coordinated by the labour backbencher david lemmy, calling for government promises to windrush migrants to be written into law. there are calls for an investigation by the competition and markets authority into a potential merger between british supermarket chains sainsbury‘s and asda. south korea says kimjong—un has promised to close north korea's nuclear test site next month — and has invited the world to watch. on his first visit to the middle east as the new us secretary of state, mike pompeo has bitterly condemned what he called iran's efforts to destabilise the region. now on bbc news, it's time for dateline london. hello and a very warm welcome to dateline london.

i'm jane hill. this week we discuss a momentous day for north and south korea, president trump's meetings with several european leaders this week, and the 73 countries meeting in brussels still searching for a solution to the syria crisis. my guests — the conservative commentator alex deane, the french writer agnes poirier from the magazine marianne, maria margaronis from the nation, and the american writer michael goldfarb, host of the frdh podcast. welcome to you all. thank you for being with us. the image of the week is surely the lingering handshake on friday between north korea's leader kim jong—un and president of the south, moonjae—in, across the most heavily fortified border in the world. there was talk of peace, of working together to rid the peninsula of nuclear weapons — albeit without many specifics.

maria, how optimistic are you feeling about that development? it was an amazing moment, to see the two men holding hands and skipping over the concrete barrier like two boys in kindergarten. only months after kim is shooting missiles towards japan and trump is calling him little rocket man and boasting about his big button. so i think optimism has its own momentum and i think it is important. i think there is so much we don't know, we know we have been somewhere like this before but not quite the same. i do not think kim has spoken before about complete denuclearisation, so it could be a moment and i think moonjae—in has set trump up very well. he has set him up to need to succeed because if this meeting that we hope is coming up between trump and kim,

which is the meeting between the wild card and the enigma, i think there is now an expectation that something has to come out of it and i think it is important. i think we should be optimistic. alex, you were nodding. that is right. i have no doubt that the critics who were saying that this is the sort of thing trump would make a hash of, we'll be manning the barricades to award him a nobel prize for his efforts here. i thought the president was rightly generous in his acknowledgement of the help of the chinese in getting it to the table like this. behind the smiles, kim has systematically, and his predecessors, starved their population, abused them, repressed them, denied them free speech. they are running out of food and friends. that is part of what has propelled them to the negotiating table, but in these circumstances, the brutal realities may be part of what is pushing us

towards a good resolution. we have been here before, not that recently, but we have seen images like this before and heard promises like this. previous negotiations, there was jimmy carter, madeleine albright — each time north korea said, "we will make an effort," and they were biding their time. also previous negotiations were quite open—ended, no specific goals each time. i think this time they will want to have timing and, moon, it is the south korean leader at the centre of world diplomacy here and his step—by—step action is a good one, that is to say that each time north korea makes an effort, they should be rewarded with some economic benefit. and i think there is a convergence of interests, not only on trump's side, because that would be his macho

erratic tactics may prove strangely efficient. we should recognise it if it is an achievement. kim has achieved his nuclear plan, his nuclear power, he is now considered as an equal at the negotiating table with trump — something that his ancestors have not managed to achieve. and now the priority for him is the economy because his people are starving. there may be a moment that will deliver. i am hopeful. in such a mad world we are living in, it is nice to see them. is trump correct to claim a little of the credit? the chronology would say yes. he came into office swaggering and getting the washington establishment right and left

convinced there was a possibility of a nuclear throwdown. anyone who was an ocean away and keeping calm, they would say, "beijing is only 500 miles from pyongyang, so maybe we will not have a nuclear throwdown, chill out, american think—tankers." but the chronology starts with him. i think the critical moment was the olympics, and maria, being of greek heritage, will know that the olympics, they were set up to stop war and have games. soft power. and what happened? president moon invited north korea to send a delegation, they marched into the arena together. there was a lot of argument about that in washington — "they should not do that. whose side is south korea on?" and then kim sent his sister, who turns out be the perfect media type for our media age, where diplomacy is conducted

through the airwaves... she has people executed, but she looks good on camera. here is this very attractive... and i'm not saying that in a sexist sense. she is very photogenic young woman, she comes in, and, "well, maybe they are not the hermit kingdom after all." also, to remind people, we tend to still look at north korea as the hermit kingdom and an inscrutable thing. kim jong—un was educated in switzerland. he has a western education inside that facade he presents of being kind of unpredictable, and i think that when it comes time, if it happens — there are some weeks before the summit with trump — donald trump went to a private school and was privately educated, kim jong—un was educated in a similarfashion. they may be able to talk to each other more than we think. there is interesting wider point to come out of these talks. in the aftermath of the execution of saddam hussein, and the murder of gaddafi, the people around

