of the european union campaigned on. yet, the government said this week it may not be quite so straightforward to free us from the european court ofjustice after all. when the negotiators reconvene in a few days‘ time after their summer break, they'll have before them a series of position papers from the british team to absorb, on subjects including immigration, the irish border and the court. eunice, have the europeans been impressed 7 well, they have been somehow optimistic about a sudden outbreak of realism from the british government. on the other hand, these position papers were strange because they were dismal position papers without positions, just kind of scenarios and the british government has no position. but there are some signs of well, realism, in the sense that the british government is ready to continue to contribute to the budget of the european union for as long as it is a member of the eu. there has also been movement, welcome movement in the area of the authority of the european court of

justice, and i think it is going to be arranged. there are also interesting noises about britain wanting to have a deep and special relationship with the european union, wanting to have also a special and deep relationship, a trade relationship with the eu. wanting to replicate the customs union and so on. the noises pointer a kind of membership of the single market but this also happens at the same time as the home office sending deportation letters to european citizens, so the studies of european citizens, so the studies of european citizens has not yet been sorted. and the european union and britain have not yet agreed about the process of the negotiations. the european union would like to start with finding a solution for the budget, and the status of european citizens and the irish border and the british government wants to negotiate the future of the

relationship. this business of the irish border is interesting because one of the things that britain was talking about in that context was how goods and people and services might be traded across the border once britain is out of the european union and of course the republic of ireland remains in because there is that land border. and the europeans said we are not talking about that because it is about the trade relationship. any sense, there are distinction is artificial and bit and we must talk about the divorce before we talk about what comes after. let's not pretend either side is a paragon of virtue in this discussion. both sides are perhaps also trying to stake out maximalist positions, which is part and parcel ofa positions, which is part and parcel of a negotiating process. this remains me in some ways of backing the presidential campaign in the us, when people said, we shouldn't take trouble literally but figuratively or make the mistake of doing it the other way about. sometimes with negotiations like this we can get stuck on literal statements that

perhaps figuratively mean something else, and sol perhaps figuratively mean something else, and so i agree with younis that there is a sign of moderation of more realistic notions of what the relationship should be. in terms of ireland, you know, that is such a vexed situation from its political and religious sectarian history, and that has to be grappled with by both the eu and britain. it is not in the eu interest that there should be any friction among that border or any outbreak of unrest that could jeopardise the piece that has been fragile. and both sides need to be really realistic when they come to questions like that. isabel hilton, do you hear realism in the political debate back in the uk? and observation that the position papers are without positions is spot on, because we know the government has great difficulty in arriving at a position. and the trajectory by which we got here was a series of promises of opportunity and little

discussion of who bears what pain? and we are in negotiations, what the pain is and how big it is going to be and how it is shared will be the big political issue, done by a weak prime minister with a slim majority and divided cabinet. i think we are going to hear a lot of magical thinking, still, on the domestic british front, because she... the prime minister is not ready to have that conversation, and it will be a tough one. so, notwithstanding the negotiations themselves, in terms of domestic british politics, it could be fractious. it could be fractious and i think we will go on seeing this ball kicked down the road, this can take down the road. we have roughly a year and it will not happen. the most important thing is the lack of trust between this government and the european union. the people of brussels don't trust theresa may at all. and it was absolutely right to

say this is a that. but you have to keep the good relations. the problem now, when it's a lack trust, europeans say, let us talk about the cost this divorce. it is £74 million. let's agree on it. billion. sorry, billion. 74 billion. briton shot itself in the foot by saying it does not want to be part of the single market or a part of the customs union. when you are outside these aspects of the

european integration project, you are essentially killing of business opportunities, but also creating problems in ireland. the question with the irish border, the problem is created by the british position, the british stance. yes, we want a fresh in this border but we are out of the single market and out of the customs union... it is not possible. like as you said, trying to create a new potential customs union between just as and the eu, and this issue of directjurisdiction of the european court of justice, of directjurisdiction of the european court ofjustice, that will end with some role for the court remaining? you talk about a bunch, but these blurring things, could they be enough to get us do it? they have such emotional resonance amongst the brexiteers here that this is the problem. if you have a major trading relationship with a block like the european union, you need some means of arbitrating disputes. you can't have it. if you andl disputes. you can't have it. if you and i were to do a contract, we would agree who would arbitrate and

