the us is hoping china might put more pressure on its ally and neighbour north korea to abandon its nuclear programme. the world's most powerful leaders will also oversee a signing ceremony for billions of dollars of trade deals. britain's international development secretary, priti patel, has resigned, the second cabinet minister to do so in the past week. she'd held unauthorised meetings with israeli leaders while on holiday in israel. ms patel said that her actions were meant with the best of intentions. the actor and director kevin spacey is facing fresh allegations of sexual misconduct. the us journalist heather unruh has told reporters that her son was sexually assaulted by mr spacey last year. now it's time for hardtalk. welcome to hardtalk. i'm stephen sackur. germany is europe's pre—eminent

power, but how will berlin use that power over the next few years? the make—up of the next governing coalition has yet to be decided and there are strategic uncertainties as well. how far does berlin want to push eu integration, and how wide could tra ns—atla ntic differences become? my guest is david mcallister, a political ally of ms merkel, and chairman of the european parliament's foreign affairs committee. how bold is berlin prepared to be? david mcallister at the european parliament in brussels,

welcome to hardtalk. thank you. let's begin with the notion that the european union has been wrestling with something of an existential crisis for a few years. do you think the european union has now emerged from that crisis, or is it still in the middle of it? well, the last years were not easy for the european union. that's obvious. but i think brexit and other incidents were a wake—up call for the 27 member states, and i believe the european union is now facing towards a better future, and you can also see in the recent polling that the approval rates for the european union membership is going up in the 27 member states. a strong europe needs a strong germany, and right now, of course it is short—term, but right now there isn't even a real german government, and no clarity about what that governing coalition

is going to look like. that is a problem, isn't it? yes, but this happens after elections. the german voters decided about the composition of a new german parliament in september. now we are busy forming a new government. it will probably be a four—party government, with the cdu, the csu, the liberals and the greens. hopefully the coalition negotiations will be concluded before christmas. i hope we will then have a strong and stable government in berlin. well, it will not be as strong and stable as people anticipated. that is clearly the result of an election where the cdu, your party, suffered a real reversal. the results took the cdu/csu vote down eight points to 33%, from over 40% before. your number of seats is down. and breathing down the necks of the mainstream parties is a far—right group, the afd, who got 12% of the vote. suddenly angela merkel‘s leadership in germany, her dominance of germany,

doesn't look like it looked a few months ago. well, of course my political parties, the cdu and the csu, were hoping for a better result in september, but the german electorate decided to give us a little more than 32%. but we have shown responsibility since then. we are ready to form a government again. our coalition partner dropped out of the coalition a few minutes after polling stations had closed. i do not think that was a wise move. the only option now is to try this so—called jamaica coalition, with the liberals and the greens, which will be challenging. for us in the cdu, one thing is clear. we will not co—operate with the far left or the far right in the german bundestag. so this is the only option we have. i was sad to see alternative fur deutschland become the third—strongest party in the bundestag. we must be very sure that the bundestag does not become a platform for racism and extreme nationalism.

would you accept the point made by pascal lamy a few weeks ago that what we have now is an angela merkel who has emerged from the entire electoral process politically weakened, and the anti—european forces in germany have gained ground? put that together, and your opening remarks about your belief that europe can now move forward, that assertion is going to be hamstrung by a much weaker sense of angela merkel‘s leadership and germany's leadership. well, i do not agree with pascal lamy. angela merkel has been elected for a fifth time as the head

of a national government. you will not find many similar cases in the western world. we knew this would be a challenging election. i am sure we will have a stable government before christmas. i would also like to point out that despite the 13% that the afd got at the election, this means 85% and more germans voted in favour of pro—european parties. there is a strong pro—eu consensus within the german political system. beyond the coalition of the csu, cdu, the greens and the liberals, also the social democrats, they are interested in bringing the european union forward and germany will continue to play an active role with the european union as we have done over the past decades. that's sort of boilerplate rhetoric. let's get down to specifics. you have a french president, emmanuel macron, who has laid out a vision of what he calls the historic reconstruction of europe and the eurozone. he is talking about very ambitious things. a finance ministry, the ability to impose eu—wide taxes,

debt sharing within the european union. these are all things which are highly controversial within germany, but which more particularly are rejected by the free democrats, who will now be an instrumental part of the governing coalition, as you havejust laid out. so i return to this point. germany cannot show the leadership alongside emmanuel macron that many pro—europeans were hoping for. we have heard two very important speeches on the future of europe in the last few weeks. one is the speech of president macron. the other was jean—claude juncker‘s state of the union speech. i have looked closely at both speeches and i would say that 80%, perhaps 90%, we have common ground. if you look at the german—french cooperation, that has always been the driving force in the european union, and i am