dictators like this advise them, "get nuclear weapons, the way to preserve the regime and stay safe, to make sure what happened to saddam or gaddafi does not happen to you, is to ensure that they cannot push you to the brink." it was one of the great challenges of the 20th century. how do we get past that? maybe through president trump and co, this is it. the two meet in the next few weeks, so we will return to that. that is something we will definitely be discussing in the coming weeks. meanwhile, two european leaders visited washington dc this week. france's president emmanuel macron spent three days with donald trump — germany's chancellor angela merkel, barely three hours. they both hoped to head—off us tariffs on eu exports of steel and aluminium, and to persuade the us president to stick with the iran nuclear deal. only one of them managed that visible rapport, with endless smiles and back—slapping.

the us president called his french counterpart "perfect". except for the dandruff. except for the dandruff! macron made quite an impression. an impression on everyone! we were wondering what was happening. it is very strange. they were curious images. including for us in france. do you remember when he invited trump to the bastille day parade. apparently it struck a chord and trump wanted his own parade in washington, except in the us it reeks dictatorship if you show off too many tanks. there is a strange friendship here, there is a genuine good manner between the two men. but we have seen macron in front of the congress speaking his mind. perhaps trump actually likes the guy

and likes his straightforwardness. i mean, both their world views are starkly opposite. macron was quite forthright in his speech. there was plenty of gladhanding, but he spoke about the dangers of america turning inwards. i think macron has a purpose and if he can keep trump from his worst instincts, it is a fight worth fighting. he sees with macron eye—to—eye, especially on the iran deal. he was going to washington to convince trump not to tear it apart. he came out of it saying, "i do not think i have convinced the american president, but now i think i have managed to make him see the implications if america was pulling out of it." he would see that as progress.

we will talk about more of iran in a moment. michael, your take on how that went? it's funny — we talk about the north korea pictures. on thursday we would have been talking about the dandruff picture. things change, move very quickly. the meeting is as much about economic issues as anything. i do not think anyone is under any illusion as to whose voice donald trump listens to on iran. they are domestic political things happening, whispering in his ear, and i think an emotional inclination to distrust the iranian regime. what europe is worried about is sanctions against russia and the tariffs, and this morning, for example, one of the things that is critical to germany is the price of aluminium. and russia provides a tremendous amount of the aluminium that goes into building airbus planes.

and this morning the oligarch who is under sanction by the us, which made importing and purchasing this stuff more difficult for europe, has stepped aside. he is leaving the company. these sorts of things, when you read them after macron and merkel have been visiting with trump, you think there is something going on there that is bearing fruit from these conversations which on the headline issue do not bear fruit at all. your reading of it, maria and alex? being so close to the american president is never a bad thing. bravo, president macron. he has seen others in the international community try to make a virtue of being hostile to the president, so he says, "i will be your best friend." it seems to have worked! the bigger question in europe is, where does macron go with his political agenda?

he has a political party that has built in an environment that has a separation of powers, he has built to support him — that is what en marche is. here come the european elections where there will not be any brit candidates if these things go as planned. but en marche will be standing. but we do not know what block in the european parliament they would stand in. where is macron? is he on the reforming right, centre left? in this sense, he is like trump, a political outsider, not conventional, who circumvents much of the mainstream expectation to seize power in a charismatic way. next year will be an informative thing on where en marche goes and whether they change french politics beyond his presidency. maybe that is why the two men got on! there are more similarities than we think. maria. i felt that the speech in congress which was amazing and gave republicans and democrats the chance to cheer, for "there is no planet b," and his demand, his claim that america will rejoin

the paris accord on climate change. he has placed himself as a european statesman, perhaps taking overfrom angela merkel, who is waning. that is what struck me about these two meetings back—to—back, macron is, "i am now the visionary for europe," whatever the vision is, because he is very unspecific politically. he is a centrist. we have to get used to it! they speak over each other he was a protege... they speak over each other a newcomer in that sense. and alex's point, he is maybe not fully formed and we do not know what he stands for. but amazing to become the president and a nascent political figure, wondering what he stands for. that is why we are perplexed.

