in terms of people or that, in terms of people or companies completely deleting their presence on social media. we will have to leave it there, thank you for joining have to leave it there, thank you forjoining us. time for a look at the weather with tomasz schafernaker. as promised, it will warm up, but a bit of a blip for us. it really turns warm across the uk. this evening, a weather front is approaching western areas of the uk. you can see isobars, that means strengthening winds. here are the wins coming out of the southwest. most of that rain will arrive overnight and into tomorrow morning, affecting northern ireland, southwestern scotland, the western isles. for most of those further east and south, the weather will be dried tonight. that takes us into tomorrow, and the weather is looking again... across for a time, quite

strong winds around the coast but that rain tends to fizzle out there in the course of the day. the woman's weather will be in east anglia in the salvation of possibly around 19. venter warmer nationwide. —— and then for wednesday, warmer nationwide. this is bbc news, our latest headlines: the prime minister insists she was right to approve military action without parliamentary consent against the assad regime in syria. labour have won approval for two debates about the government's policies in syria. the government admits terrible mistakes and announces new measures to help members of the windrush generation, many of whom say they have been threatened with deportation or refused access to health care. ant mcpartlin has been fined more than £80,000 after pleading guilty to drink driving at wimbledon magistrates' court. the tv presenter apologised over the car crash involving three vehicles in richmond last month. now on bbc news, it's time

for a hardtalk special in which stephen sackur speaks to the russian foreign minister sergey lavrov. welcome to hardtalk from moscow. i'm stephen sackur. over the past few days, the world has viewed with alarm the very real possibility of a direct military confrontation between the us and russia. the focus of the tensions has been syria, of course, where missiles have been fired, but the hostility runs much deeper. we've seen diplomatic expulsions, sanctions and talk of a dangerous new cold war. well, my guest today, in an exclusive interview, is russia's foreign minister sergey lavrov. what is russia's next move? sergey lavrov, welcome to hardtalk.

the world was deeply alarmed last week by the prospect of a direct military confrontation between the united states and russia. how close do you believe we came to that? i don't think that it was very close. i believe it was a situation created by very reckless behaviour of our western colleagues, who accused the syrian government and thus as allies of the syrian government, in applying chemical weapons against civilians. without waiting for the opcw to inspect the place. actually, at the moment when opcw

was physically ready to move from lebanon to syria, they executed the strikes. as the representatives of our military explained, the channel has been engaged all the time. so to be clear about that without using jargon, the us and allied forces gave you indications of how the strikes were to be carried out, and you gave them some indication that you would not retaliate. i'd prefer not to get into the nitty—gritty military term military channels. there is a channel existing between the russians and the united states military. both between the capitals and on the ground in syria. and i believe the military discussed and continue to discuss this and other things very professionally. they understand each other, and they understand maybe better

than anyone else the danger of this kind of adventure. mr lavrov, this crisis is not over, is it? it depends on those who invented the crisis. well, it's quite clear from words used by your own diplomats, your ambassador to the united states said there would be consequences for the strikes that we saw. vladimir putin called it an illegal act of aggression. the world wants to know what's russia going to do now? that's a statement of fact and consequences certainly, there would be consequences. we lose basically the last remnants of trust to our western friends, who prefer to berate and debase us with very weird logic. proof is in the punishment. they've punished first, like they did in salisbury.

then they wait for scotland yard to finalise the investigation. they've punished first in douma, in syria, and then they wait for the inspectors for the 0pcw to visit the place and to inspect. i mean proof in the punishment is what is being deployed by the troika of western countries. well, i want to talk to you of the detail of the cases you mentioned in douma and the skripal case as well. but before i get there, ijust wanted to continue the idea of the diplomatic relationship today. mow the us ambassador to the united nations nikki haley said us forces remain locked and loaded. when you hear that kind of language, how do you respond? well, i think that they have to put their own house together in washington. because we understand kind of statements could be made either by the commander—in—chief or by the military. and as i said, the military of the united states

and the russian federation maintain the channel on syria, and this is some kind of confidential information. you say there is no trust, you mean zero trust now... i said we're losing the last remnants of trust. which is not yet zero. theresa may and emmanuel macron both made it very clear that this was all about the degrading and deterring the syrian government's chemical weapons threat. it was not about the intervention into the civil war, and it was certainly not about regime change in damascus. do you accept that? so they said. do you accept that? what we accept, i mean you have heard talk, we have all heard.

