the us secretary of state — mike pompeo — has reaffirmed that washington rejects russia's annexation of crimea from ukraine. there've been indications recently from president trump that he might be close to accepting it. mr pompeo has been giving evidence to the senate foreign relations committee. russia's foreign ministry then dismissed his statement — pointing out other recent reversals in american foreign policy. a series of measures to try to avert an all—out trade war have been agreed by the united states and the european union. after talks at the white house with the eu commission president — jean—claude juncker — mr trump claimed a new phase in their trade relations had begun. 80 people are now known to have died in the wildfires around athens — they are the deadliest ever recorded in greece. and dozens of people are still missing. survivors have been describing their desperate battles to escape now on bbc news — it's hardtalk. to talk with me it zeinab badawi.

my guest is the outgoing united nations human rights commissioner zeid al hussein. he tell us why he is stepping down in august after four years in the post, about why he does not wish to remain in the role. after being criticised for being too outspoken — especially about the us president donald trump's policies. what has this form ofjordanian diplomats and to promote human rights globally after four years in thejob? zeid al hussein, welcome to hardtalk. thank you. to united

nations human rights commission has served a full second term, why did you choose to stand down after one term? it was clear to me, that i sought a second term, i would have to somehow win the approval of the agreement of the permanent five members of the security council, thatis members of the security council, that is how it was done the first timei that is how it was done the first time i was elected. i was dominated by the secretary general following a series of interviews and then he sounded out the permanent five, the us, russia, china, france and uk and approved. i have no doubt that virtually none would approve before a second term. i wasn't willing to try, lest i be drawn into having to compromise. this office needs to maintain its independence, the term ofa high maintain its independence, the term of a high commissioner should be limited to 15—year or six—year period and that is it. so you think

you would have gotten five straight vetoes including from the uk and france? possibly. i am not sure that that dumb like they would have approved me. had you not reflected on why that may be the case and that is perhaps, as your critics have said, you have been far too outspoken. russia has accused you of being irresponsible and hopes that your successof being irresponsible and hopes that your successor will learn from your failures. the chinese have said similar things about you. the united states is no fan of yours. hasn't it made you want to scratch ahead and think, have i done something wrong? no. look, we work with all governments, we have offices throughout the world, we extend our desire to establish a sort of technical arrangement where we can help them with human rights

obligations. but let us be absolutely clear, the governments can defend themselves, i am not there to defend them, i am there to defend their people who are disconnected, who are deprived of their rights, who are seeing their freedoms disappear at an alarming rate. those are the people that i am here to defend. were you under pressure to moderate your language and turn down the criticisms apps from the secretary general? at various times it was made to us, it is not just various times it was made to us, it is notjust something that i have felt but i think all my predecessors have felt that likewise, yes, for the rest of the un system, we can come across as being either too sanctimonious or irritant or disruptive, we do see it like that. were you asked to specifically turn down your language? in the beginning, guess i was, i was suggested to use alternative vocabulary —— vocabulary, not to turnit vocabulary —— vocabulary, not to turn it down but less terse and

aggressive. i still pursue my own way of approaching it irrespective of what was said to. for example, you called president donald trump dangerous, did you also call him a get? —— beget. dangerous, did you also call him a get? -- beget. we have called him that. there are a number of occasions where the president and many others have warned beyond what you expect the head of state of government to say, given the human rights obligations that they are supposed to meet. you know, we have to somehow also attach a discussion about comparative values and how the ideological discussions play out for the government from him and rights law, which is fixed, which imposes obligations which countries have entered into voluntarily. what we say to them is look, where there are to this —— deficits, where you are not abiding by obligations, we will

highlight this. shane is new. highlighting is one thing, but to use language like that, for example, you have criticised the rise of the populist right in the us and europe as ideological demagogue is who share the tactics of ice. it was it wise to share this with a terror group? no. there are two points addressed. one is that they appeal in their narrative to a return to some former time which wasn't affected by the disruptions of globalisation, by the arrival of migrants from other parts of the world that threatened their way of life, the culture, in that there is a similarity. i have made it very clear that the crimes committed by are so repugnant, so clear that the crimes committed by are so repugnant, so extreme, that we separate the two dimensions from

each other. but where there is similarity, again, is the use of half truths to spin a particular narrative, to deceive on to make people think that there are is a way out along a particular trajectory which would ring them salvation. are you accusing, for example, the american government of doing that?” was accusing the populists of being cha rlata ns was accusing the populists of being charlata ns and deceivers was accusing the populists of being charlatans and deceivers and they are. we are not saying that the conditions which give rise to anxiety and fear, loss ofjobs, loss of opportunities, are not real. those are very real. what we are saying is that the populists play on those fears or self interest and because they know that it generally works, it has worked before in the past in the short term, in the long—term, disastrous. past in the short term, in the long-term, disastrous. you are a highly skilled diplomat, you served as jordan's diplomat to the

