i'm kasia madera world news. our top stories is now. 26 deep have been killed in a world news. our top stories is now. 26 deep have been killed in 3 max —— mass shooting in texas. children 26 deep have been killed in a max —— mass shooting in texas. children are among the victims after a gunman entered the church with an automatic weapon. he was later found entered the church with an automatic weapon. he was laterfound dead several miles from the seal —— vaccine. it has been called a disgustingly sick tragedy. leaked documents says wilbur ross has interests in a russian company with links to the kremlin. and this story is about how the first daughter, ivanka trump, is perceived by women injapan. she ivanka trump, is perceived by women in japan. she has ivanka trump, is perceived by women injapan. she has been accompanying her father injapan. she has been accompanying herfather on his tour injapan. she has been accompanying her father on his tour through asia. stay with us here on bbc world news. —— several miles from the scene. now, it is time for hardtalk.

welcome to hardtalk. i'm stephen sackur. it's hard to imagine two men more different in temperament and global outlook than barack obama and donald trump. no surprise, then, that the current president is intent on dismantling their predecessor's legacy. my guest today is ernest moniz, energy secretary in the obama administration and a key figure in two landmark commitments — the iran nuclear deal and the paris climate change accord. so, how significant will donald trump's u—turns prove to be? ernest moniz, welcome to hard top.

pleasure. —— hardtalk. ernest moniz, welcome to hard top. pleasure. -- hardtalk. how hard is it to see your hard work being steadily dismantled by donald trump? obviously, it is, shall we say, disappointing, to say it in a very temperate way. it mainly because i think that tremendous opportunities for moving forward into united states, with our friends or allies, obviously the uk, prominent among those, on such important issues. basically, the whole range of global threats from climate change risks to nuclear security and these were opportunities hard one in both cases helping to forge a very significant

international cooperation alliance is not one of the most troublesome patterns is the way that many of our alliances, many of our friendships and collaborative opportunities, insert of being strengthened are being weakened. we will undertake a bit of that. i wonder whether it has given you pause for thought. i mean, donald trump isn't acting simply on a whim, he is surrounded by advisers. he is driven, one can only assume, as the president of the united states i and the overriding concern for the united states' security interests will stop starting with the iran nuclear deal, he has real reasons for deciding that the obama deal that you were such an important part of making, was actually contrary to america's national—security interest. was actually contrary to america's national-security interest. well, if you listen carefully to what he has

said, what i would point out is, first of all he has given no, neither he nor his administration, had given no specifics in terms of the agreement structure. there are two issues. one is the suggestion that it would have been wonderful to have had some of these nuclear restrictions going on for a longer period of time. you say there is no substance to his criticisms but there clearly is. he has pointed out to the sunset clauses in the deal which mean, as far as i can understand it, come 2026, iran's uranium enrichment programme can be given green light, full steam ahead, let's get on with it. not quite. until 2031, there is a severe restriction on any stockpile they have of enriched uranium. there is a

15 year constraint. the main point is... which comparison will we make? let's make the comparison to where we we re let's make the comparison to where we were and where we will be. where we were and where we will be. where we we re we were and where we will be. where we were was iran could have gone to a nuclear weapon in a 2—3 months. we have extended that to a 10— 15 year period. so it is a bout buying time? you don't believe that deal will change fundamentals are the run's determination to require —— acquire a nuclear weapon? —— determination to require —— acquire a nuclearweapon? —— iran. determination to require —— acquire a nuclearweapon? —— iranli determination to require —— acquire a nuclear weapon? -- iran. i think in10— a nuclear weapon? -- iran. i think in 10- 15 a nuclear weapon? -- iran. i think in10— 15 years. a nuclear weapon? -- iran. i think in 10— 15 years. i want to point out, there is a great focus on these nuclear provisions which are very important and very unique and rolled back their programme dramatically. but the key to the agreement of the verification and transparency measures which do not sunset. we have, for example, their engagement

in the protocol that allows the international inspectors to go anywhere that looks suspicious. you're putting a huge amount of faith in the nuclear watchdog situation. —— organisation. faith in the nuclear watchdog situation. -- organisation. that organisation now has tools that they didn't have before in iran. it has tools, it has nowhere else in the world, the former head of intelligence james clapper has said you couldn't say 100% certain, but the bar is raised so high that the risk of getting caught would be too enormous. the other thing that is really the point of the criticism is that the deal is not what it was never intended to be. namely, a way to address has polite and missiles. —— hezbollah. work with our regional

