president xijingping in beijing this week. it's his first known foreign trip since he assumed power seven years ago. china's state news agency reports mr kim said his government is committed to denuclearisation, of the entire peninsular, notjust the north. in the latest diplomatic response to the nerve agent attack on a former russian spy living in the uk, nato has expelled seven russian diplomats from its headquarters in brussels. 25 countries have now taken similar action. russia's foreign minister sergei lavrov has said moscow will respond in kind. russia's president, vladimir putin, has declared a national day of mourning for the 64 people killed in a fire at a shopping centre in siberia on sunday. people in kemerovo have been protesting over what mr putin called "criminal negligence". now on bbc news, stephen sackur is in geneva for the latest episode of hardtalk. welcome to hardtalk. i'm at stephen

sackur. today i am at the imposing headquarters of the world trade organization, which is supposed to oversee free and fair global trade, but right now the risks looking impotence and even irrelevant. president donald trump is making good on his promises of tariffs and protectionism. the chinese are threatening to respond in kind. my guest today is the boss of the wto, roberto azevedo. what can he do to avert a global trade war? roberto

azevedo, welcome to hardtalk. the wto has been in existence for 23 yea rs. wto has been in existence for 23 years. would you agree this is the toughest moment the wto has faced? if not the toughest, certainly one of the toughest, yes, for sure. given the nature of the challenges before the system, where it comes from, and so on and so forth, it is tough right now. you face the reality of an american president who says the wto has been a disaster, a catastrophe for the united states of america. that is a fundamental problem, isn't it? i think america. that is a fundamental problem, isn't it? ithink the america. that is a fundamental problem, isn't it? i think the us clearly has difficulties with the system. they don't think that the system. they don't think that the system is perfect. i don't think any member of the wto thinks that the system is perfect. everyone would like to see improvements. that is pa rt like to see improvements. that is part of life. we have been trying to

accommodate these desires to improve the system and renegotiate things, update their systems, the disciplines, the world has been changing dramatically fast over the past few years. so we need to face that challenged. given what donald trump has said about the wto, he clearly pays no heed right now to your guidance, advice, your role. and that, surely, makes a trade war, a global trade war much, much more likely. the us has been engaging, regardless of all these rhetorical state m e nts regardless of all these rhetorical statements that we have seen, the reality is that we have conversations going on in the wto about, for example, electronic commerce. the us has been very actively engaged. they have been praising, actually, those negotiations, and saying this is the way the wto should be going. with

respect, that is a detail. the big picture is donald trump today is taking decisions that run entirely counter to what you want to see and pay no heed to the procedures of the world trade organization. that is absolutely wrong. they just started absolutely wrong. they just started a dispute about india consultations about the export subsidies that india has been granting. whether or not they are right i don't know. that is part of the conversation. you have picked out a particular detail. but when donald trump slapped those tariffs on, and said trade was a good and easy for america to win, are you saying he did that in consultation with you?” am saying the us has every right, as every other member does have a right, to take actions regarding trade. they are supposed to do it through the processes of the wto. was he doing that through your procedures? we don't know. i cannot

tell. the secretaries cannot tell whether a measure is inconsistent with the wto or not. only a panel or a body can do that. what you're saying is a detail is not a detail. it isa saying is a detail is not a detail. it is a fundamental way of working in the organisation. one is negotiations, the other is a settlement. they engage both. your predecessor said the other day that donald trump's view of global trade is mediaeval. mediaeval. he said the only question right now is whether donald trump is really trying to wreck the entire system. you are quitting my predecessor, not quoting me. i never said that. i know. do you disagree with him? he is perfectly entitled to have his views about what the position of the united states is. i deal with facts. the facts are that when i talk to the us administration we have been engaging, we are trained to find

solutions. it is no secret that the united states would like to see changes in the wto. that is no secret. the question is, what of those changes and what are the things other members are willing to do in order to take on board those concerns? it is also a question of how leaders around the world go about trying to engineer change they wa nt to about trying to engineer change they want to see and, to quote one particular expert on world trade, robert scott at the economic policy institute at washington, dc, he says blu ntly, institute at washington, dc, he says bluntly, donald trump refers to negotiate at the point of a gun. everyone wants to increase leverage. that is no secret. i'm sure that expert has been following trade negotiations and economic and financial negotiations. people want to increase their leveraged. that is no surprise. others will respond. my concerned is when that kind of

interaction, where you take an action or threaten to take an action and somebody else threatens a response, and you are completely ignoring the consequences of that, thatis ignoring the consequences of that, that is what... is that what donald trump is doing today? that is what i have been warning people to be careful about. but is that what donald trump is doing today?” careful about. but is that what donald trump is doing today? i do not know what he is doing. you have two at gim. you know what he is doing. i know what he has announced. he has announced the purpose or the intention of those announcements is speculation. you can speculate as much as i can. if we stick to the detail of the metals tariffs, the 2596 detail of the metals tariffs, the 25% on steel and the 10% on aluminium, are those, in your opinion, and your view, illegal under the rules of the wto? the only body that can answer that question is the dispute settlement body of