if there was a dispute, so depending european court of justice if there was a dispute, so depending european court ofjustice as a great imposing dominant thing which imposes laws is nonsense, but you can't rule that back with the group that theresa may as the biggest problem with, the hardline brexiteers in her own cabinet. some have been making a bit of noise ina some have been making a bit of noise in a mollified direction saying that, look, it is not direct jurisdiction. there will be some kind of dispute resolution mechanism and european judges will perhaps kind of dispute resolution mechanism and europeanjudges will perhaps be involved, but not the same as being under the involved, but not the same as being underthe thumb of... involved, but not the same as being under the thumb of... i agree the rhetoric has been so strident that to get anything that seems to climb away from that position is dangerous ground, but in the end, as you say, politics is the art of compromise. some of this is going to have to be compromised, eight fudge or compromise. we will stay on the question of compromise... the world's oldest publisher, cambridge university press, found itself caught between the lure of entering china and the rigour of academic freedom. earlier this month, it accepted a request from beijing that politically sensitive articles

on its "china quarterly" website should be blocked. a few days a go, it reversed that decision. taken with other instances of a government crackdown on free expression, is a trend emerging. isabel, tell us about the press case and why people are worried that it may be a harbinger of things to come. tell us about the other things perhaps beginning to make people notice. cambridge university press the publisher of the china quarterly, a respected academicjournal which actually comes out of the school of oriental and african studies. they are the publisher but the content is produced elsewhere. when they announced as a big company they had removed 300 articles from the website at the request of the chinese authorities, still not absolutely clear which authorities... also 1000 e—books had been removed. this was a major purge. there was a howl of outrage from the academic community. but this is, you know, a row that has broken out in four or five years

into a tightening in china, increasing censorship, increasing ideological control from the chinese authority, and an increasing boldness from the chinese government. as china gets stronger, not only is the party capable of imposing its view of history, its narrow ideological intellectual traditions on china, but it can impose them on the rest of the world. so, if you want to publish in china, as newspapers have found, you have to weigh your international reputation against what you see as your market opportunity. the new york times, for example, when they publish those big takeout on the corruption and the private wealth of the leading members of the party, immediately blocked in china. at the backed down, they would have suffered a tremendous loss to their international reputation, and that was what cambridge university press was what cambridge university press was facing. they made the wrong call, as it turned out, and have

suffered a lot of reputational damage. it goes further. chinese authorities routinely out academics from international conferences, not only in china, but they try to stop them presenting papers in conferences elsewhere, and in the academic community there has been mounting alarm that the chinese commerce mounting alarm that the chinese commerce party is attempting to impose one view of history to completely exclude a whole bunch of topics like tibet, taiwan, tiananmen square, cultural revolution, because the party has to maintain its position in china which says, we are going to rule china forever and this is why. and that means excluding all negative past his story, and everyone is expected to swallow it. what the west must decide is, are we going to swallow this? ifind going to swallow this? i find troubling about this cambridge university press case that even blocking western media, whether

the new york times or the other publications, that has been ongoing for years, so nothing new, but when i lived in china 15 years ago those sites were blocked. 15 years ago academic freedom is beginning to actually flower. this was an area where it seemed that there could be real cooperation and real delving into issues between china and outside. with that taken in, that it real sign that this new regime is not blocking any kind of dissent or different view than what it wants to put forward. —— it is not allowing any kind of dissent. the fact there is this kind of party conference, the 90th anniversary of the funding of the liberation army, all that is contributing to this ideological construction, that some people are hopefully saying will then be loosened after this is over. i don't think so. they have a regime that does insist on ideological purity and we will see more of it. you set for five years, which more or less put us at the time when the

president they took office. it is very much driven by his perspective. there have been leaks of documents, the notorious document nine which somebody went to jail for a licking, and explicit rejection of western values, as they call it. but included rule of law, and the nihilistic view of history, a freedom to explore history from any angle. it included freedom of speech. you know, those are explicit enemies of the party, as the party sees it. it is returning to, kind of, some principles in a bizarre way. one area where this has perhaps caused consternation is in hong kong, and there has always been a debate about how one country chooses to function. britain is supposed to bea to function. britain is supposed to be a cold guarantor of hong kong's freedom, and that it continues to cooperate under this system. is britain making enough of that role, do you think? is britain's picking

up do you think? is britain's picking up enough on these issues? a lot of the dissidents there can complain they can't even get a spate of british ministers even if they come to britain. i believe it is not. i don't believe britain is doing it all here. i believe they are staying away gradually from hong kong and even china. now china is a strong power, it is the second—biggest economy in the world, and they are gaining confidence now. they would like to send a message, look, here we are. for the first time, china used the security council its times. so, before... tens of years ago they never involved themselves in any international crisis. they stayed away, either abstained or even not to take any action at all. so now the message is very clear. we are not a western democracy. we don't believe in western democracy. we have our own way to handle things. and either you respect that or go to

