this is bbc news. the headlines: president trump has re—imposed sanctions against iran, following the united states‘ withdrawal from the 2015 nuclear deal but says iran could avert sanctions by agreeing to talks to abandon its nuclear and missile programmes. iran's president, hassan rouhani, has accused the united states of psychological warfare. a key witness at the trial of president trump's ex—campaign chairman, paul manafort has testified that mr manafort filed false tax returns and tried to hide millions of dollars in foreign banks. mr manafort has pleaded not guilty to charges of bank fraud and tax evasion. the indonesian disaster management agency says nearly 100 people are now known to have died in sunday's powerful earthquake on lombok island. a spokesman for the agency said more than 230 people had been seriously injured by the quake. now on bbc news, hardtalk‘s stephen sackur speaks to the dutch mep, sophie in ‘t veld.

welcome to hardtalk. i am stephen sackur. british prime minister theresa may is running out of time to avoid the brecon cliff edge. the proposals for post brexit trade deal with brussels got short shrift from the eu's chief negotiator. she seems to be hoping to get morejoy from some of your‘s national leaders. but with every passing day, the prospect for a no deal potentially chaotic brexit throws —— grows more real. my guest is the dutch and ep sophie in ‘t veld, deputy to the chief negotiator. is brexit brinkmanship game nobody can win? sophie in ‘t

veld in brussels, welcome to hardtalk. hello. you follow the brexit negotiations very, very closely. are you comfortable with the fact that went theresa may and her government came out there need proposal, the so—called white paper, their vision for what abe post brexit trade deal with the eu could look like it was, effectively, dismissed by the eu's chief negotiator with barely a second glance? dismissed, ithink mr

barnier made it clear that we are happy there are proposals on the table. that is the start and is necessary to heels made it clear that some of the proposals clearly do not fit in, or do not correspond to the rules of the internal market. there is clearly a basis now to stop the talks. hopefully, finalise the talks in time. and try to avoid a cliff edge scenario. you say there is clearly a basis for talks. i struggle to see that bases because barnierfrom the struggle to see that bases because barnier from the beginning struggle to see that bases because barnierfrom the beginning of this process up to now appears convinced that britain is still, to use the phrase, —— all wheel —— richard is a lwa ys phrase, —— all wheel —— richard is always —— britain is always cherry picking. those phrases are still being used in brussels. there are

many cliches being used on all sides. the reality is we need to sit down and try to come to an agreement more or less by october. that is the reality. i think that on the side of the eu, contrary to what some of the media are reporting, there is a lot of good will. people do want a result but, clearly, there are limits. we will not re— negotiate the rules of the internal market all the rules of the internal market all the eu. but when barnier says that with scepticism that the uk seems to wa nt to with scepticism that the uk seems to want to keep free movement of goods between us but not of people and services, as though, in his view, there is an indivisibility to those different pillars of the eu single market and he will not accept any effort to make a difference between goods and services. are you in not? it is not his view. it is a fact. that is the way the internal market was dealt. and what strikes me in

this debate and in the way it has been displayed in the uk media, or at least the extent that i have seen, is that uk, 45 years, has been the main champions of the internal market. one of the prime architect of the internal market. so you know what the rules of the game are because you were actually leading the construction of the internal market. i think it is strange to now say" market. i think it is strange to now i. e market. i think it is strange to now ca n market. i think it is strange to now say" we can unpick it and try and select the part that we like because thatis select the part that we like because that is not the way that it works. but why not think creatively? why not consider the possibility that a little bit of on picking, as you put it, may be productive, notjust for one side but for both sides? rather than this be a lose lose situation it may end up being win—win. a respected analyst in the financial times said that we should get real. yes it is complicated, the white