it is in a good way, but he is unlike anyone we have had we have had before. and he is a cultured man. just remember his speech to congress, from hemingway to james baldwin and jefferson and roosevelt. we liked that. we have not had an intellectual in a while. he's not a public intellectual, but he is an intellectual man. by the same token, neither macron nor merkel managed to get terribly far on that issue of tariffs, one of the things that does concern them. except merkel, i think that was the purpose of her three—hour visit. i think we will know a bit more in the next few hours and days what actually happened. germany is concerned, much more than france is. i think she missed a trick. i think there was an opportunity to get closer to trump and think about the future in a way that macron did, and she didn't. she has got three terms already behind her... and it is a question

of personality as well. they don't click. she is straightforward, straight down the line. she can't do this sort of performance thing, it is not her. one would hope there is place for all styles in politics. we touched on the iran deal, one of the things that merkel and macron were addressing, or attempting to address, with donald trump in washington. also this week, exhaustive talks with some 70 delegations have been on going in brussels to try to find a way to end the war in syria. the talks broke up on thursday without any apparent progress. on the ground, as the conflict continues, and the iranian revolutionary guard has been setting up bases and arms dumps throughout the country, and close to the border with israel. it all ties in with iran. at this point, we would be forgiven for knowing that these

talks were happening, that they broke up on thursday. how worried about you about the current state of affairs? on one level, it is all the same. the new wrinkle is that israel in the last couple of weeks has attacked some iranian bases. there is a lot of speculation about, this may lead to some kind of direct conflict between israel and iran, and the secretary of defence is in israel today. i am slightly sceptical about a shooting war between iran and israel coming out of this, although i think the possibility of direct conflict inside syria skirmishing style exist. it is hard to get reporting done. you go in under strict restrictions, and then western reporters come out, it is very hard. iran controls the shia militias, it has its own revolutionary

guard — that is a force. but the real arbiter in syria is russia. they control whether assad stays in power, and interestingly, russia, talking of the iran nuclear deal, we talk of how will the european governments, who are co—signatories, feel about it? russia is also a co—signatory of that deal. russia is the main player when it comes to dealing with iran, i think, and i also know that israel's press is openly reporting it. there is daily contact between the israeli government and russian government about operational issues and i think that is really how you have to look at what israel's role is in this. also where the next phases are, which sadly don't bring any succour

at all to the syrian population, whether they have been been displaced and are under attack, or they are living in damascus and cleaving to the region and to keep them safe and hoping the regime stays in power so there will not be a bloodbath if it collapses. i think this is the overall state of play. so when i read these nations have met to do what? reconstruction? of a war that i fear has still fuel and hatred yet to work out. of all the conflicts i have seen and covered, there is nothing quite like this with the same dynamics. when there were the missile strikes on syria after the attack in eastern ghouta, a syrian man said, "the west doesn't care that we die, only how we die." and that quote has

just stayed with me. half of syria's prewar population are now dead, displaced refugees, half of syria's prewar population are now dead, displaced or refugees, the country is absolutely destroyed. the question of how this war, if this war will end, and who will pay for the reconstruction of this completely devastated country. unless russia and iran are prepared to come to some sort of negotiating table, unless assad is also willing also to respect something other than the gun as a means of settling anything, it is just more suffering and disaster ahead. we always tend to look at the latest geopolitical threat emerging from syria, but what has happened there every day is so difficult to talk about because it seems so helpless. seems so hopeless.

only half the population is left. i do not think anyone emerges from this with much credit. we were for and against assad, we are really against him now, but then we looked at the people opposing him and we did not like a lot of them either, especially on the isis side. we looked at his allies — we do not like them. we see what putin is doing. putin has always viewed the world through a geopolitical view where hard power matters. we are not his intended audience, he does not care what we think, he cares about his domestic audience and the power he controls. he is doing rather well in that. we need to think whether we can live with a putin—led resolution, in which assad reclaims power properly, or we can't, in which case we should intervene properly. we do not have the will. the reason we hesitate so much is not the moral questions. what we live with is the hesitation about iraq and not wanting

things to be like that. in iraq, we went to a country and started the conflict. you can discuss what happened post—911 and so forth, but we started a conflict with saddam. here this civil war has been raging for years and we need to decide whether we want to intervene or not. it is a different question now. and then there is the libya episode. i do not think the west will intervene in the way it should, or should have, and now it is becoming a sort of lebanon and that is why iran wants to use syria as a way to pressure israel directly. israel does not want to let it become a new lebanon for them. we are talking figures of 80,000 iranian forces scattered around, and israel is concerned, so are we, and iran facing all those hostile powers in the region

