i'm kasia maderia with bbc news. our top story: the thai cave boys have paid a moving tribute to the team who rescued them. they said they thought it was a miracle when the divers found them. and they honoured saman kunan — the former thai navy seal who died while taking part in the rescue. president trump has again reiterated that russia did interfere in the 2016 us election. in an interview with cbs news, mr trump was asked if he held the russian leader personally responsible. and this story is trending on bbc.com. it's what happened to this stretch of canal in western england, when someone left all of the gates open at a lock. as you can see, all the water drained away. they've since been put back to normal. that's all. stay with bbc news. i will be back shortly. now on bbc news — it's hardtalk. welcome to hardtalk, i'm stephen sackur.

european politicians have a long—cherished habit of taking the summer off. this summer, it may be different. the eu is bedevilled by problems that simply won't go away. from brexit, to immigration, to an increasingly vexed relationship with the trump administration. my guest today, elmar brok, is the longest—serving member of the european parliament and a close ally of chancellor angela merkel. germany is the eu's most powerful economy, but is its political clout on the wane? elmar brok, welcome to hardtalk, and thank you forjoining me

from washington, dc, where i know you are having talks with counterparts in the united states. i do want to focus very quickly, though, on brexit. how close to britain crashing out of the european union without any kind of deal do you think we are? i think since the chequers paper we see a possibility to come to an agreement. this is not exactly what we can't agree to but we have now, after waiting one and a half years for it, a proposal by the british government, which is one of the basis for the negotiations, and hopefully we can achieve preliminary results on that in order to get to the withdrawal agreement through, the transitional period time, and then negotiate finally in detail. well, i looked at reaction from brussels to theresa may's

white paper proposals. michel barnier has kept very quiet. he says he is analysing those 98 pages. another senior commissioner says it is not a question of whether we say no to these proposals, it is when and how we do it. that doesn't sound very positive, does it? i think that is the wrong position. we are very convinced that we should find a solution. for sure, our conditions must be met, interest must be met. we have clarified this position already in spring last year and britain knows it and hopefully we have the basis to do that. most of the withdrawal agreement is negotiated, agreed. we have to find a clear position with a backstop for ireland

which is the clear condition for the withdrawal agreement and this chequers proposal is more or less a free—trade agreement with certain conditions and i think that can be negotiated, then finally britain as a country. i am fascinated, mr brok, you find this so constructive. all we have heard from the eu... it is my nature. good. it is better to be an optimist than a pessimist. all we have heard from the eu since negotiations began was the simple message, "britain cannot and will not be allowed to cherry pick the best parts of being a member of the eu without the responsibilities of being part of the eu." surely what mrs may has put forward in essence is somewhat more sophisticated as a form of cherry—picking. that is true. therefore we have to negotiate a lot of details in that paper. but it is clear that britain has

to fulfil the standards and when it fulfills the eu standards it can have market access. and at the same time mrs may has said that she wants to give the house of commons rights to change the standards, that we see it is the same at the moment. britain is part of the eu and go in different directions. and we have a problem with the future. how to deal with that must be clarified. and some other things. one intriguing point of detail, if you would, for me. that is, mrs may had two meetings with your chancellor merkel in the run—up to the release of this white paper set of proposals. indeed, some people are saying that mrs merkel was given a heads up, and indication of what was in the british plan, before the british cabinet or indeed the british parliament. you know mrs merkel very well.

is that true? i cannot say that this is true for sure. i think mrs may will have had discussions with others, with mrs merkel, junker and others, to get what is possible and what is not possible. mrs merkel will stick to the negotiation line of the european union agreed by 27 nations and the european parliament and commission and therefore mrs may will understand the negotiations in future, where it might be easier to find an agreement. i don't want is want to sound cynical but if you look at the broad outline of mrs may's plan, she wants to maintain frictionless, free trade in goods, playing by the eu rulebook as she says. but she doesn't expect the same, for example, from services, including financial services. i can't imagine an arrangement more likely to please you lot in germany. it means your car manufacturers for example continue unfettered trade exports to the very big market in the uk, while your financial services sector

in frankfurt can expect to pick up a great deal of business from the city of london because there is no deal on services. it strikes me that this is a deal that germany might as well have written itself. financial services are mostly not in free trade agreements. also with canada, not. therefore it is wise to make the differentiation. there will be negotiation about the financial services in a certain way. but it must be clear that this is a way for goods and agricultural