paper and yes the british government will need to make more concessions. in essence, he says, the eu promises to treat the uk as a third country, a third party after brexit so it should, by standing ready to accept an improved checkers at white paper offer and then declaring a resounding victory. he is basically saying there is a lot in the white paper that the eu, if it would only remove itself from a puritanical stance, should regard as good news. would you call puritanical i would say it is the rule of law. we have treaties and i believe that when you sign up to a treaty you have to respect the terms of the treaty until people decide to change the treaty. until we do that we have the internal market, the eu treaties. this is a rules —based entity. again, the uk has been one of its prime architect. and i think that this is... we are not starting from

scratch. the uk, which is still a member of the eu, has chosen to leave the eu. i am one of those who regrets that however the british people in majority have decided to leave the european union. now we need to make sure there is an orderly withdrawal and we have to limit the damage as much as possible. and then we have two discuss future relations. what we are not... sorry, there is no compromise. the uk is leaving the eu. where is the compromise? the compromise, if i may say so, the compromise, if i may say so, the compromise comes in finding a deal and a process for that leaving of the eu which does the least damage to both sides. that is where the compromise comes from and that is where you may need to be creative about these rules that you regard as important. i think it is ironic that the british, who actually were pushing the internal market,

building the internal market, are now approaching the eu for protecting the internal market. for us, the integrity of the internal market is very important and i think thatis market is very important and i think that is also our interest in the future. they have made their choice. this is what the tory party, or at least a large part of the tory party wanted. it is not for us now to solve the problems of the tory party. it is for politicians on all sides including in the uk, to begin being honest. the whole idea that you can have brexit and you can cherry pick... people say they will make brexit a success. why are they not honest and say there is no such thing as a successful brexit because there will always heard and it will hurt many people, but it will hurt primarily people in the united kingdom. ifind that primarily people in the united kingdom. i find that very sad. what they should do is not expect the eu to undo the eu and the internal

market, what they must do is be honest and iran voters. there is a sense in which, with your stands and some would describe it as intransigent. i some would describe it as intra nsigent. i know some would describe it as intransigent. i know you reject that. that your absolute insistence on the laws and the process that the eu has established, you risk a form of mutually assured destruction, don't you? yes, a chi tick the verge crash our brexit is going to be undeniably very damaging to the uk economy, but it will be equally damaging to economies across the european union, not least the netherlands. if you would only show some stability, you can avoid some of that damage to yourself. actually, i think my voters, you we re actually, i think my voters, you were talking about politics and elections, my voters expect us to protect the integrity of the internal market because in the long—term, that is what will

actually assure our prosperity. do your vote rs actually assure our prosperity. do your voters expect you to protect theirjobs? and your voters expect you to protect their jobs? and in your voters expect you to protect theirjobs? and in the netherlands you will lose tens of thousands of jobs according to the imf, because of what will come with a hard brexit. this is all a panicky blame game. brexit ‘s understanding that brexit will not take them into heaven and they are trying to blame in now on others, saying that brexit isa in now on others, saying that brexit is a good idea but it is being badly executed because, you know, those europeans are so intransigent. no. brexit was never a good idea and it was always going to hurt. we have to limit the damage the. in the long—term, the prosperity of the eu and jobs long—term, the prosperity of the eu andjobs in long—term, the prosperity of the eu and jobs in the eu depend on the integrity of the internal market. we're not going one pick it.|j return to the raw data put out by the imf. of course it is speculative but, one must respect the strength of their economics. they say that if

there is a cliff edge, a hard crash out brexit, that will cost the eu as a whole probably around i.5%, if not more, of gdp. some countries will be much worse like ireland who could lose 4% of gdp. it will cost hundreds of thousands ofjobs, possibly over i hundreds of thousands ofjobs, possibly overi million, across the eu as possibly overi million, across the euasa possibly overi million, across the eu as a whole. some countries in particular, and this is where we get to you, some countries like the netherlands are extraordinary vulnerable because of the strength of your trading relationship with the uk. yes. but we also have trading relations with the eu internal market. i think you make the same calculation for the disintegration of the internal market you would get figures that are even worse. i think to now one—sided league try and make the eu responsible for the fallout of brexit is a bit turning the world on the head. there were politicians...