and highly likely is very ridiculous. and the policies of our western friends... sorry, when you say highly likely, do you mean the assessment that chemical weapons were used in douma by the assad government forces. no, isaid highly likely, as a new invention of the british diplomacy to describe why they punish people, because these people are highly likely guilty. like, in alice in wonderland, lewis carroll described the trial and when they discovered that the jury could be and the king said let's ask thejury, and the queen shouted no jury, sentence first, verdict afterwards. that's the logic of highly likely. well, that's what you say. russia opposes the use of chemical weapons and it believes people who use those weapons should be punished.

do you agree with that? i thought you were much better informed about the russian position to the obvious. it's obvious. you signed the relevant treaties, you are part of the international commitment to ban and eliminate the use of chemical weapons. yes, more than that, we did eliminate our chemical weapons in 2017, which was verified by the 0pcw, which was welcomed which was welcomed by the entire 0pcw executive committee. and unfortunately, the united states is still yet to deliver on its own obligations, which they have been postponing and postponing again and again. but if i have just stated the obvious, it's quite clear what the russian commitment is, then surely, you must want the perpetrators of that chemical weapons attack in douma, for which there is overwhelming evidence, to be punished. wait, wait, wait, you are jumping the facts again.

i don't think that i am. there is no proof that on the 7th of april, chemical weapons were used in douma. but there is. emmanuel macron and the french have made it quite plain they have intercepts with show helicopter movement, syrian government helicopter movements over douma. they have pictures of gas canisters found at the site of the attack. they also have the record of the syrian government over the last several years using chemical weapons. if you put all of that together, as far as the french, the americans, the british... i cannot be impolite to the heads of other states, and i cannot be impolite to the head of my state, but you quoted the leaders of france and the uk and the united states, and frankly speaking, all the evidence which they quoted was based on the media reports and on social networks. the canisters, i saw this picture, a canister lying on a bed, and the bed is intact, and the windowglass is not broken.

look, you need to be a bit more serious. can you explain to me why a strike, the day before 0pcw is going to move there and to verify the fact that there was a strike. the american representative of the 0pcw, the organisation for prohibition of chemical weapons, says there is a deep concern that russia has tampered with the evidence sites in douma. can you guarantee russia has not tampered with them? yes, i can guarantee that. before you... it's like... it's absolutely the same as was the logic of the resume in salisbury. when we asked dozens of investigators, we requested an investigation, we requested our presence at the samples taking ceremony, if you wish, she said no.

we're not going to answer any question until russia answers all of our questions. the only question which was addressed to russia, "tell us how you did it?" "was it ordered by putin, the poisoning of this poor couple, or this was the result of you losing your control over chemical arsenals?" i believe for any intelligent person, it's, you know, a situation which is absolutely obvious. i'll get back to the... back to douma... yes, you have claimed that the event in douma, first of all did not happen, and in the message sent to change

you said there was some sort of event but it was stage managed and fabricated by what you called a russophobic country. the event did not take place. what did take place was the stage. the staged thing. it did not involve any chemical weapons. and you believe britain was behind the staging of a mock chemical weapons attack in douma? the history, you know with some experience, during previous decades but we do believe any social services of course can present information to the british. when you say there is irrefutable proof it was staged, it was faked, you claimed the white, humanitarians, first responders were involved. where is this irrefutable proof? well, the proof is in the visiting of the place. no, no, where is your irrefutable proof that the white helmets backed by the british government faked to the whole thing? what i did say was that the white

helmets are known to work only on the territories controlled by the opposition, including... and the white helmets are known to be ringing the bell one year ago, which was a fake from the beginning to the end, and the white helmets are known to be financed among other countries by the united kingdom. well, that does not represent irrefutable proof. wait a second, irrefutable proof of what? you said you had irrefutable proof that a russophobic country, by which you meant britain, had worked with these white helmets to stage manage... why do you say i meant britain? don't put your words in my mouth. i did say a country that was trying to lead a russophobic campaign, please quote me correctly. so speaking of irrefutable facts, the douma event was agreed to be investigated by 0pcw inspectors. they moved to lebanon, they were told by the syrian government they would be immediately issued visas as they