goods, for free trade agreements, which is very far reaching. but it is clearly said that if the standards will go in different directions, it will be less market access. that is very clear. and we have to see that is the difference. at the moment we have both the same standards. when we negotiate a free—trade agreement, as we have done just now. i think it will be signed today with japan. then we have different standards and try to bring them together. i just wonder whether you and colleagues of yours in other european capitals and indeed in brussels itself, do you all look closely at the political soap opera unfolding in the uk? for example, yesterday, as we speak right now, yesterday, a group of hardline brexiteers in the uk actually got some amendments through which make the may proposals somewhat tougher for the eu to accept in terms of tariff collection, for example. so, whether you like mrs may's proposals or not, it is clear that a very strong element in her own conservative party hates these proposals and will do

anything to destroy them. are you watching that carefully and worrying about it? i look with concern to that, because brexiteers do not want to have any solution, which will have the most harm to the uk because their market is much smaller than the eu market. and this tax collection system that we have also to collect the taxes for britain looks a little bit peculiar to me and i think therefore, especially in the customs question, we will have tough negotiations how we can come to such a solution, which is very much needed, because, to avoid the hard border between the two islands, i think that is very much in the british interest to avoid such hard brexit, which would have negative impacts on peace between the islands. how frightened are you in the political sense

of a crash—out hard brexit? it would be difficult for germany and for the eu as a whole, wouldn't it? yes, very much but not as much for britain. that is why we don't understand what the brexiteers want to do. it is an ideologue point of view of politics with dreams of the past. look, that is also part of the questions before. it will be, if there is different rules, then we have tariffs, we have no free market access. and many companies have invested in the united kingdom. european and american, asian companies, because britain is the gate to the european market. the point of discussing the hard brexit is to define whether you really think, when the british talk of pursuing

the hard brexit option, and are preparing for it, whether you think they are bluffing. for example, the new brexit secretary dominic raab said just the other day, "look, i want to go to brussels and negotiate in the spirit of friendship. but if the bloc, the eu bloc, does not reciprocate in similar spirit, then the uk will be ready to leave without a deal and preparations will be made." do you think he is serious or is he bluffing? i think these people are serious, they have to explain that britain will have bad, will have a bad result out of that, much worse than us. 75% of the eu exports go to the uk. 44% of british exports go to the eu. we have to see that companies from abroad will not invest any money in the european market, britain is losing the gate function through the european union.

there will be less toyota, less american companies, also bmw and others taken away. jaguar already has said that. it would be a disastrous development for the united kingdom. brexit is bad for both of us. but it is worse for the uk. let's try to make the damage as low as possible, that should be the duty of these negotiations. a final point on brexit and then i want to move on to important matters. this final point is quite simple. there are people in the uk today he'll look at the parliamentary arithmetic in westminster and say there is no pathway, no democratic pathway through parliament to get any form of brexit through, whether it is hard, soft or indeed no brexit. the political situation here is in stalemate. in those circumstances, some are saying we should actually appeal to the eu to suspend the article 50 deadline. is it possible, do you think, from europe's point of view that article 50 and the deadline could be suspended? look, the two years have reason,

to put pressure on that. if we have the possibility of transition agreement until end 2020, which means to have the details negotiated. what is needed until october is the withdrawal agreement, a positive answer for that would be to ratify the european parliament and we can have another nearly two years time to negotiate the details of the future relationship. i do not understand the discussion in london. there are people who have the impression from the very beginning of brexit that they are looking to their personal careers in the tory party. if i may say so, you sound rather

disgusted with british politics right now. let's say that it is my lack of intellect, i can't understand in detail what is going on. it is an important question for a nation like the united kingdom, we see a situation that there is no real direction, no majority for the direction. therefore we stick to the prime minister. i have a feeling she has understood the issues and is trying to find a solution, that she can manage in the different sequences of the negotiations to find a majority in the government and in parliament and we rely on that. if that does not work then we have hard brexit. we are talking after the most extraordinary visit of president trump to nato and then to the uk and finally that meeting in helsinki with mr putin. has trump's disruptive diplomacy finally shaken europe — and i have to say germany —

