last year's the pledge she made in last year's ma nifesto. the pledge she made in last year's manifesto. the prime minister is to carry out a cabinet reshuffle tomorrow, amid reports that several ministers could be sacked or move. some of britain's biggest retailers, including b&q, wickes, morrisons and the co—op, agreed to stop selling acids and corrosive substances to customers under the age of 18. now on bbc news, it's time for dateline london. hello and a very warm welcome to dateline london, i'mjane hill. this week we look at the situation in iran after protests in many cities and we ask is president trump damaged by his former chief strategist‘s allegations of treason?

my guests this week: bronwen maddox from the think tank the institute for government, previously with the times and the economist. the irish writer and broadcaster brian o'connell. the american writer and broadcaster michael goldfarb who also brings us the podcast frdh. first rough draft of history. and iranianjournalist and editor of kayhan-london nazenin ansari. welcome to you all. the united states has been rebuked by some other members of the united nations‘ security council for calling an emergency meeting to discuss the recent anti—government protests in iran. china and russia say the unrest isn't a threat to international security, and russia accused the us of abusing its position. demonstrations and counter demonstrations filled the streets for many days, in numerous cities. more than 20 people have died and hundreds have been arrested, from your assessment, to what extent is this something

we have seen before, in iran, what you shall take? this protest, first of all, is based in the grassroots, more widespread because there are certain strands of grievances and suffering that is all coalescing into one trend. the feeling that the government and the system cannot answer the aspirations and the hopes and the needs of the people. we have seen this protest, this was nothing new, as far as the protest itself was concerned, we have seen this since 2013. rohane was elected with the intention of improving the standing in the world of iran and the economic situation, but then they continued, structural problems remain, the banking system, a lot of banks went bankrupt, the pension system broke,

and in the meantime, teachers were not paid, labourers were not paid, factory workers were fired from theirjobs because factories have closed. from an economic and financial perspective, yes, it is hurting the ordinary account holder and pensioner. fifty five per cent of the population of iran is working age, above 25. very young population. yes, very young population, and what has happened is the government has not been able to really not make things better. that is why they took off as they did, specifically, two events happened, prior to this, in the past month. number one, the budget was published by mr rouhani and this time for the sake of accountability, and transparency, he publicised the amount of money allocated to religious institutions from the budget. these institutions and foundations already receive ridges

arms from the people, already they do not pay taxes, yet their allocation increased in this budget. at a time when standards of living was falling. yes, and then at the same time, increased the budget of irgc, these forces are becoming more involved in syria, in yemen, with hezbollah, paying them daily, billions going out per month, from the iranian budget, to finance the war in syria, in lebanon, hezbollah‘s allocation.

another event that happened in the past month, two earthquakes in iran, over 700 in total quakes in iran in the past month. that is a lot. iran sits on a fault line, the nuclear policy has not been questioned in the street but they are asking, my god, why hasn't there been any safety reports issued, why can't we know where these nuclear reactors are, all of these have been given hand to hand for each other, which has international implications. is it that the implications that should be discussed at the un security council? this is a mistake by the us, things that they have that it be brought to the un, principally the nuclear programme, which is a matter of international security, and the security council reluctant to look at it but they have taken steps over the years, and that is absolutely proper use of it. the us would be much better advised

to sit and let this play out because it risks antagonising people who might... people who do not want to be associated with the us but want to see these changes. what you are looking at, as has been powerfully described, people rising up and saying, just on economic grounds, standards of living, what it is like to live in iran, we are fed up with the way the regime is handling this. all kinds of things that the us does have an interest in, money going out to hezbollah, and so on, you have people arguing from the most powerful positions possible, they resent the money going out of the country, people questioning it. the us should sit back and let this gather steam, which it probably will. and when it does we will talk about that. what is interesting is,

the us, just briefly, i know we will talk about it later, the us has no idea. this is before the trump administration, the us has had very bad understandings, going back to 1979, when the revolution first happened and american diplomats were taken hostage. of what the internal political dynamics are in iran. this is not the first time this has happened, and almost every ten years. nazaneen will tell me, 1999, major student uprising, at tehran university, that were violently suppressed by some of the fathers of the people who were in the snout, in the militia then. and then 2009, after the election was nullified and a more liberal man

