two weeks after the suspected chemical attack in syria, international experts have finally carried out an inspection in the former rebel—held town of douma. the organisation for the prohibition of chemical weapons said its inspectors had gathered samples which would now be carefully examined. the organiser of anti—government protests in armenia has said he'll hold talks on sunday morning with the country's long—standing leader prime minister serzh sargsyan. nikol pashinyan has been leading calls for his resignation, saying that is the only matter he is prepared to discuss. the funeral of the former us first lady barbara bush has taken place in texas. she died on tuesday at the age of ninety—two. barbara bush was the wife of george hw bush and the mother of george w bush. former presidents bill clinton and barack obama attended the service. donald trump did not. now on bbc news, dateline london.

hello and a warm welcome to dateline london. this week, we're discussing the surprise announcement from north korea of the suspension of nuclear missile tests. and we consider the purpose and future of the commonwealth, at the end of its biannual leaders gathering in london. with me is polly toynbee, columnist with the guardian newspaper. the american commentator jef mcallister. ashis ray, the indian writer and broadcaster. and the british—sudanese writer — also now a columnist with the guardian — nesrine malik. welcome to all of you. we go to airjust a few hours

after a surprise announcement from north korea's leader, kimjong—un, who says he has suspended all missile tests and will close a nuclear test site in his country. it comes as the north prepares for historic talks with the south, and the us. mr kim is due to meet his south korean counterpart, moon jae—in, next week for the first inter—korean summit in more than a decade, and the us president, donald trump, perhaps byjune. jef, how positive is this? really, what is not to like? compared to fire and fury a couple of months ago, the atmosphere is better. i think this is, it has momentum and it has momentum for both historical reasons and peculiar psychological reasons. donald trump came into office saying, i'm going to do everything different from barack obama, that has been his foreign policy. he does not have strong opinions about the substance of things, he pushed fire and fury

over and over and got into a cul—de—sac. it was the diplomacy of president moon that changed the atmosphere and president trump who watches four, six hours of television a day, he likes the atmospherics and he said, i want more of that. and what is wrong with it? make it interesting and put me in the centre of world attention, it will be a peacemaker. and he has actually given president kim about 50% of what he expected to get out of dealing with the americans, which is immediately a meeting with the president of united states, international legitimacy. he can trade this and use it, it is good, he is doing atmospheric things, like, i am going to suspend the testing. he can take it back. but what is the substance? does this lead to the denuclearisation of north korea? i am afraid the horse has left the barn and i have a hard time seeing them give up

those nuclear weapons which is the reason any of this is happening. and you hear north korean diplomat saying all the time we don't want to be like colonel gaddafi and zidane hussein, nuclear —— want to be like colonel gaddafi and saddam hussein, nuclear weapons guarantee us. around the edges, could there be a decrease of weapons and the stopping of testing permanently and could there be diplomatic relations? established between north korea and the united states. enough to make a good photo opportunities at the summit and to make everybody feel better and that is pretty good. we will talk more about where it might go if anywhere. to what extent is this about the trump administration and the moves made there because we should remember the first round of talks is with the south in a couple of days‘ time. exactly, would be looking at the talks on friday carefully between kim jong—un and moonjae—in. there has been some talk of the northern koreans agreeing to american troops remaining in south korea. there is an element of scepticism

about this, whether it will happen, but the south korean president has certainly said this on record and it will be interesting to see whether this materialises. the big question is, what is deemed to be a success or what will deemed to be a success? is it getting back three americans been held as prisoners in north korea? is it going to be a final peace agreement between the north and the south which has not happened since 1953 officially? or is it going to be really something significant, which is a nuclear—free korean peninsula? so i think the jury is still out on this. and dealing with president trump, one does not really know what is going on. it is twitter diplomacy. but one thing is certain, that he has two a certain extent

distracted attention from his troubles at home with this foreign policy initiative. nesrine, do you think this is what is reading it? i think the main issue with this is that trump has a very short attention span and so i would be very surprised if him or his administration had the attention span to capitalise on this afterwards. but what is leading it? i think donald trump is genuinely quite enamoured of strongman dictatorships. you can tell since he became president, he enjoys engaging with them and calling them out, he enjoys the twitter chat and the thuggishness of it. in terms of foreign policy, he wants to do things differently to barack obama and he genuinely has a taste for this kind of politics. and for dealing with these kind of regimes and looking like the dominant male who has been able to subjugate the other dominant male in the neighbourhood,

and that is very much how he has viewed north korea. and now the way he has spun it or is trying to present it is not really in terms of peacekeeping, it is in terms of the fact that he has won with this dictator. i mean, the most important thing is that the stink comes out of it because things did get hairy and if it does, that is a great thing. we should still remember that the motivation behind this and the attention to detail afterwards is linked to perhaps more to donald trump's temperament and male ego than it is his peacekeeping skills. i think we should be optimistic, cautiously. the danger is that donald trump is going to raise expectations, his own expectations. there is no doubt the north koreans will stay a nuclear country. that is it, that is it. yes, there is zero talk