highly skilled diplomat, you served asjordan's diplomat to the un, you into —— instrument or in setting up the international criminal court and have had experience in un peacekeeping. surely you must know that the role of a diplomat is to engage in a constructive manner. the chinese have said that you are a bound to work in a constructive manner and to avoid public pressure. could you have used that kind of approach, might it not have yielded more? no. i used to be a diplomat, i am not in this position, i am an international civil servant and i am to protect civil rights. my primary constituency is the vulnerable, the victims of human rights abuses. that is how i see my mandate. yes we work with government, i am not saying that our office only occupies itself with being loud and terse and eating governments. we don't see ourselves as doing that. but i will give you

an example, there was a foreign minister who i needed to reach because we were planning to send a technical team to that country. for almost a year, the foreign minister ignored us completely, i tried repeatedly to speak to them. eventually we said that we are going to the republic. the very next day he was willing to speak. you want to say which country that is? no, because we actually see improvements in that country. you do not want to use the public pressure? exactly. now we are in a situation, you may criticisms on the united states about the migration issues and separating families, micky haley, the ambassador to the un has accused you of being ignorant on your tax and they have now withdrawn from the un human rights council, which is not under your mandate but it is pa rt not under your mandate but it is part of the united nations human rights family. so when criticisms are so over, that is what it leads

to, disengagement and that is not helpful, is it? i am not sure the two are connected. the ostensible reason, and is probably the real reason, and is probably the real reason as well... why the us withdrew. why the us withdrew. the demands they laid out for the reform of the human rights council had not been met and that triggered then, the withdrawal. it coincided with the withdrawal. it coincided with theissue the withdrawal. it coincided with the issue of the separation of families and yes we did speak out andi families and yes we did speak out and i said it was unconscionable and it is, very few countries, if at all, practice that. it was a moment in time where the two came together and may have given the appearance... i tell you what us national security adviserjohn bolton said the reason why they withdrew was because the council and you, the high commissioner, have fundamentally misdirected and misguided. they don't advocate human rights, they have actually been used by human

rights abuses against the united states. it is a remarkable comment. i knowjohn bolton and used to work with him when i was an ambassador. it is bizarre. there are countries which are a world over. we have bought into places where the un had no light passed in these particular parts of the world, for instance we produced a report most recently on tu rkey‘s produced a report most recently on turkey's succession, remote monitoring, exercise we have done the same on kashmir, venezuela, we look at all countries without privilege in any, or discriminate against any. so to say that we are somehow singling out a particular country, many countries say this... it is the council, which as i say, isa it is the council, which as i say, is a body from the general assembly and is made up of 47 countries and they are elected on a rotating basis and a regional basis as well. however, it is all part of the un's

human rights infrastructure and how they perform, you accept, has an effect on your activity. so when donald trump said it was an embarrassment, there are countries on the un human rights council that have themselves committed atrocities, that makes it difficult for you to do yourjob. it erodes credibility. do you accept that? let's put it into perspective. there was an argument made that only those with the most pristine human rights records could be on the council. that doesn't exist. you don't have a country that is meeting, presently, all of its human rights obligations of. at the other extreme, we have those who have severe human rights violations on their ledger and they are not on the human rights council. you don't have north korea, you don't have syria. they are not members. and action has been taken by membership to prevent them. the

vast majority of countries have a very varied record, many have seen investors when it comes to the rights of women, the rights of children, ending the use of the death penalty, the advances where the lgbti death penalty, the advances where the lg bti are death penalty, the advances where the lgbti are concerned. at same time we see progression in areas like migration, treatment of ethic minorities and so forth. it is a patchy record for many countries and wedding you draw the line on who should be on and who should be off. it isa should be on and who should be off. it is a discussion primarily for the government, as you said, not so much for us. but don't you accept that it does a pinch what you do?m for us. but don't you accept that it does a pinch what you do? it does, absolutely. you just mentioned the death penalty, it has excited a lot of debate in the united kingdom and there have been more than 100

british jihadi's arrested and there are two in particular that can be tried in the us and if found guilty they could face the death penalty being carried out in this area by syrian kurd. would you offer any kind of human rights guidelines on this particular issue? the human rights law where it stands creates an exception when it comes to the use of the death penalty in the sense that the international cove na nt for sense that the international covenant for political rights prevent it. on the other hand, the trend is moving towards the end of its use and that is what we are pushing for. we are pushing for governments who are practising it or who have lapsed back into practising it to basically suspend its use. but if the uk doesn't have the death penalty, these two jihadi's...