is playing its cards trying to control damascus as much as beirut. that is one valid point, but to what extent also are people waiting for may 12th, which is the iran—trump deadline. all five of us discussed the fact that this week there were talks, they were in brussels, going on for some time but they broke up on thursday and we had to go, "oh, yes! did anyone see anything?" and that sense coming out of brussels, we are not issuing a communique, we have nothing to say because this may 12th is looming. let's assume that trump says, i am not going to certify the deal. there is still a whole range of other issues

before you get into some kind of shooting war between this group or that group. iran is involved militarily in a lot of spaces just next door to america. there are 2,000 american soldiers in syria, north—eastern syria. iran is a critical player in iraq. don't forget, when the kurdish crisis of the autumn, it was the commander of the revolutionary guards who actually went into kurdistan and got everyone. this is the new dispensation. iraq is about to have very important elections. i think if we look at may 12th as something that is going to trigger something because we anticipate donald trump making a decision, i think that is also wrong. i think we also have to remember very clearly what the map of the middle east looks like. israel has a border with syria, but it does not have a border

with iran, and you cannot fight wars when you are surrounded by vast tracts of desert. you can. you can skirmish and bomb in the limited fashion, but that is not fighting a war, it's not invasion or tearing countries apart, as has happened in syria. does not necessarily stop the anxiety. the americans do not share a border with iraq and it did not stop them. unless iran wants to send a couple of divisions across iraq... nevertheless, taken together, tens of thousands of troops is not a small manoeuvre. these conversations we are having are related. people do not want the iran regime to become the next north korea empowered with nucleic capability to reinforce itself. it was your president,

hanging out with trump that has affected his diplomacy who tweeted, iran will not be a nuclear power, not in two years, not in five years, never. these are tough lines being taken, but they are informed by that we do not want to get in the situation like with north korea with high stakes and an unpredictable regime. and that is a point on which to end it, only for this week. thank you for being with dateline. see you next time. thank you for watching. bye— bye. morning. south—east england, dark

looming storm clouds on the way for tomorrow. the clouds have been brewing across france, you can see them here edging further northwards towards us. on the satellite, much of the uk, broken cloud, sunny start for the vast majority, particularly apart parts of scotland, north wales, northern ireland. some isolated showers. in the sunshine, not too bad with light winds, temperatures up to 11! degrees. cloud thickening in the east anglia and a day of single figure temperatures. by day of single figure temperatures. by the end of the afternoon, rain starting to edge in towards the south—east corner. the low pressure here, it will nudge further westwards as we go into monday, and east anglia and south—east england of greatest concern with disruption from the weather. very heavy rain for some. strong to gale force winds

whipping up rough seas to the eastern coast and bringing the risk of some baby and damage. the wind and rain develops overnight across the south—east, but away from it, continuing with a quiet story. clear skies for many, like twins, and parts of scotland, northern england, northern ireland, it will be cold enough for a touch of frost. we start the day with frosty, mist and fog will clear. lots of clubs do eastern england and through the rush—hour, linda gushing in excess of 50 miles an hour. coupled on the hulls with a bit of sleet and wet snow. that will edges way into parts of the midlands, we will see how far west it will go, but with the rain throughout the day, temperatures only five or 6 degrees, a risk of building. further west, only five or 6 degrees, a risk of building. furtherwest, lots of sunshine and temperatures up to 11! degrees. parts of yorkshire could

see that before it starts to back off into the north sea. leeds the coastal counties, sunny spells for the rest of tuesday, a better day, in the west, after a frosty start tuesday, it clouds over with outbreaks of rain developing before the day is three. that will introduce atlantic at, which for eastern parts brings up rising temperatures. have a good weekend. the

this is bbc news. i'm ben brown. the headlines at midday. labour's david lammy leads 200 mps who've signed a letter calling for for government promises to windrush migrants to be written into law. south korea says kimjong—un has promised to close north korea's nuclear test site next month and has invited the world to watch. there are calls for an investigation by the competition and markets authority into a potential merger between british supermarket chains sainsbury‘s and asda. also in the next hour, can you trust that five star rating? a bbc investigation finds fake online reviews are being openly traded on the internet. and click visits a cryptocurrency mine in iceland and investigates a new and growing crime amongst hackers. that's in half an hour here on bbc news.