the wto. until that body offers an opinion or makes a determination on that, no one is entitled to say whether those are consistent or not with wto obligations. we had not come to that point yet. it is interesting to me that you refuse to condemn what so many other observers and experts in world trade has said is quite clearly an abuse of the wto rules. well, i am the only director general of the wto. none of them are. they are free to say what they want. they do not have to observe the rules of the organisation, i do. i never think appointed a member before that member was found to be in violation of the wto agreements. and that can only be done by a panel oi’ and that can only be done by a panel or the appellate body of the organisation, which will be a finding of the dispute settlement body. until that point in time, as director general, i have no right to say whether a measure, whatever measure it is, from whichever

member, whether that measure is or is not in compliance with wto obligations. what you think of the american decision to continue with the steel and aluminium tariffs on the steel and aluminium tariffs on the chinese and a couple of other nations, but to say to a bunch of other nations, including the european union, your home country of brazil, and a few others, that they will suspend the imposition of the ta riffs will suspend the imposition of the tariffs on those countries if those countries, by may one, come up with, quote, satisfactory alternative means of addressing this national security threat, by which, it seems, they wish brazil, you, canada, these other nations, to take their own measures against china. i.e. the united states is encouraging the will to gang up on china. once again, you are speculating about the outcome of that conversation. i do not know what the outcome of that conversation will be. all i know is the united states is having with

those countries in those countries are expecting to find a solution. some elements, for example, which is the root of this problem, the oversupply of steel and aluminium in global markets is already under consideration in the oecd. that conversation involves a loss of actors who have to discuss and figure out the solution for this. that conversation, by the way, i have been saying this for a long time, the way out of this is to have a conversation, is to have a dialogue, put everybody around the table, and find a solution. a dialogue yes, but you said this the other day in the press, you said quote unilateral actions could lead toa quote unilateral actions could lead to a global trade war. so, today, as you look at what donald trump has done, you look at steel and aluminium, but we can talk about the bilateral measures taken against china, do you feel more worried that unilateral actions could lead to a global trade war? i said that one. there is no reason to take it back.

i think there is no reason to take it back. ithinki there is no reason to take it back. i think i lateral actions can take us i think i lateral actions can take us in that direction. you characterise donald trump's actions as unilateral. i do not characterise anybody‘s actions. they know what they are. you are abdicating any responsibility to show leadership. it doesn't matter. it doesn't matter whether you find that a measure is unilateral or not, the fact is that when you announce certain types of measures and others deemed that those measures are not in compliance with their obligations and threatened to retaliate, that is a problem. that is where we are today. that is a problem. how big a problem is that? it is a big problem. i don't think anybody believes this is something minor. even in the us administration. the reality is these conversations are now ongoing. the conversations are now ongoing. the conversations are now ongoing. the conversations are ongoing precisely because people are beginning to

understand, i hope, how serious this is in the kind of impact this will have to be global economy. so this isn't really any more about the threat of a global trade war, we are ina threat of a global trade war, we are in a global trade war, really?” don't think we are there yet. we are seeing the first movement towards... watmore would it take for you to declare? the measures and countermeasures are not in place. there are still conversations ongoing, negotiations are ongoing. there are announcements. that doesn't mean we should downplay that. you don't want to be in the war. we want to avoid the wall. if everything we can do to avoid being in that situation, that is what we need to be doing at this point.“ you say what is the brink of a trade war becomes a full fledged trade war, what is that neither the global economy? it will mean a severe impact on the global economy. we begin to see the economy coming back and growing at healthier rates. global trade is part of that as. it

is beginning to pick up. a 3—point percentage expansion rate at this point in time. if you have that kind of thing, it would go down very quickly, i would suppose. and how far? by how far it would depend on how big that war is. if it is limited to steel and aluminium, that is wanting. if we are talking about hundreds of thousands of products, it isa hundreds of thousands of products, it is a completely different thing and the impact would be significantly different. you said you couldn't opine on the merits or otherwise on the us case in steel and aluminium orthe otherwise on the us case in steel and aluminium or the unilateral trade actions were china, because, you said, in our procedures it needs to go through the appellate court, it needs to be considered by the judges that we have in the world trade organization. this is one of the fundamental problem is that the united states is holding another done to the head of the wto because it is blocking the appointment of newjudges and, very soon, when the nextjudge quits, that core 20 able