allies and friends to push back on those other destabilising behaviours. right. you see, notjust donald trump that called the deal the worst deal in american history, horrible, he said, but america's greatest ally in the region, israel and benjamin netanyahu and and other key ally, saudi arabia, both leaders have said the deal is potentially disastrous because it allows iran to refine and develop it uranium enrichment techniques because it doesn't stop it altogether. number two, it allows the iranians to develop their ballistic missile technology which they are very actively doing. and number three, as the prince of saudi arabia puts it, on the day of the sun sets, "my view is, iran will race to developing a nuclear weapon without anybody restricting them further. i come to

the question again, has it not giving you any pause, this reaction? again, from where we were and would be today, we have made tremendous progress in rolling back their programme and very importantly providing insight. prince turkey knows very well that measures of means in terms of understanding of what will be going on in a run. —— acra one. —— iran. many believe we should stay in it because of the advantages. you mentioned benjamin netanyahu. advantages. you mentioned benjamin neta nyahu. let's talk advantages. you mentioned benjamin netanyahu. let's talk about the former iran hawke, one was involved in israeli military actions and he came out in support of it. you can't

use the same arguments now as you could two years ago. this is analogous to what ronald reagan did with their soviet union. in the face of all of the other adversarial relationships we had. either way, the uk, french and german governments have all had this as a foundation stone. we shouldn't be sitting here carving, which should be working to build off of this foundation stone as we look forward 15 years. on the principle of buying time is it not wise for congress to put some new clauses or proposed some new clauses? you used the phrase about buying time. you used the term buying time. it is implicit

on everything you said. is it not wise to ramp up the pressure? festival, we are not —— first of all, we are not simply buying time. we have a long period of time in which they nuclear programme is is rolled back. during which time, i would hope that we could build on that foundation and address what happens down the road, 10— 15 years. the transparency, the verification, i want to emphasise, is the core of the agreement. the i want to take you to north korea. --i want to take you to north korea. --i want to take you to north korea. --i want to take you to north korea. it seems the message from trump on north korea, not entirely unrelated to iran,

policy over a generation hasn't worked. we have tried to work multilaterally and it hasn't worked and clearly, the north koreans are developing their weekly weapons technology, they are miniaturising, they are developing ballistic missile technology, put them together and the us is in the firing line. donald trump has decided to say, so far and no further. if you continue on this path, fire and few rebuild be the result. if that not actually sensible diplomacy? first of all, you talk about not having an agreement or a policy not working for a long time. i will come back to korea but let me make one more point about iran. there was a deal to be had in 2003. that was declined. iran went from essentially no centrifuges to 20,000 centrifuges. no image uranium to 20 times. —— times. ——

tons. sometimes buying time but putting in place the kinds of verification measures, it is critical. either way, verification for north korea will be equally important. we can't bend too much time going back in time. but what we can consider is right now and north korea and the notion that you have that donald trump is not pursuing a sensible course. —— we can't spend too much time. there must be dialogue now. i am saying, well, they have tried that, many, many times. donald trump is in essence threatening something very different. he is using the fear factor. i believe the piece you are to does advocate dialogue. it makes it clear that the first dialogue is with china, south korea and japan. but a different dialogue than what we are seeing in the public. a

dialogue that is not simply the united states making recommendations to china for what we want to see happen as opposed to a broader dialogue of the entire security context for that region, china, north korea, south korea, japan. of course, issues like the first american military posture in the region. should an agreement be reached is very important to china. we have to put on the china are very much broader set of issues. this is a case where the issue of north korean nuclear weapons, i believe and combined with missiles, can be eventually resolved only by enlarging the discussion to include the full security context. right. well, those words sound great but i am very mindful of what is actually happening on the ground. every single day, the north koreans appear more determined to develop a programme that would threaten allies

in the region. here is my question. you are part of the nuclear threat initiative organisation. in your view, is it inevitable that what north korea is doing today is going to lead to another very dangerous round of nuclear weapons proliferation in our world ? round of nuclear weapons proliferation in our world? that is certainly a major risk. that is one of the regions where we are concerned about that, especially since, it is very important. you have talked about united states coming under the range of north korean missiles. that is obviously a very serious issue. i want to emphasise the stop our allies, south korea and japan are a military forces, they have already been under that threat. it is notjust about the united states. it is also about tens of millions of people, potentially, coming under threat in south korea and japan. that threat has been there for a while. and

frankly, south korea, seoul has been under a huge threat. we need to have a broader picture of the whole security context. let me ask you this, now that you are out of the administration and free to say what you really think and now you are heading up the nuclear initiative organisation, do you yourself believe that one day, the united states should commit not just the nuclear non—proliferation but the abolition, the nobel peace prize has been given to a group who are fundamentally committed to what has become a us treaty —based notion that one day we will get to a point where all nations sign up to the elimination of nuclear weapons. you believe it's possible to imagine the united doing that? yes. i think the vision has to remain a world without nuclear weapons. i'm not...