out of a deep sense of complacency about the state of transatlantic relations? we are very nervous about that, i was here watching and i must say that a majority of members of congress senators from both parties are very convinced to stick to the transatlantic relationship. it is mr trump's policy, not a policy of the country and congress. the problem is, mrtrump is commander—in—chief and president of the united states. that is true. therefore we should keep the damage down. the us is a democracy, that is the difference to china and russia, but we see at the same time trump uses every ally like a vessel — he does not take them seriously, he does not take them as partners. therefore, mr trump is helpful to bring the european union closer together and now you have

trade agreements with japan and others coming soon shows that we are prepared for the situation. 0k. i used the word complacency and that is because donald trump delivered some pretty harsh home truths — not least to germany — i will quote you some of his words about germany. "as far as i am concerned," he said, "germany is a captive of russia. it's getting so much of its energy from russia and we are supposed to protect germany when they get their energy from russia? explain that to me, it cannot be explained." donald trump actually is exposing a hypocrisy in germany today, isn't he? no. first of all, i do not know after the helsinki meeting who is captain of putin — trump or germany. secondly, we don't rely so much on energy. it is not 70% of our energy, it is 35% of our gas imports. hang on, when nordstream, which is a venutre driven

by the russians, when that comes on stream you will be very reliant on russian gas. let's not forget one of your former chancellors is a chairman of the board. germany has wrapped itself into this relationship with russia at the same time it is expecting america to offer the security umbrella while germany refuses to pay for it. that is just wrong. 8, 9% of gas relies on russia. no more. it will stay that way. i am personally against nordstream too. but this argument is more selling lng gas to europe and we have to see also that germany is bringing the european union together. this gas is not only for germany, it is partly to britain, the netherlands, france, please do not or germany in it and we will do business

with whom we want. you can swap stats with me about trump's accuracy and i agree with you, but he was getting at a basic truth. you in germany today spend — you tell me — what percentage of your gdp today are you spending on defence? remind me. germany has not yet achieved the 2% goal. give me a figure. if you would, give me a figure. we are on the way to i.5%. you are not even close! you are not even close to i.5%. you are closer to i.2%. we have another security definition. what we do in africa — 60% of the vote is given by the eu member states, 70% of the humanitarian aid is given by the eu, security is much broader. it is part of security. but we are talking about the future of nato

and germany is complacent. when angela merkel, after this message from donald trump, she said yes we will talk in germany about wrapping up our defence spending quickly. she was shut down by her coalition partners, who said no way. quoting one of them, he said "angela merkel cannot allow herself to be exploited by donald trump's rearmament mania". are you prepared to spend a lot more on defence quickly or not? we spent more, since two years we have increased the defence budget considerably and on our way to continue until ‘24 this way. but we need to see the other questions. buying of tanks is important, which means more for security. we'll come closer to the 2% but we have to see over our own responsibilities and we have to see that we stick

with the alliance, that we fulfil our conditions and most of all, that we work for — synergy effects is the new defence union, stopped by the united kingdom to get the synergy effects. let me touch up on one other issue which is important in germany and around the world, the response to mass migration. again, donald trump — this is something he tweeted not long ago. you are a very close ally of angela merkel, i wonder how you felt when you read this. "the people of germany are turning against their leadership as migration rocks the tenuous coalition, crime is way up," — we know that is not true, but he went on — "big mistake in allowing people in who have so strongly and violently changed their culture". what did you think when you read that tweet?

i must say that that is just stupid. we have taken in eu half as many refugees as turkey has done. we have now per month 95% less migrants than in autumn 2015, incredible success story how to keep the numbers down. what we are doing at the moment northern africa but also the south, is to decrease it, to help these countries to go forward. that is, go to the root causes of migration. here, trump wanted to decrease the money for africa. again, if you don't mind me saying so. trump in his own way, nobody can accuse him of worrying too much about accuracy, but in his own particular way he is picking at a scab which is painful for germany because your coalition is again

divided on migration policy. mr seehofer clearly still feels very raw about angela merkel‘s decision to open the door in 2015 and if you look at opinion polls, right now the party that is making most ground towards the october elections is the far right afd, so you have a real problem in germany and i am not hearing that angela merkel has a solution to it. first of all, his problems are in bavaria, angela merkel won the re—election last year. we have to see that she has a majority in this party, goes forward with her policy. this battle, the same as in the financial questions about armament, we have increased our amount of money for that. i think she will go forward and is in a strong position, we will see that. she is working on the route causes.