to operate. well, we have some time before that situation paralysis of the appellate body... before that situation paralysis of the appellate body. . ” before that situation paralysis of the appellate body... i think it is six months. i think you are wrong. it think it will be more than that. how many more months?” it think it will be more than that. how many more months? i will not share that calculation with you. we have calculation is inside our heads. with respect, donald trump has been in powerfor more than one year. you are telling me you have a matter of months to change the us policy on blocking... no, i don't have too... well, because they are blocking new judges have too... well, because they are blocking newjudges being appointed. what we have to do is figure out two things, the first one is whether we can solve that blockage, that is on that we are trying to address. that requires the us also to sit at the table and figure sum it out with the other members, which is something we are trying to do —— figure something out. the other thing is, it is blockage goes on, do we have alternatives, we have other will way

is? there are two tracks here. what is? there are two tracks here. what is your opinion of the united states continuing to block the appointment of new i think the us puts the system in a difficult position. and it is not something that helps the system. it is not something that helps the global economy. because the moment that that part of the system stops functioning — it has not yet, as i said— but the moment it does, once you take an action comedy and the result that is left to the other side is to respond in kind. and that is precisely what we are trying to avoid. and that will take us to the domino effect we do not want to see. what you are saying is that by blocking the appointment of new judges, the united states is, in effect, risking the breakdown of the entire wto system. if we don't think

that, it is a risk. yes. we do not have much time left. but i wanted to get to something else. one is a simple thought in which —— on which the way negotiations work in these situations. it seems to me that there is a really difficult thing to read right now. weather world trade is now going to be governed much more by regional blocs than by the wto system that use it on top of, with its 160 or so memo states. we have the european union, a powerful economic bloc, and wheels have, despite the —— despite donald trump, we have the ttp. we have something similar in africa. we may have nafta, with donald trump reforming it in nafta, with donald trump reforming itina nafta, with donald trump reforming it in a different way. our regional blocs the way in which double tradies are to be governed in the

future? i think they have always been there. —— the way in which trade is to be governed. that is the nature of our and of course that make that it is the nature of our organisation. it is easy to manage something is regionally rather than globally. what has historically happened is that those blocks negotiate new tariffs and disciplines, and then they are brought to the wto, when they are harmonised with the other members. —— blocs. that is the waiters or has been. that is not new. —— that is the way it has always been. what is new is the new initiatives. is the same. really it is just about leveraged. include the two two biggest economic powers in the world, the united states, and the new urgent dynamite economy in the world, china, they have leveraged. they can negotiate on their own toes because they are the two most

powerful economies in the world. that seem odd to you that the uk is walking away from the european economic club at this time?” walking away from the european economic club at this time? i think negotiations are never about one power convincing everybody else. that does not exist. today, alliances are formed and they are changed and they geographically are very fluid. so for one particular issue, you have alliances with these groups in these countries, and the former group, then you try to convince another group. it is very fluid, very flexible in the way that you do it. so it is notjust about the size of your economy or power. it is about allegiances. and what kind of allegiance is? britain is cheating is allegiances with europe. it is exiting the european union. we don't know the basis of the new economic trade deal and how they will be. and you have spoken about a bumpy road ahead for britain as it exits the eu. as you look at the

state of negotiations today, how bumpy as that were it had to be?m is difficult to tell. it is really difficult to tell. i don't they are where they will end up in march next year. you know, there is still a transition period that is looking forward to at a future. we don't know at this point it time what that future is going to be. —— point in time. no matter what, future is going to be. —— point in time. no matterwhat, it future is going to be. —— point in time. no matter what, it will be bumpy. at the less bumpy it is, i think, the better it is for the global economy and for the other commercial partners. do you think the british — be governed, the people— understand how difficult it will be if they do leave the european union without a fully negotiated trade deal. —— the government, the people. and to go to a hard brexit raced on doubly clear rules and relationships with the former members of the same club, the european union? i think you people

in the world understand the complexities of the impact that those things will have. few people. and every time these few people want to explain things, they are deemed to explain things, they are deemed to be bored or they arejust too technical, people do want to listen. it isa technical, people do want to listen. it is a much more political, a much more emotional conversation, at this point in time. you think the british people don't realise.” point in time. you think the british people don't realise. i don't think anybody does. at do think anybody does. it is dependent on the specificities of the agreement. these conflicts deals. i think they have, to be fair, a general understanding of where things are going to end up. but i don't think the particularities of the details of the conversation— which could be big in terms of economic impact — are fully absorbed by anybody. one particular detail that is exercising people both in britain and the european union is what to do about that border between northern ireland

