hasn't gone through the media scrutiny that president biden has — those polls won't be reliable either. that's their view.— polls won't be reliable either. that's their view.- the | that's their view. mmm. the question _ that's their view. mmm. the question to _ that's their view. mmm. the question to go _ that's their view. mmm. the question to go back- that's their view. mmm. the question to go back again . question to go back again initially is — will democrats stick with him? and, you know, will they pay attention to the polls? will the polls continue to go down? will they stabilise? will they go up? right. stabilise? will they go up? richt. ., �* , stabilise? will they go up? richt. ., h , ,., right. that's 'ust things and elements— right. that'sjust things and elements that _ right. that'sjust things and elements that we'll - right. that'sjust things and elements that we'll see - right. that'sjust things and elements that we'll see in i right. that'sjust things and i elements that we'll see in the coming days and weeks.- coming days and weeks. we'll have to leave _

coming days and weeks. we'll have to leave it _ coming days and weeks. we'll have to leave it there. - coming days and weeks. we'll have to leave it there. jeff - have to leave it there. jeff mason, white house correspondent for reuters, thank you forjoining us. mi; thank you for “oining us. my pleasure. — as the summit wrapped up, i sat down with nato secretary—general jens stoltenberg. secretary—general, great to speak with you again. we spoke a few weeks ago while you were in washington, speaking about your expectations for the summit. what do you think was achieved? irate summit. what do you think was achieved?— summit. what do you think was achieved? ~ .. ., achieved? we achieved what we ho ed for achieved? we achieved what we hoped for and — achieved? we achieved what we hoped for and planned - achieved? we achieved what we hoped for and planned for - - achieved? we achieved what we hoped for and planned for - andj hoped for and planned for — and thatis hoped for and planned for — and that is a strong message on ukraine, more support, and helping to move ukraine closer to membership. it's important decisions in terms of defence, and we stepped up our co—operation with our partners in the pacific. this is a summit to celebrate with nato, but also to make important decisions for the future. let's talk about — decisions for the future. let's talk about the _ decisions for the future. let's talk about the membership . decisions for the future. let's talk about the membership for ukraine. i think the wording was "an irreversible path to membership". ukraine wanted a formal timetable for when that would start. do you think ukraine was disappointed by the fact that there wasn't that

concrete language? ukraine welcomed — concrete language? ukraine welcomed the _ concrete language? ukraine welcomed the language. - concrete language? ukraine welcomed the language. i. welcomed the language. i attended a press conference and meeting with president zelensky, and they expressed, of course, that this is a strong message. they always want more, because they would like to be members of nato as soon as possible. but given the fact that we are 32 hours, we need to have consensus. ukraine expressed satisfaction with the language. but, in a way, language. but, in a way, language is important. this is the strongest language nato has ever had on membership for ukraine. but actions speak louder than words. and what i regard as even more important are the decisions we made on delivering more air defence, more ammunition, and also to set up a nato command to provide and co—ordinate security supplies and training for ukraine, and also to set up a new training and support

su—centre in poland. these are concrete measures, actions, that have been decided here and will be implemented to help ukraine to prevail.— will be implemented to help ukraine to prevail. let's talk about some _ ukraine to prevail. let's talk about some of _ ukraine to prevail. let's talk about some of that - ukraine to prevail. let's talk about some of that military | about some of that military assistance. f—16 fighter about some of that military assistance. f—16fighterjets, assistance. f—16 fighter jets, for example, assistance. f—16fighterjets, for example, are expected to arrive in ukraine by the summer. do you think that they should be used to also strike into russian territory?- into russian territory? well, different allies _ into russian territory? well, different allies have - into russian territory? well, | different allies have different types of restrictions on the use of weapons they're delivering.— use of weapons they're delivering.- i'd i use of weapons they're | delivering.- i'd be delivering. right. i'd be careful speaking - delivering. right. i'd be careful speaking on - delivering. right. i'd be i careful speaking on behalf delivering. right. i'd be - careful speaking on behalf of every ally. what i can say is that allies have delivered long—range missiles which are now used also against legitimate military targets inside russia. russia has attacked another country — ukraine. ukraine has, according to international law, the right to international law, the right to self—defence. and the right to self—defence. and the right to self—defence. and the right to self—defence includes, also, the right to strike legitimate military targets on the territory of russia. did you