vision has to remain a world without nuclearweapons. i'm not... knots not so naive to think that is possible in any short time period, it will take a long time to get there. i hope we can get there. that sort of long—term intent, it's a bit ofa sort of long—term intent, it's a bit of a fork hypocrisy isn't it for parts of the world to lecture people who do not have nuclear weapons and to tell people not to get them. if the us can't even prepared to commit toa the us can't even prepared to commit to a long—term abolition, why should any other nation...? to a long—term abolition, why should any other nation. . . ? the united states is signatory to the non—proliferation treaty. it is a different thing. it makes the statement. the p5, us, russia, china, britain, france, were singled out as nuclear weapons states, the rest of the world which other non—nuclear weapon states, we would act to help them develop peaceful nuclear programmes and we would act to eliminate nuclear weapons. it is

a commitment in the non—proliferation treaty, it is already in the treaty. but to get the required steps. the idea ofjust talking about the vision, frank lee, is not going to help us with a very, very difficult, step—by—step processes that will take a long time to get there. what is the verification regime for a world without nuclear weapons? but the tough question. it applies to everybody. ok? right now what we focus on is let's make sure we are taking the steps that prevents the use of a nuclear weapon, that is the real risk, and regrettably, i would say the odds of that happening today are higher wobbly since the cuban missile crisis. so which do you lose more sleepover, that threat, your alarm about nuclear proliferation and the danger, the real danger you see is actually a nuclear conflict in the world in the not too distant future, or climate change, the rising global temperatures, and the

fa ct rising global temperatures, and the fact that despite the paris court, it looks as though the international will to keep temperature rise below that two celsius threshold isn't going to be effective ——a chord. which causes you more loss of sleep? i bill through a third one in, bio security, the possibility of pandemics including those caused by bad actors. the ronald koeman -- are only so many alarms we can deal with. are you to give three main issues though. but with the climate change, he worked very hard with john terry and others to get the paris deal and donald trump has walked away from that. and it looks like the american public doesn't ca re like the american public doesn't care that much that he has walked away from it. first of all i want to make sure it is understood that what has dropped it onjune one was announced the beginning of the process to withdraw from the paris accord. formally, it cannot occur...

until around the time of his first administration coming to an end. until the day after the next presidential election. i don't consider it a done deal. obviously i was quite disturbed. but look at the fa cts , was quite disturbed. but look at the facts, whatever he can practically do about the paris accord, look at what he has done, he has approved new pipeline projects, massive projects, double obviously further expand fossil fuel exploitation in the united states, he has revoked the united states, he has revoked the clean power plant, he has overturned obama's arctic cooling bad, he is reviewing commitment to federal investment in clean energy research and development. all of these different levels he has taken real, practical steps which are the first the policies that you end president obama were driving. obviously i'm very unhappy about this but it look at some other fa cts . this but it look at some other facts. first of all the united states is roughly speaking halfway

towards the paris goal already. but happened without these federal climate rules. the states were the big drivers of this. the governors of those states have recommitted the continuing. but because of easy wins with the conversion from coal to cheap shale oil and gas. cold to gas was half, roughly half of the progress. and it is low-hanging fruit but you have to move forward. so the clean power plan which is being called part of a war on coal which never existed, but the clean power plant would in fact, there is no doubt, it was lower call‘s role in illicit -- no doubt, it was lower call‘s role in illicit —— ultraslim production on that list if there was carbon ca ptu re on that list if there was carbon capture in the discussion. but donald trump's is expanding coal production, at least he wants to, and reducing... let's talk about the fa cts o n and reducing... let's talk about the facts on coal, no one is talking about building a new coal plant with or without the clean power plant,

and secondly every projection i've seen is that the target of the clean power plant, 32% reduction in co2 by 2030, is coming to be met even without the clean power plant. some states now will not meet their targets so there is a lot of progress towards the low carbon future but i would say the president's announcement notwithstanding in the united states and globally, we are going to the same place. there is no going back. we are going to a low carbon future. and that is so deeply held that in fa ct after and that is so deeply held that in fact after the president's announcement, over 1000 businessmen made the same statement. we are coming forward. international scientists have just released a paper saying the co2 in the atmosphere increased at record speed last year. you are a respected scientist in the field, is it too late to have any hope of keeping global temperatures, late to have any hope of keeping globaltemperatures, globalwarming below that significantly below that two celsius threshold? the threshold