you referred to borisjohnson earlier and some other politicians who have behaved like populists and have told people that brexit will be in that it would bring them have an. that was simply never true. brexit was always going to hurt. it depends on two sides but, also the uk. that's not forget that the vote took place over two years ago. only now do we have the white paper with some proposals on the table. it has a lwa ys proposals on the table. it has always been an internal problem of the tory party and... i don't think that this is what david cameron had in mind when he called for a referendum. let me ask you this then. you sit there in brussels and, obviously, you follow this process quite closely. but the british government appears to have changed tack recently. the commission is, by and large, on summer holidays so theresa may and the foreign secretaryjeremy theresa may and the foreign secretary jeremy hunt are theresa may and the foreign secretaryjeremy hunt are going around capitals and talking to leaders and foreign ministers across

europe, trying to tell them that, look, there is a looming tragedy. these are the words ofjeremy hunt, isa these are the words ofjeremy hunt, is a looming tragedy here is the uk crashes out of the eu without a deal, according to mr hunt that will be damaging to the eu as well as britain. in his words, at tragedy. it strikes me that some national leaders worried about employment and the state of their own economies may be much more are set give to that message band barnier and possibly you. mr barnier is negotiating on behalf of the eu and he has the support of the member state typical of the member state has said he is not speaking on behalf of my country. but some member state by malta, italy, it austria, have suggested that there should be a focus on trying to find compromise. everybody is open to compromise. but a compromise can never, ever include the disintegration of the internal

market. integrity of the internal market. integrity of the internal market is not on the agenda of the negotiations. that must be very clear. is there an element of bluff in this? i notice that the netherlands has made a public announcement that 1000 new customs officers are being trained to deal with the potential fallout from a no deal brexit. i know there is discussion in the netherlands about what it will mean for the agriculture and other sectors that would be most affected. is the netherlands government really now thinking no deal will happen or is there an element of loss to wall of this? on both sides of the english channel? i don't think there is any laugh here. we have been clear about our position. it is not rocket science. we are the european union. we have the internal markets. we will negotiate with the uk about a future relationship but we will not

re— negotiate the eu because, yes, brexit will be damaging, even if there is no cliff edge, no crashing out of the eu. if there is a crushing out, it will be even more damaging. but i'm picking the internal market will be the worst scenario and we will not do that. if you say bluff... i have noticed that in recent weeks, in the british media, and you are actually making the same point here, they are trying to kind of intimidate the eu in two, oh, if you do not accept our terms and it will be terrible for you. i think we should be... maybe it is time for little bit of honesty in politics and maybe people should have been told before the brexit referendum on what reality was going to be like a. the vote has taken place, that is clear. that is the situation we have to deal with. and it will hurt. we are not going to one do the internal market. be from me to intimidate anybody, i

am looking at the recap —— the reality of what is happening. not in terms of economics but also security. talking about reality, what is happening is reality is sinking in even with like boris johnson who have been promoting brexit and they are trying to put the blame on someone else. but if they were honest, i think they should man up and take responsibility for what they have achieved. i try to switch focus onto security issues. you say that there isa security issues. you say that there is a foursquare unity of monks at 27 members of the eu as they approach brexit, but on this could issue there clearly isn't complete unity. we had the german interior minister saying recently that he believes it is vital that the uk is kept in because of various security structures that involve in so much

of the important work concerning policing and security across europe. isa policing and security across europe. is a very different message from michel barnier, it suggests to me that in some capitals in europe there is a great concern about what they know dual brexit could mean in security terms for the rest of europe. of course there is great concern anywhere, also in the european parliament. i understand what he wants to say, but i think he said at the wrong way. the fact that we will want to have very close corporation with the uk, i think is undisputed, everybody wants that, but we have two look very carefully at the terms. it is clear, the uk will not be a part of the eu any more, so it can not be a part of the institutions. this should not prevent us from having corporation and exchanges of information but clearly there has to be agreement on legal safeguards, data protection,