of denuclearisation. he has learned, as leaders do, acquiring nuclear weapons gives you status, everybody was in stew and why would you give that away? it makes you a player. so is trump going to overplay expectations? i hope he does not and he thinks everything can be made much more peaceful and much, and the right token gestures made. but we are dealing with the two most unpredictable and mercurial characters and it could be a great explosion. they could offend each other in some extraordinary way. if we accept denuclearisation is not going to happen, what does success look like and do we have a genuine sense from the administration what that might be a jef? what is good from trump's perspective, he can define success. north korea is not a burning issue for americans politically and they don't pay attention to the fine point of the nuclear programme of north korea,

everybody knows it is a terrible regime and nobody is talking about regime change, certainly well he is having the summit. this is good for a trump idea. you have the summit and the photo opportunity and you say you experts will work on the denuclearisation problem for some years. we have lots of korean cheerleaders coming to america for exchanges. i mean, afterall, nixon went to china when china had nuclear weapons pointing at the united states and no one expected china to denuclearisation of the idea of containment, which is to be the policy of united states faced with complexes nuclear powers, it was in the end, they will collapse, they have internal contradictions which could manifest, which did happen with the soviet union. north korea is a special case, it is much more controlled, the internet makes it easier

for the regime to control people as well as for things to come in, who knows if there will be an internal revolution. i don't see it. could trump say, we are going to give you a security guarantee so the north korean regime starts to relax and do perestroika? they don't want that stuff. i don't see how we will get any kind of success measurable out of this. it isjust going to be not having a war and that is success enough. that is not for trump to play it as a success at home. the two relevant facets to the success, the success of the project on the ground in north korea and how this plays out for trump domestically. i think trump is obsessed with appearing presidential, with appearing sort of decisive and larger than life. and unfortunately, the media loves this sort of thing. they love it when donald trump launches missile attacks in syria and when there is a kind of bold foreign policy gesture.

yes, there has been sensible experts saying, like yourself, saying, we don't know where this is going and i think the most we can ask for is that there is a continuation of the peaceful status quo. others have trotted out the same line whenever we see donald trump doing something a little bit less erratic and random than his usual behaviour, saying, it looks like he has got the hang of it now and he is growing into the role. sanctions played any part in this, they biting more than we realise? that is possible, things are very difficult in north korea. but at the same time, i think for the american public, success would be the return of the three prisoners. that is i think something that trump can say, here you are, i brought the three prisoners back. the more ambitious, the real big success of getting north korea

to give up their weapons, nuclear weapons, i doubt very much whether that is going to happen. but the suspension is significant. at the same time, it has to be said that in this state and age, you can carry out simulation, you can carry out laboratory tests so you don't really have to do these open tests. therefore, you can suspend the tests. i don't think from that perspective, well it is significant, it is a huge concession. and it is something that he can take back if he really wants to and is not satisfied. so we are dealing with a very erratic system and leadership. perhaps on both sides. as has been reflected. that set of talks on friday so we will see what emerges from that and we know we will be

discussing that on dateline. 46 heads of government and a further seven foreign ministers gathered in london this week, representing the 53 countries that make up the commonwealth. the queen, on thursday, amid the splendour of buckingham palace, said it was her sincere wish that her heir, prince charles, would one day be leader. and duly, on friday, the leaders announced that the non—hereditary role would indeed pass to her son when the time comes. but the summit was overshadowed by the windrush scandal, the prime minister apologising and promising compensation to people who'd arrived in the uk between the 19405 and 19705, who'd been refused medical treatment — or even faced deportation — because they didn't have documentation that proved their right to be in the country. we'll talk more about the future of the commonwealth in a moment. but first, polly, a huge embarrassment for the british government. extraordinary. the guardian has been writing about this for months and months and it suddenly talk of the week of the commonwealth heads of state,

which is very bad timing for the government. and for theresa may in particular, who was responsible for this policy and the hostile environment. people here legitimately, who had been here four years , for year and who had paid their taxes and their stamps, and whose lives have been absolutely destroyed. a lot of them lost theirjobs, terrible things have happened to people. and i think is a representation of the commonwealth, people kept saying, well, the commonwealth will replace. i think this will have left a very sour taste and a sense that, well, they don't really want us and are they going to give us more visas? i don't think so. is there any real welcome from britain. i find it astonishing they so easily accepted prince charles is the next leader when they should really democratically have elected somebody themselves. but they seem to have accepted this peculiar organisation. they sat in a room together