confident there are a lot of political issues on which paris and berlin can closely co—operate when it comes to the future of europe. co—operation in defence and security, strengthening the eu's external borders, strengthening the coast guard, this co—operation on the fight against terrorism. and also, we agree that if we want to keep ourjoint currency, the euro, sustainable, we will have to strengthen the economic and monetary union, and we are ready to discuss many of the french proposals, and i would also say that we have a lot of things in common. where i am of a different opinion than emmanuel macron, i don't think it is wise to create new institutions, that means a eurozone government and parliament. we should use the existing institutions we have. hang on... hang on a minute. if you are not prepared to buy macron's point about i think what the experts call variable

geometry, and that is the deeper integration in the eurozone, then as usual, the eu can only travel at the pace of its slowest members. and if we see all of the scepticism now from eastern europe, from poland, hungary, the czech republic, essentially, if you are not prepared to expect the multitier, multispeed europe of emmanuel macron, you are not going to get anything changed at all. i don't like using the term "multispeed europe," but i would prefer to talk about different levels of integration, and the heads of government of the eu 27 made this clear at their meeting in rome, at the 60th anniversary of the rome treaty, that this is the way to go. certain member states want to deepen the european integration and we should be able to do so when it comes to defence and security, when it comes to cooperation within the schengen area, but also within the eurozone area. what i was trying to point out is thatjean—claude juncker was right in his state of the union speech, the euro is notjust the currency of the eurozone, it is the currency of the whole european union, apart from the uk,

which is leaving, and denmark. so i would prefer to use existing european institutions instead of creating new ones like euros in parliament. and as a german i also see the necessity that we have to develop the rescue mechanism for the euro into the european monetary fund. one thing is very clear. it is not only a point from the german liberals but also from my party. we will not accept the mutualisation of debts. i see a lot of common ground with french president macron and i am sure that french vision can be combined with german pragmatism to keep the european engine going. briefly, on that one point, you have just said clearly that you will not accept the mutualisation of debt. that is a red line, is it? that means there will be a severe brake on the deep economic, monastery in fiscal integration that juncker and indeed macron envisaged. the germans aren't going to break on that, is that clear? this was a clear vision in the election manifesto for the cdu and csu. it was also similar position coming

from the liberal party. so i don't know about red lines, but i think this is a clear german position which our partners in the eurozone will have to accept. let's talk about other issues. i want to get onto brexit in a moment, but before we get to brexit, do you think we are not sufficiently aware of the degree to which there is a new set of fragmentations inside the european union, which are dividing the old western european members from the newer members in the east of the union? i am thinking of the so—called visagrad countries — poland, hungary, the czech republic, you could add a few more. they are very unhappy with much of what they hear coming

from the centralised institutions in brussels. i think they are beginning to feel that they are being frozen out of the decision—making process. well, a european union with 28 member states, or in future with 27 member states without the united kingdom, is a complicated organisation. undoubtedly. but if you look at the history of the eu, six member states, 9, i2, 15, it has always been challenging. europe always lives on the willingness of the member states to find compromises. yes, there are different views on migration between the west and the east. hang on. it is easy to say it is just about migration. it is also about you, well, not you personally, but the brussels institutions telling the poles that in terms of their treatment of their judiciary and their constitution, they are behaving outside the parameters of european values. the eu is more than a single market. it's a community of values.

ourjoint values our democracy, the rule of law and other important values. and if one country is in danger of violating these fundamental principles, it is not only fairer, it's also an obligation of the commission to investigate this thoroughly. this is exactly what the commission is doing according to ourjoint treaties. how would you characterise the state of brexit negotiations? well, i still believe that brexit is a historic mistake, but i have to accept the decision of the british people and the uk government. we are in the middle of these negotiations. we all knew this would not be easy.

we have all entered uncharted territory. the clock is ticking. we will have to conclude the negotiations on a technical level at the end of october 2018, so this gives us now 11 months to not only settle the british withdrawal but also the cornerstones of the future relationship. hopefully at the european council in december, the heads of government will agree that sufficient progress has been made so we can start the second phase of the negotiations. you say hopefully. do you think that will come to pass? do you think the uk government has a coherent strategy, for a start? at the last european council the heads of government stated sufficient progress had not been made, but they also showed readiness to prepare for a decision to be taken in december. but it now depends what the uk government will deliver. i think a speech of the prime minister in florence was important in setting the tone. the prime minister made clear that the uk will honour all its financial obligations. what we now need is to translate this promise into a concrete and firm commitment to actually settle all the financial

obligations. and if we can do this within the next weeks, and david davis and michel barnier are working on this, then i am positive we can see this sufficient progress achieved. yes, but they are miles apart. in the florence speech, theresa may claimed she was making a major effort at reaching out by saying, you know, we will pay our budget obligations through to 2021, which amounts to 20 billion euros, the uk government is "giving" to brussels as financial settlement, but the message from brussels is it has got to be around 60 billion. so, you tell me, how do you bridge this gap? i don't think it is helpful discussing concrete sums at this point. what we accept from the uk... time is running out, mr mcallister. when will it become helpful to actually get specific?