i will not say, it will be tough to meet, is it possible, it's possible, but it will require serious concerted action to get there. including in my view a pretty universal price on carbon. but let me emphasise to the great goal is a very sensible one in terms of minimising the damage from global warming, minimising the degree of very expensive adaptation in all countries will have to do. however, it is really important is to get as far as we it is really important is to get as faras we can it is really important is to get as far as we can in the carbon greenhouse gas emissions reduction. because if we don't, we will be way up because if we don't, we will be way up the curve in global warming with catastrophic impacts if we can't make two degrees, but the 2.5 degrees. i'm not giving up. i'mjust mindful that the current head of the epa, donald trump appointees scott pruitt, as it is a belief that

carbon dioxide is the primary contributor to global warming my last question to you is do you feel is renowned nuclear physicist, scientists, a man who left science to go into politics in the federal government, do you feel like an endangered species? in the donald trump era it seems a man like you would have no chance of becoming a key player in washington politics. there is no question i think this administration to date at least has not met the standard in my view for putting in those who are knowledgeable on the science as a basis for policy. i do want to, however, i cannot let this go without saying you said scott pruitt cosmic statement, it simply incorrect and in fact... it isn't so much you want to the dispute whether it is correct or not, i want you to address has something fundamental change in us government that rationality, data, science, matters less tha n rationality, data, science, matters less than it is noted the generations? i'm not going to talk

about generations but i can talk about generations but i can talk about the last decade and the answer is yes. it is a fact that we are seeing far less fact driven, a nalytically seeing far less fact driven, analytically driven analysis of policy and i might say that what i found personally in the last administration was full, look, it isn't as though the obama white house and congress had a wonderful political relationship. let's face it, it was quite difficult. even within that when the department of energy went forward with policy recommendations clearly based on data analysis, we found a very receptive congress and they in fact, enacted legislation to put in place many of those recommendations. i think the administration is missing and it by not basing their policy on that and statements of the type that you made about carbon and climate area you made about carbon and climate are a good example of an anti— fact driven statement. the key is society will keep moving in that direction

of low carbon. we will see. ernest moniz, thank you for being on hardtalk. my pleasure. bonfire night was a cold and mainly dry one up and down the uk. overnight, temperatures continue to fall away under clear skies with light winds, leading to the coldest night of the season so far. during the early hours of monday morning, we are looking at values in towns and cities close to freezing. you can see that blue hue there on the map. in rural places, significantly colder, down two “11, —5, or even —6 in some places, along with some mist and fog. so monday morning is starting on a cold and bright note. some mist and fog about too.

that should tend to clear away. so to see a change out west as this weather system slowly losing, bringing cloud, rain, and strengthening winds. into the afternoon, some of the thicker cloud will have a right across the south—west of england into west wales, with spots of rain, as well. winds will pick up in the south, lifting temperatures to 11 or 12 celsius, gradually. but still a bright and sunny afternoon in the midlands, and will remain like that until the overnight period when thickening cloud arise. much of northern england, northern ireland, and scotland, cloudier skies in the afternoon, strengthening winds, and that rain will really start to pep up and become heavy across the west of scotland. the isobars packed together. a breezy evening across the board. they travel continue to push this was along with the rain band. by the end of the night, it will be across western parts of britain. behind it, something clearer and cooler. ahead of it, mild and breezy and certainly much milder than the previous night. but the mild air, as you can see,

here, is only a very thin slice, wedged between two areas. cold air moving in behind that rain band. a windy day in england and wales on tuesday. the rain will eventually get to eastern areas where it will be heavy at times. one or two showers around, particularly sunshine. the will be cooler, back into single figures for many. double figures across the east and south—east, but here, very wet. weather front eventually clears away. a ridge of high—pressure noses and for wednesday before the next weather system comes in wednesday night. a little bit of frost and bright and turning brighter across far south—east. turning windy across scotland and northern ireland. that band of wet and windy weather will spread through wednesday night to leave thursday breezy with a little bit of sunshine and a few showers. i'm rico hizon in singapore, the headlines.

a mass shooting at a baptist church in texas leaves 26 dead. another 20 are injured. we are dealing with the largest mass shooting in our state's history. error so many families who have lost family members. —— there are. he's met his best friend in asia — shinzo abe — now president trump is off to meet the japanese emperor. i'm babita sharma in london. also in the programme — a huge new leak of financial documents — known as the paradise papers — has revealed how the powerful and wealthy secretly invest vast amounts of money in offshore tax havens.