syrian state media is reporting that anti—aircraft guns have been fired in response to a missile attack over horns, targeting the shayrat air base. the missiles are reported to have been shot down by the country's air defences. syrian state television didn't say who may have fired the missiles. the pentagon has denied any us involvement. russia's foreign minister says relations between his country and the west are worse than during the cold war. in an exclusive interview with the bbc, sergei lavrov described the recent missile strikes on syria as an outrageous aggression. us and british scientists have created a plastic—digesting enzyme that can help in the fight against plastic pollution. the enhanced enzyme has the ability to break down p—e—t, one of the most popular forms of plastic — used to make bottles and other types of packaging. the discovery could offer a new way of recycling plastic. now hardtalk — stephen sackur interviews 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. 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 of this military term military channels. there is a channel existing between the russian 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. but 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 opcw 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? we do not accept this. 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 engaged, and the king said let's ask the jury, 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 opcw, which was welcomed by the entire opcw 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 which 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 opcw is going to move there and to verify the fact that there was a strike.

the american representative of the opcw, 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 opcw 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, please one second, 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 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 army 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 but to assume 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 itself.

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 made pains to tell me 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 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 the government and the president are very much keen to make sure the necessary forms are taken

through and this was the essence of the first half of his message to the parliament, and his second part when he 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. hello.

the long—awaited spring warm—up has almost arrived. from wednesday, with high pressure close by, most places will be dry for a few days with some good sunny spells around and it'll be much warmer, temperatures widely into the high teens, low 20s, and in some spots, a bit warmer than that as we look at a selection of temperatures from probably the warmest day on thursday. so not everyone will get to 25, 26 degrees but i think most places will be having the warmest weather of the spring so far. but we're not quite there yet. we have one more weather system affecting us. and as tuesday begins, that will be giving some quite wet and windy weather to some northern and western parts of the uk. it's blustery across the board though during tuesday and any temperatures, nowhere particularly cold as the day begins. let's take a closer look at this weather system — it's pushed in by an area of low pressure to the west of us and this weather front becomes slow—moving and will clear on through much of northern ireland and scotland during the day as it brightens up but we keep cloud and outbreaks of rain for parts of northern, western england and wales and this

is how it looks at 7, 8 o'clock in morning. a lot of cloud for south—west, england, seeing a bit of patchy rain during the day, more especially some outbreaks of rain in wales, north—west england. look how much of it is clear through northern ireland, even at this stage, to last, some early sunshine for many of us. in scotland, there are some heavier bursts to content with, especially in the hills of south—west scotland and the strongest winds will be northern ireland and western scotland, gusting up to 50mph at times. but it's blustery wherever you are. scotland, northern ireland brightening up. catch an afternoon shower, it could be heavy and possibly thundery. that area of cloud covering much of northern england, the midlands, wales and the south—west, delivering a bit of patchy rain in places. best of the sunshine, eastern counties of east anglia and south—east england, albeit quite hazy at times, and the highest temperatures here at near 20 celsius. as wednesday begins, don't be surprised by a bit of early rain for parts of northern ireland, northern england and scotland but as pressure continues to build in, we push that away and more of us see the sunshine. a good deal of afternoon sunshine on wednesday, and it is warmer as a result

and some spots are breaking the 20 celsius mark by several degrees in places. high pressure to the east of us is drawing in warm winds from the continent with a good deal of sunshine, though we are going to see a bit of patchy cloud coming back to parts of northern ireland, northern england, wales and the south—west during thursday, so don't expect clear blue sky. the best of the sunshine will be in central and eastern parts of england but we have certainly got the warmth on thursday and the vast majority are going to be dry. and again, temperatures may be peaking in some spots into the mid—20s but most of us will be enjoying the warmest weather of the spring so far. welcome to bbc news, broadcasting to viewers in north america and around the globe. my name is mike embley. our top stories: state television in syria says air defences have shot down missiles fired at an airbase near homs. there are other unconfirmed reports that missiles have also been intercepted over an airbase near damascus. a bbc exclusive with russia's foreign minister, who says relations with the west are worse

than the cold war. during the cold war, there were channels of communication, and there was no obsession with russophobia. donald trump hits back at the former fbi directorjames comey, who claims he was morally unfit to be president. and a taste for toxic waste. the scientific breakthrough that could help tackle plastic pollution.