fundamental rights, the right to a fair trial, all of the regular safeguards that you have and that we need to negotiate. a quick final thought on brexit before i broaden this out a bit. there is a growing sense among some policymakers in europe that what will actually happen, rather than a know dual brexit, there will yet be another moment of fudge and ticking the can down the road come this autumn and early spring of next year. it seems there is a feeling that the two sides will not be able to do much more than established a withdrawal agreement and only the very broadest notion of where they might go in terms of future trading relationships and most of the detail will be left off any document and there will be a transition agreement and during those two years or so, the hope is somehow they will get to a consensual agreement. is that what is going to happen in the long run?

look, i do not have a crystal wall. there is no map, no blueprint, we are in uncharted territory, we don't know. all i can hope for is that we do find an agreement hopefully on time by october. again, i think contrary to what was suggested earlier, the european union were united and very open to compromise, that does not entail renegotiating the basis of the eu. we are open to compromise and everybody i think is a way of the seriousness of the situation and the urgent need to find solutions on time. before we end, iwant find solutions on time. before we end, i want to broaden this out and throughout this interview you have stressed the unity of the eu 27 but ina way stressed the unity of the eu 27 but in a way it seems brexit is a distraction from the much bigger challenge facing the eu, which is there is a growing strain of

populist nationalism rife right to europe from italy in western europe to hungary, poland and elsewhere. it isa to hungary, poland and elsewhere. it is a movement that is challenging the basic, sort of notions of european sovereignty in a way that goes far beyond brexit, would you agree? well, yes. and actually, i think european integration isn't even at the top of their political agenda. a clearly have an agenda which is much more focusing on issues like values, like equality, pluralism, the basic rules of democracy. it is a very authoritarian strand of populism, very nationalist. it is a strand which is all about the nationstate and the power and importance of the nationstate. so when it comes to profound eu challenges like a common approach to migration, or in deed

the future of the eurozone, because let's face it, that hasn't been sorted out satisfactorily. when it comes to those pan european challengers, there is no coherence to the eu at all. actually, that is not true. the anti—eu nationalists are not the majority. i also see that the pro— european forces are being mobilised as they are beginning to realise that they have to act and i would also like to stress that yes, the european union, we have a way of doing things. it is a lwa ys we have a way of doing things. it is always about compromise, consensus, it isa always about compromise, consensus, it is a bit slow, it is not very sexy and heroic, the way we take decisions. if you look at what the eu has called through over the last ten yea rs eu has called through over the last ten years or so, eu has called through over the last ten years or so, an economic eu has called through over the last ten years or so, an economic crisis, refugees, terrorism, now we have to deal with a world run by people like trump, putin, we are facing brexit. you know what, the european union is

still there, it is strong, it hasn't fallen apart and popular support is growing. no doubt it is still there at but whether it is coherent is another matter. in a sense, the most powerful political figure in the another matter. in a sense, the most powerful politicalfigure in the eu is emmanuel macron, he has a strong vision of deepening european sovereignty, but frankly most other leaders are not there any more. the integrationist impulse is over. even your own prime minister in holland responding to him said integration for integration's sake will only harm future public support for the eu. so when you tell me there is a clear direction of travel, there isn't. there has never been integration for integration's sake. never. it has been integration in order to respond to the challenges of today and the reality of course is that the nationstate, or the national state in itself cannot respond any more through the challenges of today. we need a strong eu, iseek challenges of today. we need a strong eu, i seek support for european integration amongst young

people which is the next generation of leaders, is a very strong. they are more at it, will mobilise, so actually i am quite optimistic. looking at brexit as an example, all one can say is that there are increasing deep divisions between different demographics across europe, not necessarily helping the eu. afinal europe, not necessarily helping the eu. a final thought, the guide you work closely in the eu parliament says that actually brexit is a sign of failure. it has to be accepted as a failure for the eu and part of the bigger picture. would you accept that. —— except that? bigger picture. would you accept that. -- except that? in political terms, i don't know, but i would feel it is a sense of failure as well. at the same time it is serving asa well. at the same time it is serving as a wake—up call, both in the uk and the eu. i think trump is another wake—up call and we have a few