come to the border. seven hours later, the douma and the surrounding territory was struck. what is the reason for going that way one day before the inspectors are about to arrive there? the us is pushing for a new un security resolution today which they believe is needed to send the international signal that president assad cannot be allowed to do this again. will you work with the united states at the un? if you mean that they want to resume an investigating mechanism which is not transparent, which is not independent and which takes decisions on a sentence itself without a verdict from the security council, then no, we cannot accept this. by the way, and if, you know what i think, i believe that the entire reason

for this resolution is to make it look that if russia and syria agreed to co—operate, which is impossible, but what they want to do is to make it look that we and syria were bombed into negotiation. that's why in the resolution they insisted the syrian government must negotiate. they forget that the main opposition group which they all support, the so—called group, the leader of this group stated that the united states must continue to use force notjust in case of some chemical episodes, but against the syrian government wherever and whenever the syrian government opposes the opposition. and what is russia's endgame here? i see you're sending more military materiel and men into the syria conflict. is it your commitment now to back assad all the way until he controls every inch of syrian territory? no, it's to protect the syrian arab republic from aggression. which was launched

on the 14th of april, and which the three countries say that they will continue. are you going to send this latest sophisticated s300 anti—aircraft missile to president assad in syria, because if you are, the israelis are going to be gravely concerned? president putin has addressed this issue, and he clearly said and reminded that a few years and reminded that a few years ago at the request of our partners, we decided not to supply them to syria. now that this outrageous act of aggression was undertaken by the us, france and uk, we might think how to make sure that the syrian state is protected. to be clear, you're saying that what has happened in the last few days makes you reconsider and feel positive about sending those very sophisticated anti—aircraft missiles to syria? it makes us convinced that whatever

is required to help the syrian to deter aggression, we will be ready to consider. i want to briefly turn to the case of sergie and yulia skripal, who were poisoned in salisbury in the south of england. in this interview, you have told me the credibility is important, that trust is important. you are the russian foreign minister. you claim that the skripal attack was mounted by british intelligence services, who you perhaps jokingly, i don't know, are known for their licence to kill. do you expect that claim to be taken seriously? we were told that there is no other credible explanation that it was russia which highly likely poisoned skripals, we said there are other credible explanations.

have you got one shred of evidence to suggest british intelligence tried to kill sergei skripal? well, there is an old roman criteria, who is to benefit? and i believe the uk is grossly benefiting from the provocations both in syria and in the united kingdom. hang on a minute... and is back on the stage of world politics in a very negative and very aggressive and a very weird way. there is inconsistency in your position, if i may say so, foreign minister. in this interview, you have mad pains to tell that russia is overly committed to honour these international commitments

and conventions on chemical weapons, including supporting the work of the organisation for the prohibition of chemical weapons. you know better than i that the 0pcw has run tests in four different labs on the nerve agent used in salisbury, all of them have concluded that was a novichok agent in a highly pure form as described by british government. and that's the problem. that's the problem. first, the a234 agent in highly pure form, high concentration, is already raising suspicions. because this... it came from russia, it's quite clear it came from the former soviet union. you invented that nerve agent. you're not factual. you are maybe talking but not listening. this chemical substance was created in the soviet union. then one of the inventors fled

to the united states and made the formula public, and if you want to check before raising this, please do so. the united states, they invented this formula. and it was formally taken by the united states social services of their government. but a very light amount, i mean, it seriously damages a person, kills you on contact. but it evaporates very fast. and a sample taken two weeks after the event cannot, according by our scientists, contain very high concentrations. i guess it's all a question of credibility. you're telling me, it's certainly not credible around the world. you have more than 100 diplomats expelled from more than 20 countries. it;s clear where the consensus lies. russia is seen as culpable. if you want to finish the issue of the substance, on saturday, we presented a paper which contains

the literal conclusion of the swiss of the swiss laboratory, which was one of the four laboratories, which did say that there were traces of a very high concentration, but they also said... either you trust the 0pcw or you don't, it's quite simple. it seems you're not saying you don't trust the 0pcw. for a brit, you have very bad manners. the swiss laboratory report also said, and in the first place, they found something that was invented in the us in 1955 and was used... among equipment of the us and uk army, and we asked 0pcw, who we trust, whether this is true or not. in addition to a234, there was also this discovered. and we're awaiting a reply which of course we will trust. we want to trust and verify. the us treasury secretary is due to announce another raft of sanctions against russian companies and individuals