in the united kingdom, and the republic of ireland. the governance is to say that he can leave the customs union, the single european market, but it still can ensure a frictionless border between the northern ireland and ireland border. does that make sense to? this'll be technically challenging. —— says to you. i then or the answer to that would be. ithink you. i then or the answer to that would be. i think there will also be a bigger political component. we will act as you that is. technically there is a very challenging proposition. i don't know how to a nswer proposition. i don't know how to answer that. can you of any neighbouring countries with a significant border that are notjoin together in some sort of economic union, customs union, which have a frictionless open border? can you think of a single example? not really. it seems to be very specific

in that situation. and i think that is why i keep saying that, you know, people tell elements are going to be very important, because whatever the decision is, it will take political commitment to find it. otherwise, technically, you are just looking at it from a technical perspective. i can't see any easy solution. finally, i want to go back to your overview of the world trade organization. your predecessor said very recently in the light of what has been happening in washington and the souring trade relationship between the us and china. he said it is time to consider what the wto would and could look like without the united states, is donald trump decided to walk away from the wto. had he begun to think about what that might look like? either make i have no indication that the united states is walking away from the delhi tia. -- i have no indication

that the united states is walking away from the video. we don't discount the possibility. they want to find solutions and other members wa nt to to find solutions and other members want to sit down and find solutions as well. as far as the us is concerned, they are members of the wto. if donald trump is serious about saying that the delhi tia is a disaster the united states of america, do not need a plan b? —— wto. we have no indication that it will happen. his words are an education. i've heard nothing from the united states that they are walking away from the wto. i didn't hear that from any of the sources that i spoke to. when someone look what has happened over last month, and say this is the beginning of the end for the wto, what do you think

about? it is a catchy phrase. it is 0k. it is about? it is a catchy phrase. it is ok. it is farfrom the about? it is a catchy phrase. it is ok. it is far from the reality. the reality is the tougher the situation is, and the more challenging it is, the more the wto is needed. the us itself mentioned that if the wto didn't exist, it would have to be invented. i am didn't exist, it would have to be invented. iam not didn't exist, it would have to be invented. i am not making that up. they have said that publicly. so we need the wto — and, by the way, we should be painful but it is out there, because it is —— exhibit work, we would be in a trade war yea rs work, we would be in a trade war years ago. deeply after 2008. roberto azevedo, we are to do there. but they you for on hardtalk —— particularly after 2008. -- thank you for being on hardtalk. it was a pleasure. hello.

temperatures on the way down in the lead—up to the easter weekend. low pressure close by. so it's looking unsettled. some rain around in the day ahead from this first area of low pressure, has been some uncertainty about how far north the wet weather is going to get. still a little bit about that. south wales, southern england most likely to see some wet weather, but it may push further north to parts of wales and the midlands into east anglia as the day goes on, getting some showers, a chance of a bit of sleet and wet snow out of this, especially on the hills into the west of these areas as we go through the afternoon. much of northern england, northern ireland and scotland will have variable cloud, sunny spells and a few showers around, wintry on hills, longer spells of rain in the northern islands into shetland. single figure temperatures. that's the big difference across southern parts of the uk compared with tuesday. some spots reached as high as 16 celsius. the chill will be around on wednesday night under clearing skies, most of the showers still around on wednesday evening

will die away and that means clear skies will be widespread frost settling going into thursday morning. it does mean is thursday begins it will be chilly, but there will be a fair amount of sunshine around, but then we are watching another area of low pressure coming in from the south—west. a bit slower, but it will at least have some showers, some longer spells of rain but at least showers pushing into south—west england, wales and to parts of northern ireland too. gradually on thursday, edging a little bit further north—east. ahead of that, you are likely to see some dry weather and some sunshine of a fairly pleasant day. there is a weather front working in northern scotland with outbreaks of rain, sleet and snow around here, it'll feel quite cold. a little bit milder, those eastern areas have seen the sunshine during thursday and those heavy showers wales and the south—west edging into the midlands, parts of south—east england, continuing to feed northwards during thursday night into good friday. low pressure very much in evidence during good friday. there will be bands of showers pushing north across the uk but there will be gaps between them, we might get to see some sunshine, but for the most part it's single figure temperatures.

that is how we are going into the easter weekend. temperatures on the cool side of average. not cold, but cool for the time of year. it is low pressure so there will be wet weather at times, a risk of snow on northern hills, but it won't be wet all the time. there will be drier, sunny moments, quite pleasant in the spring sunshine. easter day looking like a decent day on sunday. mild by monday, particularly into england and wales. that's your forecast. this is the briefing. i'm sally bundock. our top story: china says north korea's leader kim jung—un is ready to denuclearise and meet american officials. a national day of mourning and the first funerals for victims of russia's deadly shopping centre fire. and france honours the police colonel killed after he swapped places with a hostage.

"the world is seeing the first movements towards a global trade war," warns the head of the wto, but he says "it can still be avoided." and as google's self—driving car unit launches its new vehicle, we'll hear from the boss about how safety is their top priority.