in windsor on friday and that was the announcement so we don't know unless somebody says something how that decision was reached. i think the visa question and how many citizens will be allowed in is very important as they go away. certainly when it comes to free trade agreements. for instance, one talked about between britain and india. free movement will be a very important factor. it is no one that it is not going to happen from an indian perspective unless pre—movement is permitted, pedigree for people working in the high—tech industries, the software industries where people need to come on intercompany transfers and spent time here, two years, three years, before they go back. unless that free movement is there, there is not going to be any free trade agreements, certainly not between britain and india. and the fda can take very long to negotiate. so the british government and brexiteers are trying to fall the public by saying the commonwealth will replace

the european union, it is not going to happen. today, the trade britain does with the commonwealth is 9% britain's trade and 44% of britain's trade is with the european union. it is going to take a century for any change to take place and it is not going to happen because today, countries in the commonwealth have a choice. in the past, they had to buy british goods because britain considered these colonies to be captive markets. but today, each country has a choice. each country will go for the best and each country will go for the best price. and what is best for them economically. it is not about emotional ties or historical ties. exactly. i think it is a club which is two

plus because it is a nice place to get together. but the big boys are missing, four of the five permanent members of the un security council are not there. germany is not present, japan is not present. so it is an organisation which talks and talks, but does not deliver. since the 1980s, which i believe was the high point of the commonwealth, when the commonwealth provided leadership to the world to dismantle apartheid in south africa, it has faded away. and today, what we have seen with prince charles being confirmed as successor to the queen, as the next head of the commonwealth, is a reassertion of the commonwealth being a british commonwealth rather than a modern commonwealth. because i have a little history on this. if i may! not too long! it came to being in 1949 is a formula which said it would be an association of sovereign states. but it is very much attached to the strings of britain. do others think that this

was the commonwealth missing a trick, if you like, that the discussion about succession, whatever was said, whatever went on, could have been an opportunity to look in however many years' time to modernise and to change and to shift a bit? i don't think members of the commonwealth have the same delusion that britain still has anything that really matters any more. it is a symbolic status that prince charles has, he has no control over a lot of the practical economic decisions made. why rock the boat? it is only britain that has this really peculiar view of the commonwealth. and indeed, all of its foreign relations. as a hangover of colonialism or imperialism, where britain has the status. and it has been interesting to see how the language has crept in to the discourse about brexit in the past couple of years, popular culture has become a little bit more fetishising of colonialism and world war ii in

particular and the empire. and i feel like there has been a displacement and that europe, to the british, brexiteers, is seen as a region of obstreperous equals giving them a hard time and trying to dominate and subjugate britain. whereas the commonwealth is a sort of lovely, leafy hangover of colonialism which is full of pliant leaders. who love the monarchy and prince charles. the truth is, they don't care, they are getting on with business. and charles, sure, that is the easiest way of doing it and he is a good big had and maybe meghan markle will visit and it will be nice paparazzi vents. nobody really cares in terms of the practical.

that is my point, is there any practical use to it as an institution? the practical. that is my point, is there any practical use to it as an institution? yoghurt goes it and not talk or to argue —— the argument goes. and soft power does matter, the fact these countries do speak english and their strange emotional ties, maybe in one direction more than the other, i remember secretary of state in the united states said when you are having really tough issues leading up to the iraq war, they would call their friends in downing street and have the downing street people make the arguments back to the people in washington. they sound so much smarter when it comes to the british accent! and there is a sense in which britain has cards to play, but the commonwealth does not have any substance any longer. it doesn't mean anything. the fact that prince charles is the leader, maybe they chose prince charles in the same way no one chose theresa may, for fear of what else would be that. it is a sign of not, an organisation not thrusting forward.

do english beating countries have a lot they can do in trade terms, if you know the language is someone else, can you make a phone call and make something happen? sure. but i think that was a vision of london at the centre of international finance and trade, companies from japan were going to make their headquarters here because they couldn't get into europe and they could still send their kids to english language schools because they preferred that, and that is the vision of england at the centre of an expanding economic universe which i am afraid is not the same if europe is taken out of the picture. i think that is really interesting, the optics were really tragic for the uk. the windrush generation scandal happened at the same time that all this commonwealth, these commonwealth meetings were happening.

and it really brought home how even though britain pretends it is going to be open to the world and replace the european epicentre of trade, commerce and foreign policy with an approach, it isjust so clear the windrush scandal made it so clear that britain is delusional about how it treats citizens from non—city macro countries. it treats them with contempt, as extracted from non—eu countries. while desperately needing them for the economy. the reason the british still feel they are in colonial times is because they do deal in a colonial heavy— handed way we non—eu citizens. so the justification was interested that britain wants to make make brexit a success by engaging with the world on an equal footing where it is not dictating the terms and making victims are people who have come to this country illegally to work and to pay taxes, it needs to adjust its attitude.