who are deemed to have contacts with the syrian military. there are already over the past two weeks, new sanctions from the states on a whole bunch of different companies and individuals which have hit the russian market very badly. russia is being squeezed. thank you for your sympathy, but don't worry, we will survive. market down 10%, ruble down against the dollar. it's not just these threats to punish those who keep hurting the syrian government. it's a threat which we see to punish the entire russian people for making the wrong choice during the elections. and they say, "we would never target the russian men and women, we would only target the oligarchs, the politicians, the military who disturb the world." they are lying. because their desire, as i see it,

is to make thousands and dozens and thousands and hundreds of thousands of russians disturbed. those who have been employed... but that is russia's vulnerability. you may have an arsenal of weapons the president boasts about, he says it's the most potent and powerful in the world today, but you have an economy which is weak and vulnerable. true, we know this. but this economy has sustained quite a lot, beginning from world war ii, and i can assure you that you that the government and the president are very much keen to make sure the necessary forms are taken through and was the essence of the first half of hi smessage to the public, and his second part informed his audience about the new weapons in russia. he ended by saying, "we always

are ready to talk, provided the talk is respectful and based on looking for balance of interests." and a final thought, the secretary—general of the un to the other day said the cold war is back with a vengeance, but also with a difference because now the safeguards to manage the risk of escalation are no longer present. that was a truly frightening thought. you have been foreign ministerfor 13 years. is this the most scary time you have been through? the safeguards, one of the safeguards is having normal channels. the channels between us and the uk have been closed by the british. with all agencies fighting against terrorism, between the military it was a lost long ago

by the initiative for london. the russian council, which is a very useful mechanism to promote confidence and transparency, was closed for all practical purposes by nato, who only wants to discuss ukraine in that body. in the european union closed all the channels with russia except talking to us on syria. but do you feel you are in a new cold war? i think it's worse. worse? because in the cold war, there were channels of communication, there was no obsession with russophobia, which looks like genocide by sanctions. sergey lavrov, we are out of time and i thank you very much for being on hardtalk. we have been promising warmer

weather, hot weather in fact. that is certainly on the way. gradually getting warmer and warmer over the next few days. how warm is it going to get? we expect apertures widely into the 20s as far north as parts of scotland, but could be peaking around 26 we think on thursday. in the short—term, there are certainly some bad weather to the west there. cloud and rain means low pressure behind me. that is going to bring a lot of damp conditions to the course of the night to western fringes of england and wales, but wet weather for northern ireland and southwest scotland. don't freeze and galloway getting a lot of rain in a short space of time. anglers should remain a drive tonight. 9 degrees in london. here is the map for

tomorrow. when a in, see a big low pressure there with a rush of wind as well, up to gale force in some places around the west coast here. this is a day and, but the rain does not make a lot of progress, just to pembrokeshire and the peninsula. would have gone through by northern ireland by then into central parts of scotland. for some, a damp morning by brightening up very quickly in places like belfast. this rain will fizzle out to the course of the day as it makes its journey towards the northeast. so with that track moving in that direction, places to the southeast. so lincolnshire, east anglia, london getting away with a dry day and quite warm and i9 celsius. then on wednesday, low pressure still making its presence felt. another weather front moving in, just sweeping ireland here and getting to the western isles. but for the bulk of the country, wednesday is a stunning damp, very warm and eight. way above

average for the time of year. 18 in newcastle, will feel balmy. this thing here is an area of high pressure and showing you how the winds are blowing off germany and france in our direction, very warm twins, so my college hot. will feel hot on thursday. lots of sunshine. if you go to the park and spend some time there, because it is april, does not mean he will not burn. the sun is very strong at this time of year. 26 the likely hype. then into the weekend, still find but the temperatures will these. —— will ease. hello, i'm ros atkins, this is 0utside source.

the russian foreign minister has been speaking to the bbc. he says that relations between russia and the west are worse than during the cold war. the context for this exclusive interview was as western attacks on syrian positions, in response to an alleged chemical attack in douma, but mr lavrov doesn't believe that happen. there is no proof that on 7th of april chemical weapons were used in douma. in his first tv appearance since being sacked as fbi chief, james comey says president trump is a serial liar, who's morally unfit for office. and he said more besides.