had been elected who is still under house arrest, and what i see is a pattern, every time the regime realises it has to liberalise a bit, the problems with liberalising a bit, in iran, any authoritarian state, you get people's hopes up and then you cannot deliver. some of what we are seeing now is what was going on in 1999 and 2009, people thought, we have signed the jc poa, the iran nuclear deal, so we will get some benefit now. because assets overseas are unfrozen. —— jcpoa. easier trade to carry on... and it is not coming through, and after two years they are fed up and they come into the street. and, bronwyn is right, america should not be involved because when america... —— bronwen. all these american administrations have forgotten what they ever knew, if they ever knew it, iranians are profoundly patriotic, not nationalistic, but patriotically they want to sort out their own problems, they do not want intervention, the less said from the outside,

the better. do you see it as an internal problem, a lot of it economic but more besides? looking at it from afar, it does seem that it is not like the 2009 incidents that centred around what was perceived as an unfair election process, and it is far more widespread and economically base. and the us cannot win no matter what it does, back in 2009, i seem to remember, barack 0bama try to be nuanced in what he said, he was criticised for not saying enough when it happened, and then to match a week or two later, the crackdown came. they cannot win. one thing, probably, that the united states could do, is, and i think this would be very useful, if donald trump decided to do it, although i won't be holding my breath, would be to lift the ban on travel from iran, his ban that he initiated over several muslim majority countries, that would help. it would back up what he says in his tweets, talking about

"freedom—loving people" and helping people get their own freedom. i don't think it is going to happen but either way, it is not going to get on the security council agenda and the us cannot win on this one. there is a few differences between 1999, 2009 and now, 1999 it was only students and it was freedom of expression, you can actually chart, you know, a rise of the movement itself, from 1999 to now. in 2009, it was a single issue, and it was within the government, this time, it is not so anymore, it is very widespread. but, one thing that we understand, that they are asking, the activists, everyone, they are asking for open lines of communication. because the first thing

that the regime did was close down social media, telegram, snapchat. .. controlling the internet... because that is how they communicate. that is one thing they did. the next thing, they started beating them up, and they started saying they were cracking down, then they started their own demonstrations. bringing their own people out. like entering into a football stadium with one team playing. at the moment, what the united states can do, and has expressed that it will do is open these lines of communication, provide access to internet. and the demonstrations we have seen thus far,

despite the number of arrests, is your best guess that this will have any impact at all on the country's approach to syria ? you mentioned hezbollah, does it change anything? it will not pull iran back from involvement in those conflicts, where it is very invested, notjust in the scraps of the moment but in trying to build zone of influence right across the region, what has been called a "shia crescent." this is a dangerous game for the us to play because it risks inflaming this is a dangerous game for the us to play because it risks inflaming the sunni—shia, saudi versus iran conflict that has been called a new cold war, it is not very cold at all. it is not dramatically going to change a lot. but, i think it cannot help

but begin to have some effect on the regime. it will not change, the resolve of the islamic republic is to defeat united states, to defeat israel. they do not even want to acknowledge that israel has a right to exist. will it change from these red lines? obviously not. do the people realise it, that this is the way it is going to be. it is not for the international commute —— is it not also for the international community to acknowledge that this will be the same, do not expect any change from the islamic republic, specifically not in the international sphere. that is why it is an international issue. interesting, we will see where it goes, whether there is further protests. let's talk specifically about the united states as well. there's been a swirl of claim and counter—claim around the white house this week, with a new book by the us journalist michael wolff suggesting numerous staffers around president trump believe he never wanted the top job, and isn't up to it. his former chief strategist

steve bannon is reported as telling wolff that meetings between trump's son and russian diplomats was treason. donald trump did try to get this book banned, he tried to get the publication delayed... does that tell us anything? storm in a teacup? you expect these books six weeks after the end of the administration, however it ends, whether it is the impeachment... he serves the full eight years, doesn't matter, this is the tell all we have all been waiting for... except we did not have to wait! much of the book, from the extracts i have read, has been reported elsewhere, it isjust that names have been put to anonymous sources, and it is organised in a titillating and very amusing way. i think what the book does show is that the war for trump's ear is never—ending, one of these bosses whose decision is the last person who spoke with him.

whatever he said, that is my decision. his children, steve bannon, the republican party all trying to get his ear, initially steve bannon had his ear and then he lost it. steve bannon has allowed this to go forward, to say that the son of the president, donald trumer., is going to be cracked like an egg on national television by robert mueller, the special prosecutor looking into the matter... that is burning your bridges with a flame—thrower! but what is interesting to me is the way the republicans have dealt with this so far. their initial response was to demand the justice department look into the clinton foundation. they are backing their man. one of the interesting quotes, it comes from mitch mcconnell, you can correct me if i am wrong, "trump will sign anything i put in front of him."