what we expect from the uk is to settle all its financial obligations with regard to the eu budget, to other european bodies and funds, and also to other eu—related facilities and investment programmes. and once we have seen a firm commitment of the uk government to settle these obligations then it makes sense to actually calculate the concrete amount that the british withdrawal will cost. that's the way we should go ahead, instead of discussing facts and figures, which, at the moment, nobody can really acknowledge. well, i suppose in the end it comes down to trust and clarity on both sides. here is something that a colleague of yours, manfred weber, a senior conservative german mep, he said, there is a big question about who the eu should call in london on brexit. he said, who speaks for the british government, theresa may, borisjohnson, david davis?

he went on specifically about boris johnson, saying, reading johnson's attacks against his own prime minister's position, he talked of quarrels, political contradictions and he ended up saying, please, sackjohnson, because then we might get some clear answers as to who is responsible for the british position. do you share those views? you know, i would prefer not to comment on domestic british politics. we will accept the uk government as it is composed. theresa may is the prime minister. she is in charge of the uk government. yes, but the point manfred weber is getting to is, honestly, you are a significant figure at the european parliament, watching this closely, do you honestly believe theresa may is truly in charge right now? she is the prime minister, and as long as she is the prime minister she will be treated as a prime minister. and i haven't read any news that she won't be the prime minister.

so i will accept the prime minister, the foreign minister and also david davis, who is doing, from the british point of view, a good job negotiating this british withdrawal with michel barnier. let me once again underline, we in europe didn't ask for this divorce. it is a british decision to leave the european union. we want to make the best out of this situation. brexit will never be a win—win situation. it won't be a win—lose or lose—win situation. it will be a lose—lose situation for both sides. but let's try to make the best out of this divorce, which we didn't ask for. ok, some quickfire points before we finish, a lot to get through. catalonia — you, as chair of the european parliament foreign affairs committee, have been watching a very closely. simple question for you, if the catalans in their regional election slated for december 21, of course, called by the madrid government, if they clearly vote by majority for pro—independence parties, will you and other senior figures at the eu at that point recognise their right to self—determination?

this is an internal spanish conflict. we have the rule of law in spain, we have a strong constitution. and what the separatists in barcelona are doing is unconstitutional. it is not possible under the spanish constitution to leave the state of spain. but you are not a tone deaf politician, mr mcallister. you have actually won elections in germany. you know how politics works. how do you think it is going to look if the people of catalonia go to the polls, frankly, forced there by a madrid government decision to call these elections, and if they vote clearly for pro—independence parties, you are saying that vote will have no legitimacy and the eu won't even bother acknowledging it? this is an internal spanish conflict and it will have to be solved within the spanish framework. that's why i don't understand

there are calls for a negotiation... negotiation role of the european union, because neither the separatist government in barcelona, nor the central government in madrid, have asked for the eu to negotiate a dialogue. this will have to be sorted out. and i am pretty sure that if you have real elections in catalonia the silent majority of those catalans who are fed up with the separatist movement will have the possibility to actually declare their will. because the referendum which took place was illegal. that is an entirely different case. i grant you we will find out on december 21 what they vote for. my question is posited on the notion that they might, who knows, they might vote by a clear majority for pro—independence parties, and i want to know what the eu will do then. and you seem to me to be saying

we will hold our hands to our ears, deaf to the rights of the catalans to self—determination, and we will support a government, which, last time there was a vote, sent in the military police to drag people from the polling booths. how do you think that looks? the referendum was unconstitutional and illegal, first point. the second point, i know what you're trying to get at. but why should i answer a hypothetical question? and the third point is that all member states of the european union, including the european commission, have been very clear that they did not accept the declared independence of the separatist government in barcelona. before we finish, i would like to talk to you about transatlantic ties as well. donald trump clearly doesn't think much of the european union. and, in particular, he doesn't seem to think much of angela merkel and germany. he has described the trade policy of germany as bad, very bad.