if not happen, it will be a failure. i, this incredibly powerful and important country in the world, far more important than we are. if we cannot allow their commonwealth citizens into this country and be generous with abusers because we desperately want to trade with india, if we can't do that, we really done for if our petty little mindedness, our brexit state of mind cannot be generous towards a country that we really need, then the commonwealth is meaningless. but after many years, i would say after 25 years, india has increased its interest in the commonwealth, it is going to put in more money for technical funds to help the small states. and various other matters connected with the commonwealth. so to that extent, there is change in indian foreign policy under narendra modi which was not there for a long time. increasingly, the indian foreign office lost interest in the commonwealth and their interest was on the united nations.

that said, i think the main issue in thisjust concluded a deal was the succession. it was not the other issues. what governed it from the very beginning, from the queen's speech to the end and it is in the read a statement, the succession. now, i agree with polly that in principle, the commonwealth, in order to fit into the character of being modern, which was emphasised as far back as 1949, it could have explored democratic option in of having had by rotation. but it was not practical to do so. so india, i have to agree, there was no alternative, at least on this occasion, damning charles as successor. polly, a final thought as to whether you think theresa may has done enough on the windrush issue. we have had multiple apologies and now talk of compensation. it has been so damaging, is the sufficient? she has not been good at damage limitation because all of those people should have been dealt with immediately and they should have had grovelling letters they can hold up to the television. they should be given compensation very fast.

unbelievably slow process. one of the things is that the home office is unbelievably incompetent and the idea it can cope with european citizens now being treated in that way as well, millions of them, is undrinkable. —— unthinkable. so no, it has been dealt with very badly and it is going to drag on. more cases will come up and they will not have been dealt with promptly. that may well be a topic for future weeks. they give very much. and it is good to see you all. post—brexit, will the commonwealth be a source of trade? the end of the queen's reign could make the commonwealth less anglocentric.

there are 2.4 billion people. diverse countries, with different beliefs, values, economies, that's it for dateline london for this week. we're back next week, at the same time. goodbye. good morning. well, after the heat of saturday, some spectacular storms through the night across parts of england and wales. they ease out the way though to start sunday. and sunday, still a few showers through the day, particularly in the west, that fresher weather is behind this weather front, tracking from west to east throughout the day. introducing atlantic air, sweeping away the warmth we've had and dropping temperatures as that fresher air pushes its way in. we will start the day with some warmer air across parts of eastern england for the start of the day. once the overnight showers clear, temperatures rising quickly. in the west we already have that weather front to begin the day across parts of western scotland

and northern ireland, bringing outbreaks of rain, the odd spot or rain, the odd rumble thunder offjust off the east coast of scotland. thicker cloud bringing some showers just to the western fringes of england and wales. but the sun is out towards south—east, east anglia and across estern england, so once the early showers have cleared, it is looking fine for the london marathon, for spectators at least. but probably a bit too warm for the runners, 21, 22 celsius possible. maybe a refreshing shower later. that's all tied in with our weather front, working its way eastwards. it brightens up in scotland and northern ireland eventually. some sunshine. brightening more quickly across parts of england and wales. but we could see the warmth across the south—east spark off some heavy showers later on, there could be a rumble of thunder across east anglia too. so 23 or 24 in london and norwich, 13 in belfast. we finish the day here with sunshine and showers. showers continue through the night in the northern half of the country. clearer skies developing further south. a much fresher night than we've had over the past few days, all parts of the uk temperatures dropping back down into single figures to start your monday morning.

that's a sign for next week, it's back to normal. we're back to factory set for the weather, because it's spring and it will feel like it once again. a cool start to your monday. not a good deeal of sunshine around in central and eastern areas. it will be fine day for many, the cloud will increase. in the west, the cloud will be thicker. spreads into western scotland. then it turns damp, grey and drizzly towards the hills and coasts of the south—west. temperatures where they should be for this time of year. 17 possible in the south—east corner. the south holds onto cloud and patchy rain and drizzle at times on tuesday. some brighter skies, particularly during the middle part of the day. further north, a lot more sunshine around. but more of a breeze and here, a scattering of showers. note the cooler temperatures across the north as well. they will be with us all as we go through the rest of next week. always brighter the further south you are. further north, frequent showers expected. and like we saw last night, some rumbles of thunder too. hello and welcome to bbc news. two weeks after the suspected chemical attack in syria, international experts have finally carried out an inspection in the former rebel—held

town of douma. the organisation for the prohibition of chemical weapons said its inspectors had gathered samples, which would be examined in specially—designated laboratories. andrew plant reports. it is now two weeks since these scenes played out on screens around the world. released by the syrian opposition, a video appearing to show