that is crucial, they have the most important thing they wanted, and its ordinary tax reform bill, which cuts corporate taxes which will not necessarily mean higher wages for people, it will mean bigger dividends for shareholders, cutting taxes on the most wealthy in american society with tiny amounts coming to the kind of people who backed donald trump all the way. the republicans think, "we have one here, we have pulled him into our camp, steve bannon thought he would pull him into the nationalist camp..." ..i will get in trouble for this, "the white supremacist camp," blood—and—soil nationalism, the new way forward for america, "making america great again"... i think the republicans feel they have won him over and they have a sense of control but the other thing the book tells us is that this guy really cannot be controlled because he has no impulse control himself. and i think that is probably the most important thing of the book, it does reveal how this guy's mind, such as it is(!), works, we should all be paying attention to that. in this era of fake news,

he says he coined the phrase, michael wolff himself is a colourful character. i was interviewing a trump supporter and he said, you have to second source most of these things, at the bbc, these sources do not have two sources, these quotes, and so you cannot rely on it. what is the average reader meant to take away from this, can they trusted? i think they can trust the overall picture, because it stands together as a picture, a narrative, of how the white house is working, and as michael says, a portrait of this extraordinary president. whether you can trust any individual seed, is a question. real questions about michael wolff's technique generally, which is to write it as if he were there even when he was not, so to take things he has done from interviewing people, second or third hand, writing it as if he was there.

that has been a question right the way through. first base, he has had some of the key people, people like steve bannon, standing up and not withdrawing them. the only significant kind of protest we have had is tony blair saying, i did not say that about the british spying on trump. no one else has rushed out to say i'm disowning that quote. we have not had that quote. the picture hangs together. what hangs there is a portrait of donald trump, as michael is saying, a man so paranoid he will eat only mcdonald's because he doesn't want to be poisoned(!) the very odd mistrust between him and his family members, distance between him and his wife, advisors both clamouring to be close to him, to impress their views on his mind, and being contemptuous of him. that hangs there but there is also stings in there which have some life, one, the allegations of money—laundering against members of the trump coterie. that has legs.

the other one, allegations about his mental health, questions about whether he is suffering from dementia, the repetitions he goes in for. and this instability of decision—making, those have some legs. to his core base, again, they will say, this is the establishment out to attack somebody they do not like. apparently this book is selling very well in his base as well but it is not going to change their minds. it confirms, as you have said, more or less what we already know, that the white house is dysfunctional... that all the comments about trump's mental health have been said by, whether on or off the record am

a by rex tillerson, by rupert murdoch, by hr mcmaster... a couple of others as well. these people have all said this already, we know this. it is confirmation of something that should be quite worrying, yes, but i don't think there is anything new in it but it will sell a lot of books. when you come to talk about amendment 25 and the removal of a president or you are talking about impeachment, you are into a completely different thing, it takes a long time, it is primarily a political process, involving a vote of congress. we are not there at the moment. but it is interesting to have the confirmation of something that we have been discussing on this programme for quite a long time. does it have any long—term impact? he has got things through that he promised, tax cuts mentioned, that was a promise, paris climate accord, supporters will say he is delivering on what he promised on the campaign trail.

yes, i mean, the tax bill you referred to, that counts as achieving something, despite having a white house that the president cannot focus on details, at least this bill was passed, biggest tax success for an administration. you have had the fightback against isis in syria and iraq, the us has increased influence in iraq, iraq right now, with iran, it is not with them at all points. so, there are positives that have happened, but the potential for other positives to happen i think has decreased, in the sense that, let's take iran, again, if donald trump had a better stature among the international community, among the electorate, whatever he would say would be basically, at this time, when he asks for support, people would come, barack 0bama, take trump out and put barack 0bama there are, with his positive approach, if barack 0bama had announced support for this policy of supporting the protest is, everybody would except it. instead...

we have this family dynamic going on, in the middle east, it works, and all colleague of mine told me, they will love trump in saudi arabia and the gulf because they have been telling american presidents for years, have your children around you. a dangerous situation, jared kushner, he inherited a position in his father's real estate business, he married donald trump's daughter, and he goes off to iraq(!), and he spends days with mohammad bin salman(!), the crown prince, and out of it comes this new axis against iran, so when donald trump says, when nikki haley, un ambassador, says, "we think we should have the un security council meeting" it is all part of this new axis of pressure on the regime, except they do not have anything to back it up with. the iranian machine is stronger.