hell. that is the message, very clear. i have had experience with them, they published, beijing university press publish my book. and they don't care. after ten years of publishing the book, now they realise that there is this book... maybe they like it already... i don't know about the message is very clear. we are not democracy. we are not western democracy. it worked for us, now not western democracy. it worked for us, now we are not western democracy. it worked for us, now we are the second biggest power on earth so why not? that is the message. this nervousness is to do with their not clear what they are. are they a commune is party state? they don't look like a communist party. redistribution of wealth upwards and downwards? there are kind of state capitalist so they have we birgitta a lot of imperial traditions they used to denigrate and despise. —— they have reverted to imperial traditions anyway. a long history that predates the communist party. if there is a big cultural that we in the west have

not fully grasped? or is that an excuse? it is about modernity and modernisation. for 100 years china has been arguing with itself about who owns the state, ever since the 1911 revolution. on the streets in 1911 revolution. on the streets in 1911 people were calling for mr science and mr democracy and they still are 100 years later. the other interesting and perhaps worrying aspect of all of this is that since china joined the wto, there was a great hope that very soon china would become a democracy and capitalism would bring democracy and capitalism would bring democracy and so on. actually what is happening is that china is transforming the west. the west is not very assertive in its dealings with china. we are allowing ourselves to be transformed by china ? we are and it is shocking the number of media companies who have not only bowed to the requests of censorship coming from the chinese government, but actually have helped the chinese government to arrest dissidents. yahoo is a case in point. it is

worrying where an academic publisher, who is supposed to be a little bit above profit—making, which they are clearly not, is ready to read vogue any claims to be a defender of academic freedom —— it is ready to revoke any claims to be a defender of academic freedom. the economy plays a major role. look at shanghai or other cities, prospering, a huge market. many people think twice before taking any steps which... people think twice before taking any steps which. .. even people think twice before taking any steps which... even the british government here know it is a dictatorship and they are banning the press. they know they are arresting dissidents but despite that they would like to do business. i would not actually be surprised if, for example, cambridge university and we have good business with them, i am not surprised... the governments are doing the universities do so. the reality is if you read up on

this from now on there will be less access to that market for foreign companies. the dream of the chinese market, which the chinese have used to devastating effect, to get their way, is actually fading. we sell three times as much to ireland as china. let's kowtow to ireland instead. china's economic development is undeniable, and because of the place it is around the world, it has been able to marking are just as economic model but its political model as well. you say it has been influencing the western also influencing other countries, whether it is to hear other part of asia who say, look, we can become economic prosperity without liberalisation and that is dangerous. a massive role in africa. do take that long view you were talking about, china loves to go on about its 5000 year history, even to ta ke about its 5000 year history, even to take the last 100 years that isabel was pointing out, from 1911 onwards. anyone who studies china knows that

there are periods of tightening and periods of liberalising and periods of tightening. i don't know that i would feel very confident in making any kind of production in 20 years from now where we will be. will it have tightened further or will it have tightened further or will it have undergone another liberalisation? hard to say. and maybe that's it becomes the mind about the chinese politician who was asked about the outcome of the french revolution, it's too soon to say. we talked before... we've talked before on dateline london about the standoff between a number of gulf states and qatar. abdel bari has been watching this closely for us. you're detecting signs of regime change — who wants to bring that about, and why? it is very dangerous. now the conflict started with a media war between saudi arabia and its allies against qatar. they presented about 13 demands for qatar to apply or else. one of them, closing al—jazeera, the other to stop financing and supporting the muslim brotherhood... terrorism. there

terrorism. there is terrorism. there is a terrorism. there is a huge terrorism. there is a huge step terrorism. there is a huge step now for word for a regime change in qatar. it seems that all mediation between the two sides held completely, so now the arena is grooming another prince from the royal family, and they have another prince and they think he should replace the royal family. this is the most dangerous things. this happens, how they will sink into power, for example, reinstate him in power? because he belongs to the founder of qatar... the royal family, he is part of it. how they are going to do it? either planning foran are going to do it? either planning for an internal military coup or political revolution a popular revolution? are going to carry him to go higher, for example, to rule the country. we don't know yet. the most important thing, the saudi are

furious and very serious and now they are giving this man of the authority. they are creating, you know, a parallel government... so it is extremely dangerous. how well qataris respond to that? there were reports after this, dictation began that becoming like a pop star on the streets of the capital, that people we re streets of the capital, that people were putting up his portrait and singing his praises, that they admired him, and taking a stand against this pressure from outside. has that changed ? it has not changed. there are no traces of changes but we have to remember that it is a tribal society, a tribal country, and these tribes are divided, between saudi arabia and qatar and the emirates and they have roots there. they could play on the tribal nerve here and it could also split, as i said, the royal family. there are always disputes in these royal families. there is another one outside power.