urn e territory of russia. did you urge partners _ territory of russia. did you urge partners to _ territory of russia. did you urge partners to allow - territory of russia. did you urge partners to allow thatj territory of russia. did you i urge partners to allow that to happen with ukraine? figs urge partners to allow that to happen with ukraine? $5 i urge partners to allow that to happen with ukraine? as i said, different allies _ happen with ukraine? as i said, different allies have _ happen with ukraine? as i said, different allies have different i different allies have different types of restrictions. some allies don't have restrictions at all, but allies have now loosened, reduced the restrictions — not least because, until recently, the front lines were deep inside ukraine. so to attack targets on the other side of the front was to attack targets inside ukrainian territory. over the last few months, russia has launched a new offensive in kharkiv, where the front line and the border line is more or less the same. of course, if you are not able to attack on the other side or the front line, then that will be a kind of safe haven for the russian forces. so that's the reason why also the united states has adjusted its restrictions on the use of us weapons. ad'usted its oli , the use of us weapons. ad'usted its policy. but i the use of us weapons. ad'usted its policy, but not i the use of us weapons. ad'usted its policy, but not the h the use of us weapons. ad'usted its policy, but not the type]- the use of us weapons. adjusted its policy, but not the type of- its policy, but not the type of weapons, necessarily. we spoke to a few congressman before the summit who said ukrainians are

fighting with their hands tied behind their backs. do you think that's a fair assessment? well, i think it's fair to say that ukraine needs the right to attack legitimate military targets inside russia — as i said, different allies have different kinds of restrictions. the united states has adjusted their policy. this is an issue which is constantly discussed among our allies. again, there's no doubt that ukraine has the right, because this is attacking airfields, missile launchers, which are attacking ukraine. and therefore, ukraine has the right to strike those military targets. around the world and across the uk, this is bbc news. let's look at a story making news in the uk: in scotland, dozens of pilot whales stranded on a beach, in what is thought to be the largest stranding event in scotland for decades. rob flett sent us this update.

12 i2 whales are now being euthanised. the remainder of the 77 whales which beached in the 77 whales which beached in the middle of the night, sadly weren't spotted until the middle of this morning, leaving too little time for a rescue effort to be mounted, which stood any chance of success. i've seen remarkable acts of compassion from the rescuers just over those sand dunes trying to keep the remaining whales moist and cool and alive long enough until a decision on theirfate can be long enough until a decision on their fate can be taken long enough until a decision on theirfate can be taken by veterinary experts from around the country. but, sadly, those vets decided there was just no realistic prospect of success and for those animals to be saved. experts say it is too soon to know what caused the stranding. but likely, one of the whales got in trouble and the rest of the pod tried to help. you're watching bbc news. asjoe biden comes under scrunity for his age,

his campaign is fighting back with a warning about what it claims donald trump would do if re—elected. the biden campaign is pointing to project 2025, an initiative from the heritage foundation, a right—wing think tank. the authors of the plan write, "federal education policy should be limited "and ultimately the department of education should be eliminated." "should be eliminated." on abortion, the plan says the white house should "push as hard as possible to protect the unborn in every "jurisdiction in america." and the authors say they want to "assemble an army of "conservatives to go to work on day one "to deconstruct the administrative state." donald trump is distancing himself from the plan, posting on social media last week "i have not seen it, have no idea who is in charge "of it, and had nothing to do with it." for more i spoke to isaac arnsdorf, national political reporter for the washington post who covers former president donald trump. so let's start with a big step back here. can you explain to us what exactly project 2025 is? us what exactly pro'ect 2025 is? ., . i: , us what exactly pro'ect 2025 is? ., . :: , ., us what exactly pro'ect 2025 is? :: , ., ., us what exactly pro'ect 2025 is? :: , ., is? pro'ect 2025 is meant to be an is? project 2025 is meant to be an off-the-shelf, _

an off—the—shelf, out—of—the—box blueprint for the next republican administration that represents the consensus of the entire conservative movement. this was something that started before it was clear that trump was going to be the nominee. and it involved the heritage foundation, but a whole coalition of about 50 other conservative groups in washington. what's happened over time as it became clear that trump was the nominee — and the fact that this report was written predominantly by alumni of trump's administration and people who are likely to serve in the next trump administration if there is one — it's being read as kind of a companion to trump's very threadbare policy platform, and it's sort of like, "well, that's what trump says." but if you want to get into the nitty—gritty details, you would go look at project 2025. and that's what's got the trump campaign going, "what...? oh, we don't know if we want to own all of that." 0h, we don't know if we want to own all of that. "— own all of that." right. back to that in — own all of that." right. back to that in a _ own all of that." right. back to that in a second. - own all of that." right. back to that in a second. first - own all of that." right. back