that is a danger to the way the world works. russia have vested interests in maintaining that regime. if anything, when you say iran is stronger at the moment, it is not, in the sense that financially, because it is at the stage it is at now, it cannot maintain its... it's power... economically, maybe not, but militarily... they have been sending afghan militia, look at the amount of money that has been spent, it is upwards of 10 billion. now, this is not a point of strength for iran, and they know it as well, that is why there is dissatisfaction... do you think this pressure brought by trump through his son—in—law and through the saudis, is that strong foreign policy? i'm not saying that for saudi, no, i'm talking about iran,

do different things. it is a shallow—based policy, the significance of this book is whether it tilts the mood... —— two different things. it is a shallow—based policy, the significance of this book is whether it tilts the mood... i take the points that have been made, that the base is sticking with him, but the republicans now think they have what they want out of him, which is the big tax deal, and do they now have reason to distance themselves from him? midterms are coming later this year, which congress is going to watch very closely, as to what that says about whether donald trump's base is sticking with him. we still have the big crisis of north korea hanging there, question about whether donald trump is flirting on twitter, talking about the nuclear button, there is no constitutional check on donald trump pressing that button. he could still get up tomorrow and tweet whatever he wants. the markets are on a roll...

this book may give the generals and others license to pull back a bit, and possibly not carry out the orders of the president. the economy“ doing well. the economy does well for some people and does not do well for others, there was not as manyjobs created as forecast. i'm not sure about that. the bigger question, donald trump is donald trump, how he got there is... people who watch this programme should really focus on that, the republican party is no longer a political party as we come to think of them in democratic societies, it is a faction. when it wins, it governs as if there is no opposition, when in opposition, it ruins everything possible so that it gets re—elected. it does not acknowledge there is a separate thing. ithink... we are all right, it is a transactional racing chip, they got the main thing they wanted, the tax cuts. if they see other benefits in supporting trump, then they will.

come june, when they look at the public opinion polling on individual house races, in 2018, they may reconsider their judgments, and basically, all senior politicians, they do not like to be humiliated. and they have long memories, all of them, and donald trump has humiliated paul ryan, and from time to time, mitch mcconnell, they swallow their pride, got their tax bill, there will come a time, i am certain, when they want to extract their price for that. thank you very much for drawing that to a close, thank you, thank you very much indeed for being with us. plenty more to discuss next week, same time, same place, thank you for watching dateline london. very cold start to sunday morning,

widespread frost and a little bit of ice, most of that gradually clearing. glorious sunny blue skies up clearing. glorious sunny blue skies up and down the uk, in shropshire, one or two showers in the forecast, really are isolated, these are reserved for the north—east corner of england. the odd one may be lingering on for the next few hours, otherwise most places dry, on the mainland, but for shetland, breezy and white throughout the whole afternoon. lovely day elsewhere, little bit of cloud, breeze across the south starting to feel raw, temperatures barely getting above freezing order even a little below.

temperatures falling away very quickly again this evening and overnight thanks to high pressure. more of the breeze further south, isobars closer together, feeding in a bit more cloud. less cold here thenit a bit more cloud. less cold here then it will be further north. in rural places, again, potential for another hard frost. we start the new working week very cold, lots of sunshine, cloud across the south continues to creep north. by the end of the afternoon, much of england and wales will be pretty cloudy. best of the sunshine will be across scotland into northern ireland and the very far north of england. another cold day. breeze, it will feel more raw than it has done. for england and wales, far north of england and wales, far north of england sunny, fringes of west and wales. elsewhere, grey, dank afternoon, odd spit and spot of drizzle, on the strong easterly wind, it is going to feel pretty

bitter. as we head into monday, increasing amounts of hill fog and mist and murk, pretty intense in places, into wales and the pennines as we head through monday night. into tuesday, in between weather systems, higher pressure to the east, low—pressure, systems, higher pressure to the east, low— pressure, working systems, higher pressure to the east, low—pressure, working slowly from the atlantic, this will bring the change to the weather during tuesday night, and wednesday, most places on tuesday, rather grey day, the odd spot of drizzle, breezy in the odd spot of drizzle, breezy in the north—west, turning windy in the south as rain arrives. something a little milder eventually reaching the far west. wednesday it will be across southern areas, a little bit of sunshine as the rain continues to push east. quite messy in parts of the week onwards, the rest of the day and into monday, cold, with frosty starts. this is bbc news.

theresa may defends the government's record on the nhs insisting it was properly funded for coping with the winter pressures. we put some extra money and for coping with winter pressures. we also have the budget in november announced that for the next couple of years there will be extra money, further money going into the nhs. trying to get those people from the corridors and trolleys, the elderly people in freezing january being treated in ambulances. the prime minister will carry out a cabinet reshuffle tomorrow. there are reports that several could either lose theirjobs or be moved. some of the uk's largest retailers agree to stop selling acids and corrosive substances to customers under 18 years old.