she and mrjuncker are responsible the deal with turkey. certain questions in niger. every attack by the in accuracy in the style of mr trump will strengthen angela merkel. last question, is it time for germany to fundamentally reassess its geostrategic alliances? is this the end for all of those assumptions about the relationship between germany, europe and the united states? no, not at all. i think this situation will strengthen our belief to continue to build a european union. we want to have a constructive solution with britain to keep them... you are not addressing that donald trump just a day or two ago described the european union as a foe when it came to trade. we know that when he talks to theresa may or indeed emmanuel macron, he encourages them to leave the eu. i come back to the basic question, is there a real

crisis in relations between the united states and europe? there is a crisis, but not because of us but because of mr trump. but we will not stop to work closely with the united states because he represents not alone the united states. it is clear that we need to meet our interest in defence, we need to work faster on our own trade agreements as we have done today with japan and many other countries and this means that new alliances in that question in trade matters and so on in order to be fit for the future, but please try to keep the collective security agreements of nato so long it is as possible, despite we have now feeling that there is no total credibility in that any more. all right, elmar brok, we have to end it there.

thanks for being on hardtalk. thank you very much. hello there. i think there's a little something for everyone in this forecast, some rain and also some warm sunshine, but on wednesday it was a case of high pressure and mostly to seeing some sunshine. also quite a bit of cloud around as well but that could lead to some dramatic sunset photos sentin lead to some dramatic sunset photos sent in by our weather watchers. high pressure was the dominant force on wednesday but we look to the north—west, a tangle of weather fronts which will bring some rain on friday. first thing on thursday it

is going to be a dry one. variable cloud, some clear spells. quite a warm one to start the day for england and wales. a few chilly spot to some rural parts of central and northern scotland. but thursday promises to be another dry one, i think, for most. probably more sunshine around across than we saw on thursday. just a slim chance of a shower in north—east england and south—east scotland. and later in the day, breezy with clouding up in the day, breezy with clouding up in the north—west corner and of those weather fronts. a little the north—west corner and of those weatherfronts. a little bit the north—west corner and of those weather fronts. a little bit of rain here as well. 15 to 20 degrees in the north. that is as high as 28 or 29 celsius across the south—east, so it will be warm here. this is the tangle of weather fronts which will bring some rain to northern and western parts of the uk. it will continue to move its way south eastwards as friday wears on. so a

lot more cloud across the northern half of the uk. some substantial rain in places, under heavy burst that time is. but as it moved southwards it will tend to ease and become a little bit lighter and patchy. so it is going to be a little bit cooler across northern areas, 18 to 20 degrees. further south, though, another warm day with temperatures reaching 20 to 29 degrees. and then, in the friday evening there is just a slim chance of seeing thundery downpour move up from the near continent across the south—east of england into east anglia. it will be very few and far between, but if you catch one you will certainly know about it. that cold front and continues to sink southwards during the course of saturday so it may linger on across southern areas for a while. so we could see a fair amount of cloud in central, southern england and wales saturday. the spot of light rain on it. to the north, a little bit drier, variable cloud, some spells of sunshine, and temperature—wise, again hiked this celsius in northern scotland. cool and fresh across england and wales, 21 to 25 degrees. 0n england and wales, 21 to 25 degrees. on sunday it is a warm day. central and southern areas with more sunshine. further north, breezy with more cloud and outbreaks of rain. pressure across western scotland. in

the south—east, again, need to high 20s celsius. so it is quite a mixed weekend, with variable amounts of cloud, a little bit of rain, but also some spells of warm sunshine. i'm mariko 0i in singapore. the headlines: the thai cave boys finally go home after telling the world's media what it felt like to be rescued. translation: we heard a noise, we were afraid that they would walk past us. it was a miracle, i was shocked. making his mind up. president trump says vladimir putin is to blame for russia meddling in the us election. well, iwould, because he's in charge of the country, just like i consider myself to be responsible for things that happen in this country. so certainly, as the leader of the country, you would have to hold him responsible, yes.