to that in a second. first ofl to that in a second. first of all, talking about the authors here, the heritage foundation, we mentioned a few of the points, but what are the guiding principles of this agenda? guiding principles of this aaenda? , ., �*, agenda? philosophically, what's coin: agenda? philosophically, what's auoin on agenda? philosophically, what's going on here — agenda? philosophically, what's going on here is _ agenda? philosophically, what's going on here is a _ agenda? philosophically, what's going on here is a shift - agenda? philosophically, what's going on here is a shift from - going on here is a shift from the previous conservative orthodoxy of limited government to what's now sometimes called "common—good conservatism", which is an idea really of actually using the government in a more proactive way for right—wing or conservative policy goals. and so that's very in line with, you know, the kind of president that trump is running to be, which is not your ronald reagan "the government is the problem" — it's actually — everything trump says is, "i am your solution." trump says is, "i am your solution-"— trump says is, "i am your solution." , , ., solution." interesting. if you were to take _ solution." interesting. if you were to take the _ solution." interesting. if you were to take the agenda - solution." interesting. if you were to take the agenda for| were to take the agenda for project 2025 and put it up against the agenda for the republican party going into the convention next week, how similar are they? i

convention next week, how similar are they?— convention next week, how similar are they? i mean, there are definitely _ similar are they? i mean, there are definitely some _ similar are they? i mean, there are definitely some areas - similar are they? i mean, there | are definitely some areas where there are gaps. abortion is definitely a key one. but overall, you know, there is a clear alignment where project 2025 is like a more fleshed—out, in—the—weeds, agency—by—agency blueprint for how you would actually implement as policy the big ideas that trump is promoting on the campaign trail. looking at one of the _ on the campaign trail. looking at one of the points _ on the campaign trail. looking at one of the points we - on the campaign trail. looking at one of the points we read i at one of the points we read out — "assemble an army of conservatives to go to work on day one to deconstruct the administrative state." what exactly do you think that would look like? ~ ., ., �* , look like? well, what that's talkin: look like? well, what that's talking about _ look like? well, what that's talking about is _ look like? well, what that's talking about is basically i talking about is basically collecting resumes ahead of time for people who are kind of considered bona fide maga to serve in an administration, as opposed to people who trump loyalists perceive as being not with the programme in the first term. my reporting is that they

have also identified political appointees from the first term who are not welcome back, as well as civil servants, career government officials, who they view as uncooperative who they will be trying to eliminate as part of a broader weakening of the civil service. [30 part of a broader weakening of the civil service.— the civil service. do you get a sense of— the civil service. do you get a sense of how _ the civil service. do you get a sense of how much _ the civil service. do you get a sense of how much donald i the civil service. do you get a i sense of how much donald trump himself actually embraces some of this agenda, some of these proposed policies?— of this agenda, some of these proposed policies? well, again, trump actually _ proposed policies? well, again, trump actually does _ proposed policies? well, again, trump actually does mean i proposed policies? well, again, trump actually does mean it i trump actually does mean it when he says, "i don't know anything about project 2025 — that doesn't speak for me." and it's true. those are not official campaign positions. but the campaign's kind of trying to have it both ways in terms of not having the liabilities of some of those controversial positions that are getting a lot of public pushback, but obviously they are relying on — if trump wins, they will be turning to a lot

of the people who contributed to this for help taking over the administration.- to this for help taking over the administration. right. and that is an important _ the administration. right. and that is an important point. i that is an important point. last question — what do you think we can expect looking ahead to the convention, the republican convention, in milwaukee?— republican convention, in milwaukee? ., ., , ., republican convention, in milwaukee? ., ., milwaukee? conventions are sort of four-day _ milwaukee? conventions are sort of four-day infomercials, - milwaukee? conventions are sort of four-day infomercials, and i of four—day infomercials, and to some extent they're always about presenting a kinder, gentler reintroduction of the candidate. and what i'm interested to see as this is shaping up is how it compares to your average trump rally based on what we know about the schedule. it looks to be very different — really about the kind of poll—tested messages that republicans often wished trump would talk about. right. richt. .. trump would talk about. right. right... ..rather_ trump would talk about. right. right... ..rather than - trump would talk about. right. right... ..rather than what i right... ..rather than what trump talks _ right... ..rather than what trump talks about - right... ..rather than what trump talks about on i right... ..rather than what trump talks about on the i trump talks about on the campaign trail.— trump talks about on the campaign trail. thank you so much for _ campaign trail. thank you so much forjoining _ campaign trail. thank you so much forjoining us - campaign trail. thank you so much forjoining us tonight i campaign trail. thank you so l much forjoining us tonight on bbc news. much forjoining us tonight on bbc news-— kenya's president, william ruto, has fired every member of his cabinet apart from the foreign minister —