if the uk doesn't have the death penalty, these twojihadi's... you wouldn't support theresa may's government in doing it? no. we would advocate that if they are vulnerable to the use of the death penalty, we would very much advice against it. there is nojudiciary on would very much advice against it. there is no judiciary on this would very much advice against it. there is nojudiciary on this planet thatis there is nojudiciary on this planet that is mistake free, so long as that is mistake free, so long as thatis that is mistake free, so long as that is the case, quite aside from the moral arguments that you can bring into this, what happens to theirfamilies of bring into this, what happens to their families of those who are executed? the their families of those who are executed ? the children their families of those who are executed? the children who suffer for the rest of their lives. that those within the administration of justice system who are traumatised for yea rs justice system who are traumatised for years and years, all of those arguments can also be brought in, but ultimately no, they should not be exposed to the penalty. another issue that generates a lot of debate in the united nations is theissue of debate in the united nations is the issue of the israeli palestinian conflict and that is another issue

that the united states criticises the united nations force when it comes to the un human rights council, it singles out israel like no other country. at 300 specific resolutions the council has passed in the last 12 years, 76 deal with israel, less with syria and 20 with me and mark. this and anti— israel bias in the un and perhaps own office? in the council, it is 47 countries that collectively make decisions. i have repeatedly asked for investigations. for instance, in venezuela, they haven't been met by the human rights council. avast most recently per investigation in the koran. it had no response. —— i have asked for. an investigation into yemen. —— nicaragua. asked for. an investigation into yemen. -- nicaragua. iwas asking

about anti— israel bias.” yemen. -- nicaragua. iwas asking about anti- israel bias. i get to this point. the thing is, we can put forward a request. ultimately, these governments, 47 governments have to make the decision themselves. but you yourself are being criticised, per example, by the pro is watchdog, un watch, which says all the united nations has an anti— israel bias. but it says your tenure is one of com plete but it says your tenure is one of complete disregard when it comes to fighting anti—semitism.” complete disregard when it comes to fighting anti-semitism. i don't really accept this. that, if we look at what it is that i have said about anti—semitism or is racial discrimination, usually recover all theseissues discrimination, usually recover all these issues in the same context. it is the case that anti—semitism is very evident now notjust in europe but in the arab world, part of a worldwide come from and in other parts of the world and it is toxic

and it is very alarming. there is no doubt we can do more. i don't accept the fact, the suggestion made that somehow i am anti—semitic or my offices all the experts we deal with human rights. i find that repugnant. he say it's incumbent on states to maintain human rights of our citizens. —— you say. what's your response to the recent move by the israeli knesset that says jews only have the rights to self—determination, downgrading arabic for the 1.8 million israeli arabs. it is clearly discriminatory, i don't see how was he can describe it. it certainly privileging one pa rt it. it certainly privileging one part of israeli society over another. there is no other way to describe it. i don't know how one would argue otherwise. looking at your own region, the middle east but the wider muslim world, there have

also been criticisms that perhaps you haven't done enough to promote freedom of speech when it comes to expressing religious beliefs and we saw one incident in your native georgia were a journalist was shot where he was gay to stand trial for blasphemy. have you done enough? we have,in blasphemy. have you done enough? we have, in the sense that the way the blasphemy laws are conceived and applied, often they are so ill—defined that they are used for political reasons to silence those who have expressed dissent, as you rightly point out, political opponents of the government, journalists, bloggers and so forth. we have spoken about this. we have seen vigilantism in pakistan and bangladesh. i've spoken about this publicly in indonesia. similar manifestations in aceh. we can a lwa ys manifestations in aceh. we can always do more and i can speak more forcefully that have done enough in terms of highlighting the problem

and asking governments to take the appropriate action. the kashmir report you published this year, and both indian and pakistani administered kashmir, the indian government very cross about your actions, accusing you of ulterior motives, the deputy permanent representative to the un says the report reflects the clear bias of an official, that is you, acting without any mandate whatsoever and relying on unverified sources of information. water off a duck ‘s back? i don't know how to respond to it. it's ridiculous. the claim is ridiculous. let's go back tojuly 2016, when we first had this massive disruption, let's put it this way. unrest, where the use of pellet guns was in such evidence that the home minister of india said we had to put a stop to this. if you look at the development of this, at the very

beginning of the crisis, we said we wa nt a ccess beginning of the crisis, we said we want access to both sides of the line of control. we demanded and requested. unconditional access to both sides. the pakistanis gave us conditional access which were not in favour of. we could not avail ourselves of it. now we have all this invective, emotion and hysteria, it's nonsense. most of the sources were indian sources, with an indian institutions. 322 footnotes referencing, much of it coming from indian institutions. publicly available material. it's not argument. edward mortimer who worked for kofi annan says the international climate now has become notably international climate now has become nota bly less sta ble international climate now has become notably less stable when defending human rights. would you agree with