he says he is considering putting new tariffs and controls on german exports of motor cars into the united states. how would you describe the german feeling about donald trump? the united states and canada are our most important partners outside europe. we are democracies, we are market economies, we are strong trade partners and we closely co—operate on security and defence, and that's why i strongly believe, as a huge majority of germans, including the federal government, that strong transatlantic relations are key. yes, there are some new challenges for our transatlantic relations, for german—american relations since president trump was elected, but i must say in the last months, even though president trump does seem quite critical in my home country, the german government,

and the eu commission, is working with the us government on a number of issues. hang on, i can't let you get away with that. you seem to be ignoring reality. the german government, along with other eu governments, pleaded with the americans not to abandon the paris climate change accord. donald trump didn't listen. in recent weeks and months you have pleaded with him not to end the certification of the iran nuclear deal. he didn't listen to you on that item either. how can you convince me that europe has any leverage with the trump administration today? well, just before you interrupted me, i was about to say that, apart from a lot of common issues we have, we do have some different views. ah. not only germany has criticised the trump administration for abandoning the climate protection agreement of paris. we also see very critical american moves to end the nuclear

deal with iran. we negotiated for years to get this deal done, it was hard work. and i was in washington last year, with other members from the foreign affairs committee, and the european parliament, telling our us counterparts that the americans should always take into account the possible consequences if this deal no longer exists. i guess, if i may, we are almost out of time, the fact is donald trump doesn't appear to believe that europe counts for much, yes? i strongly believe that the european union will survive, and it will be even stronger, because i strongly believe that in the 21st century, in a globalised world, all european countries are stronger and better off together, and only together we will get the eye level with the united states, with china, with india and with russia. we have to end there. but, david mcallister, i thank you very much

forjoining me on hardtalk. thank you so much. it was a pleasure. hello, again. there's some colder weather on the way for this weekend. we revealed the important progress made in the relationship since we met at mar—a—lago and we discussed how to further move forward the relationship in the months ahead in

great depth and we reached a series of new and important consensus. our meeting is constructive and productive. i shared with the president the policies adopted at the 19th party congress. i conveyed china's firm commitment to deeper reform, greater opening up and a path of peaceful development. and china's desire to expand converging interest with other countries and including corporation with other major countries. president trump shared with me he is —— domestic agenda. the development of china and the us is reinforcing without contradicting each other. our

respective success helps both countries. we believe that facing the complex and changing international landscape, and maintaining stability and promoting global prosperity, china and the us being two large countries share more common interests, show greater responsibility and enjoy broader room for corporation. a healthy, sta ble room for corporation. a healthy, stable and growing china us relationship is not only in the fundamental interest of the chinese and american people, it also meets the expectations of the international community. (inaudible). through mutual visits and correspondence with a view to timely communications on major issues of

shared interest. we agreed to make the most of the diplomatic and security dialogue, comprehensive economic dialogue, social and people to people dialogue and law enforcement and cyber security dialogue, four high level dialogue mechanisms, and worked together for greater results out of these dialogue. we believe that china and the united states are the two largest economies and important engines of global economic growth. we need to further expand trade and investment cooperation, strengthen macroeconomic policy co—ordination, pursue healthy, stable and dynamically balanced economic and trade relations. it is necessary to formulate and launch economic corporation and plans for the next phase to have in depth discussion on

export restrictions, investment environments, market openers and other issues —— cooperation. and work to support practical —— cooperation in energy infrastructure and other areas. just now the president and i witnessed the signing of some major cooperation agreements by our businesses. during this visit. .. (inaudible). billion us dollars of commercial deals and investment agreements. according to china's table and roadmap for opening up, china has announced steps to promote market access. this speaks volumes of the broad space forfurther access. this speaks volumes of the broad space for further economic and trade corporation between the countries, which would deliver great benefits to the two peoples. we agreed to expand dialogue between oui’

agreed to expand dialogue between our military is at various levels, realised at an early date the visit by the us secretary of defence to china and a senior high—level chinese military delegation to the us to work to ensure the success of the firstjoint us to work to ensure the success of the first joint staff dialogue mechanism and the disaster managementjoint exercise mechanism and the disaster management joint exercise and economic exchanges. we agreed to strengthen law enforcement and cyber security cooperation. the two sides reaffirmed that neither wants to become a safe haven for each other‘s fugitives and we will instruct authorities of the two countries to actively explore a long—term cooperation mechanism regarding fugitive assets recovery and repatriations of illegal immigrants. the two sides will continue the implementation of the 5—point consensus reached in 2015 to enhance cyber security cooperation including