and qatar, for example, witnessed more than three or four military coups or political coups, so we don't know what will happen. so it is really deadly serious. a very... the people are the same attitudes, the same attitudes, the same background, but for the first time there is an earthquake hitting the whole area and where it will la st we the whole area and where it will last we don't know. i will give you one example. if you tweet sympathising with qatar, if you are

in united arab emirates you could be imprisoned for ten or 15 years, with a huge fine, maybe a million. things are really developing to the worst. short of actually developing a government in exile, or preparing a government in exile, or preparing a government takeover, there are other things these four countries can do which they have not done yet. for example, imposing formal sanctions are going further. they have not yet taken that are going further. they have not yet ta ken that route. are going further. they have not yet taken that route. it seems it is a stand—off at the moment, that there is no upper hand on either side. i don't know that there is a good outcome necessarily, but it hasn't escalated to the point yet, it seems, where... will it come to terrorism? all these countries actually were financing and supporting some kind of terrorism in iraq, in syria, libya. this is not the problem... the real problem which is facing them, you know, qatar is a small nation, 300,000. the population of qatar '5 300,000, and one of the richest countries on earth.

a wealth fund which spends huge amount of money in european countries. they have about $320 billion in their sovereign funds they are rich and they know how to buy their own people to make them happy. the problem is the blockade is starting to hurt... it is starting change and people are now saying, ok, why shall we be besieged? saudi arabia and its allies, egypt and bahrain and arab emirates, they are saying, we have time. we are well established and we have also... qatar is besieged... i think we have to be a bit careful with all this talk, because the potential of instability, it is absolutely huge. there is no guarantee whatsoever, at least perhaps what the saudis have to dig about, that the population of qatar is going to support it brings that is going to support it brings that isa is going to support it brings that is a stooge of the saudis. it is likely that actually the actual population will support the current

in the year. on the other aspect of all of this is the original implications... of this instability. we have on one hand qatar being supported by turkey, iran, there is a strengthening of the relationship with iran. and israel is on the side more or less of the saudis, but there were previous relationships with qatar, so it is cutely contradicted the potential for instability. be sure effect has driven qatar closer into the arms of restoring diplomatic relations... i wonder, had presidentjohn's diplomatic relations... i wonder, had president john's visit to saudi arabia not given such explicit encouragement to this action, whether we might not... encouragement to this action, whetherwe might not... —— president john's visit to saudi arabia... i believe they gave the green light. —— president trump. he said, i have gotjobs for you... we'll must leave it there. thank you

all very much. do join us again next week, same time, same place, but, for now, thank you for watching and goodbye. now let's take a look at the weather. hello. there may be a few showers, a few splashes of rain in the uk over the next few days, but given the fact it is the weekend and an extended weekend and what we've had so far this august, the prospects looking good. lots of dry weather and feeling warm. through the afternoon, a bit more cloud in southern areas compared to yesterday, one or two showers to the east of england. a few showers in scotland as well, some heavy ones in the east. but most of you will stay dry through this afternoon and once the sun is out, temperatures if not into the high teens, low to mid 20s.

a day of sunscreen and sunhat rather than umbrellas at headingley and also on monday, for the second test. just a little rain late in the evening. hopefully the rain stays clear of belfast this evening for the women's world cup final between england and new zealand. for many, dry evening with clear skies and sunny spells. an isolated shower in scotland. one or showers into the far west by, particularly for the island of western scotland. temperatures in rural parts of eastern scotland and northern england at the lowest around 8—9. but most staying in double figures. mist and fog patches first thing tomorrow morning will clear. though clouded in western scotland throughout the day, patchy rain and drizzle. any early showers in england and wales should fade away. it should be a dry day forjust about all and feeling warm again when the sun comes out, perhaps a degree or so higher than today.

good news for those at notting hill carnival, potter by monday. hotter by monday. drive for the leeds carnival. these weather fronts on the charts push into the north—west. the further south and east, high pressure in charge, a few morning mist and fog patches, lovely star in england and wales. cloudy in the north and west later. outbreaks of rain and gusty winds spreading across scotland and in the afternoon in northern ireland. the wettest weather on the western hills of scotland. sunshine returning later towards the north. temperatures 17—18 celsius, the further south and east, blue skies overhead and some of the warm as conditions of august so far with a high of 28 celsius. this is bbc news. i'm geeta guru—murthy. the headlines at midday: several people have died after a crash involving a minibus and two lorries on the m1 in buckinghamshire. for others have been taken to

hospital. counter—terrorism police investigate after two officers were injured while arresting a man with a sword outside buckingham palace. during the struggle the individual repeatedly repeated the words allahu akbar. hurricane harvey batters the coast of texas with winds of 130mph — the most powerful storm to hit the us mainland for 12 years. record flooding is predicted as thousands flee their homes. wind speeds have dropped as the storm moves inland.