that? we are seeing, as i've noted at the beginning, and since huge advances over the last 60, 70 years when it comes to women's rights. trying to end the practice of torture, and forced disappearances, improving the climate for migrant rights, the rights of persons with disabilities. that is undeniable, that has happened. we are now moving ina that has happened. we are now moving in a different direction. the attack is on in a different direction. the attack isona in a different direction. the attack is on a system as a hole. we have the brexiteers, the firsters, the nationalists, the chauvinistic nationalists, on the policies are very national, narrow agendas. nationalists, on the policies are very national, narrow agendasm the vanguard is donald trump?” would say it is the prime minister of hungry viktor orban. this global

movement you describe? i said back in march, he said in a public statement, i don't want people of my colour to mix with people of another colour. clear racism. when you look at hungary, a country of almost 10 million people in how many afro hungarians there are? about 1300. the population that has now voted in fidesz again, how xenophobic it is? you are saying that viktor orban is spearheading... not spearheading but in europe, he is providing an example of what seems to be a workable logic in political terms in terms of securing... his foreign minister rejects your comments which you have just laid out, minister rejects your comments which you havejust laid out, saying, u nworthy of you havejust laid out, saying, unworthy of your position and you should resign. i respectfully disagree with the foreign minister. finally, what you think you have

donein finally, what you think you have done in your time to advance the cause of human rights globally? do you think you really need a change? what i've been able to do is continue the trajectory that i inherited from my predecessors. that is, give voice, without fear or favour, in support of those most vulnerable. those who need the voice ofan vulnerable. those who need the voice of an office like ours. we simply cannot treat all these disasters as if they were the product of some natural phenomenon. applied here, forced measure, an earthquake. much of the suffering of people is caused by humans and it's notjust that we need to focus, it international media and ourselves, on the grievous suffering of individuals. we need to look at who is causing the suffering and say to them, look, you're not getting a pass. we are going to speak, and we're not go to let you forget this. we have lived through

two much trauma in the 20th century to begin to relive it again. we believe that there are so much energy out there, sami people who believe likewise. we have to mobilise them in the last direction. thank you very much indeed for coming on hardtalk. good morning. if you think it's been hot enough already this summer, well, just wait for the next couple of days because it looks like it's going to turn even hotter. some spots could get to 36 degrees and that brings with it the chance of some thunderstorms and welcome rain and you can see from the satellite picture, a couple of different areas of low pressure spinning out

into the atlantic as they approach our shores. we will eventually see some wet weather but ahead of that, drawing this very hot air up from the south. we start thursday morning in double digits just about wherever you are, parts of the south—east starting the day up around 20 degrees, and as we go through the day, a lot of dry weather and some spells of sunshine. more on the way of cloud spreading up from the south. small chance we might break out the odd shower into the afternoon. a bit more cloud into the west as well, into the western side of northern ireland, particularly, a bit cooler here. down towards the south—east, look at these temperatures. 34 degrees in the heart of london, but for some in the south—east, maybe 35 degrees. but the building heat and humidity, it looks like we will see some showers and thunderstorms starting to break out across the eastern half of the country, particularly

as we head into the early hours of friday. thickening cloud and outbreaks of rain starting to trickle across northern ireland. a warm and muggy start to friday. during friday, this rain band tracking in from the west. then we see these thunderstorms blossoming to life across parts of south—east england, the east midlands, maybe eastern scotland. these are the areas most prone to vicious downpours. perhaps even some disruption.

to the far east of the country, that is where we might get all the way up to 36 degrees. however, we push these various bands of rain and thunderstorms to the east as we get into the start of the weekend. then we start to tap into some much fresher air, these green and even blue colours blowing in our direction. during saturday, we say goodbye to ourfirst rain band quite quickly but there will be further bands of showers or further spells of rain from west to east on a fairly brisk breeze. fresher feel for the second half of the weekend and rain spreading in from the west. this is the briefing. i'm ben bland. our top story: searching through the charred remains as the devastation in greece becomes apparent — thejob now is to identify the victims of one of europe's deadliest wildfires. the wildfires were exacerbated by unusually dry and hot conditions. we'll be looking into why the northern hemisphere is experiencing an extreme heatwave. his supporters are already celebrating, but is former cricketer imran khan about to become pakistan's new prime minister after apparently

winning its general election? coming up in the business briefing — back from the brink. president trump and eu chiefjean claude juncker agree a deal to head off a transatlantic trade war.