claiming he wants to make his government more efficient. mr ruto's dismissals of high—level ministers on thursday follows the government's withdrawal of planned tax increases that sparked protests across the country last month. more than 30 people were killed and hundreds injured as security forces sought to quell the demonstrations. president ruto himself has faced public calls to step down. speaking about the dismissals of cabinet ministers on thursday, mr ruto said he wanted to make his government more efficient. we have, including other radical measures and programs, to explore raising domestic resources and revenues, to deal with the burden of debt, to explore raising domestic resources and revenues, expanding job opportunities, eliminating wastage, and unnecessary duplication over multiple difficult government agencies, and the slaying the dragon of corruption, consequently making the government of kenya lean, inexpensive, effective,

and efficient. our senior africa correspondent anne soy is following all the latest developments from nairobi. this is another big win for the kenyan protesters. it started out as protests against legislation that sought to introduce new taxes, and that was withdrawn by government and then it evolved into an agitation for reforms within government. they have been protesting against excesses and largesse that's been exhibited by government officials and they even had a session on x spaces with the president in which they accused him of not listening to them, of, you know, running a bloated government and demanded for cuts in the government expenditure as well as cutting down on some of the excesses in the government.

the president has come back to them to say, "i have listened to you. "i have fired most of the cabinet". he is only left with the deputy president, whom he can't fire because it is a constitutional office, and one member of the cabinet, who is the prime cabinet secretary — it is not a constitutional office, it is a controversial one, but he's a senior member of the cabinet. anne soy. let's turn to some other important news around the world: the leaders of small caribbean nations including grenada and st vincent are calling for more climate financing following the aftemath of hurricane beryl. the caribbean catastrophe risks insurance said it would pay 44 million to grenada, its largest ever single pay—out. however, leaders say that is not enough, citing hundreds of millions of dollars in damage to the small islands. the grenadian prime minister dickon mitchel said the two nations, "simply cannot afford another hurricane." a0 fire trucks and 70 firefighters raced to the scene to extinguish a fire at rouens historic cathedral in northern france on thursday.

the spire of the cathedral had been under renovations for years and was surrounded by scaffolding and a white cover when the fire began. officials are still assessing the damage and investigating the cause of the fire. stay with us here on bbc news. hello there! the best way to sum upjuly so far this month has been rather wet at times and disappointingly cool. average temperatures at this time of year generally between 18 and 23 degrees. just take a look at the next few days — temperatures below par for the time of year, all due to the direction of the wind and the amount of cloud we're going to see. now, let's take a look at the pressure chart a little more detail, explain further. we've got this high pressure out to the west but circulating around that high. the wind direction comes in a clockwise fashion and so, that means a northerly wind. it will continue to drive in plenty of cloud across

exposed east coasts, maybe thinking of a spot or two of drizzle as we go through the day, and perhaps a few sharp and thundery downpours breaking out across south wales and south west england. best of the sunshine, perhaps, on friday will be across parts of southern scotland and northern ireland. brisk northerly wind, particularly out on those exposed east coasts. temperatures will struggle mid—teens but we could see highest values of 20 degrees in western scotland but generally, those temperatures a little bit subdued. the high pressure tries to hang on in there as we go into the start of the weekend, staying out to the northwest, and this area of low pressure could just influence eastern areas, spilling in, once again, a little more in the way of cloud and some drizzle. so, double figures to start the day on saturday. still some showery outbreaks of rain around for some and as we go through the day on saturday,

sheltered western areas will see the best of the sunshine. a feed of cloud and some showery rain just drifting in across east yorkshire. so here, temperatures once again mid—teens at very best. we might see highest values of 20 degrees. now, as we move into sunday, there is a potential for that low pressure to just pull away a little bit further and allow for more sunshine to come through, particularly across england and wales, and as a result, the sunshine is strong at this time of year. we'll start to see those temperatures recover just a touch. and that's going to be the trend as we move into next week. we've got low pressure pushing across the country which could bring some showery outbreaks of rain at times. but then, the weather story looks set, fingers crossed, to quieten down. so, a few scattered showers around monday, possibly tuesday, but by wednesday onwards, drier and warmer.

voice—over: this is bbc news. we'll have the headlines for you at the top of the hour, which is straight after this programme. welcome to hardtalk. i'm stephen sackur. the west's collective defence club, nato, is celebrating its 75th anniversary. amid the self—congratulation, there are hard questions about nato's staying power as a backer of ukraine in its war against russia.

also about the lessons learned from nato's 20—year involvement in afghanistan. three years ago, western troops pulled out. the taliban regained power. my guest was there when it happened. sir laurie bristow was the last british ambassador in kabul. now he's ready to reflect on the significance of failure in afghanistan. sir laurie bristow, welcome to hardtalk. thank you. three years ago, you were a key player in the chaotic western withdrawal from kabul. many people would choose

to move on, to try to forget about it.