others, like putin. but i think the wake—up call is working, people are being mobilised, they are speaking up. being mobilised, they are speaking rt being mobilised, they are speaking up. support for the eu is growing and it has never been linear process. is it as valid and coherent in budapest, warsaw and rome as it is in brussels? i think so, because new can see everywhere, of course in one country it will be stronger than in another, but i actually think it is not so much the eu that is in trouble, it is the nationstate which is much weaker now in times of globalisation, digital era, what is territorial power? so we can see it is an open world and we can see that it is actually the nationstate struggling with these challenges, whereas the european union is actually growing stronger and has

much better answers for the future. all right. we have to end it there, but sophie in ‘t veld, i thank you very much forjoining me on hardtalk on the think you. —— joining me on hardtalk. thank you. to pleasure. —— my pleasure. hello there. today we see the last of the hot and humid conditions across the south—east before it's all change by the time we reach wednesday. we'll maintain a north—west/south—east split for the next 2a hours, that's because we've got a weak weather front across northern and western areas, largely clear skies and a very warm and muggy start in the south—east, whereas further north and west, slightly fresher and there will be more cloud around, perhaps a spot of drizzle and some hill fog too.

so it means for tuesday morning it starts off relatively cloudy across many northern and western areas, but the cloud tending to thin and break. sunny spells developing quite widely. will be breezier across the north—west, but again, across the south and east, another hot and sunny day. you can see the deep orange colours unfolding there into the afternoon with highs again 29 to maybe 31 degrees. further west, though, in those yellow colours, it's going to be feeling a little bit cooler. something typical for the time of year, 18 to 22 celsius. and then late on tuesday evening and overnight, we could see a cluster of thundery showers move up from the near continent, grazing past south—east england and east anglia. bit of uncertainty as to how far westwards these will get, but it's all tied in with this weather front, which is going to continue to move its way eastwards during the course of thursday night. and then by wednesday morning, we lose the hot and humid air from the south—east and then we're all into the cooler air mass. so, for wednesday it's going to feel very different to what we've been

used to, particularly in the south—east. there will be some sunshine around, but some showers as well, particularly across western areas, some of them could be heavy and thundery. and there's your temperatures, 17 to 2a celsius. a good eight degrees lower in the south—east than what we've been used to on monday and tuesday. on into thursday then, most of the showers will be across the north—west corner of the country. sunny spells elsewhere, but there is a chance of some thundery rain moving up from the near continent, again grazing the south—east. but it could stay over the near continent, south—east could stay dry. and again, temperatures around the seasonal average but feeling cooler than what we've been used to. friday not a bad looking day, largely dry. some showers in the north. but then later on in the day, the skies are going to cloud over across western areas with increasing breeze ahead of a weather system. now, this is something we haven't seen much of during the summer period, but it looks like it's going to be quite a vigorous area of low pressure hurtling in across our shores just in time for the weekend. it could deliver a spell of pretty heavy rain at times, and also strong winds. could be touching gale force. so saturday's looking very unsettled with wet and windy weather moving through.

for sunday, though, a little bit brighter with sunshine and showers, but it's going to feel much cooler over the weekend. welcome to bbc news, broadcasting to viewers in north america and around the globe. my name is mike embley. our top stories: with the united states now out of the international nuclear deal with iran, president trump is re—imposing sanctions. and the moment the tremor struck. indonesian officials say nearly 100 people have died in the latest lombok earthquake. two britons accused of beheading western hostages in syria tell the bbc they shouldn't be sent for trial to the us. at the trial of donald trump's former campaign chairman, a key witness testifies that he helped paul manafort submit false tax returns. the moving animal sculptures powered by wind now attracting the attention of nasa.