violence in the united states, after several low—grade explosive devices were sent to barack obama and hillary clinton. several other democratic party politicians and officials also received them, as well as the broadcaster cnn. there's serious and growing concerns about the human rights situation in xinjiang where the bbc has uncovered fresh evidence of china's campaign to detain and re—educate muslim uighurs. our correspondent has been hearing the stories of some of those who have fled the region. saudi arabia's de—facto leader, crown prince mohammed bin salman, has described the death of the journalist jamal kashoggi as a "repulsive crime that cannot be justified". in his first public comments on the killing, he told an investment conference in riyadh thatjustice would prevail and all culprits would be punished. now want bbc news, it is hard to

talk. —— now want bbc news, it is hard to talk. -- it now want bbc news, it is hard to talk. —— it is hardtalk. welcome to hardtalk. i'm stephen sackur. turkey's president erdogan says the murder of saudi journalist jamal khashoggi was a savage crime meticulously planned in riyadh. he wants all those responsible to stand trial in turkey. as the pressure on the house of saud mounts, will the kingdom's partners in the west take punitive action? my guest today is alan duncan, minister of state in the uk foreign office. has the time come for britain to end lucrative arms exports to saudi arabia? siralan duncan, welcome to hardtalk.

top of the agenda on international affairs right now is what president erdogan of turkey has said about the murder ofjamal khashoggi, the saudi journalist killed in istanbul. does the british government accept that he was murdered on orders that go to the very top of the saudi state? we can certainly take the first half of that sentence, he was undoubtedly murdered. president erdogan has outlined today how it was planned, and that is the question, how far up the line did it go? the foreign secretary has made absolutely clear that we are appalled by this incident, and there are many unanswered questions and explanations. so i think over the next few days, more facts will emerge, which will allow us to have a clear view about what further steps we might consider taking.

you talk of facts emerging all the time. the latest news reporting we have suggests that body parts have now been found. this is a truly gruesome exercise of investigation, but do you in the british government believe that the saudi arabian government is in any way co—operating satisfactorily with the turkish investigation? well, we have had some very, i think, unconvincing explanations, which started with denial and which now admit murder. the question is who was complicitous, and clearly the people who did this were part of the saudi government, the issue is one of authorisation and basically, who commanded it? and so, that is what i think has to be established as soon as possible. you are suggesting there was some sort of mystery about it, but there wasn't really, was there? we have seen the names of various individuals, they have been pictured by the turkish government in cctv images and various other things.

they are known to be close to crown prince mohammed bin salman, there was close communication with the office of mohammed bin salman. it is quite clear, given the nature of the saudi government, that authorisation could only have come from a very, very senior position. that, of course, is a very serious allegation. you are right. are you disputing any of what i have just said? there's no doubt about who did it because the faces are there, there is no doubt about the proximity to the government, and any further accusation has to be proven. they have just found the body parts, it is said. there is talk of there being tape recordings, or recordings of conversations, which if they were to be revealed could be absolutely conclusive, but we have not heard them yet, so president erdogan has made a statement today and i think it is quite clear that there is more information to come out and i think we have to wait for it to come out, for perhaps countries

to collectively react to this, rather than ministers sitting in a studio, speculating about the latest report. some countries have acted already. germany has already. yesterday, angela merkel has already said that germany will end arms sales to saudi arabia. the canadian government has expressed a willingness, preparedness to freeze a huge arms deal that it has signed with the saudis. governments are acting, why isn't the british government? yes, the germans are not in the same position as us, and the canadians have already been in a difficult sort of spat with the saudis over the last few weeks. because of their criticism of saudi arabia's human rights record. indeed, and we are very critical when we meet them, but we have to make a distinction, i think, between a long—term relationship with saudi arabia, the kingdom, the country, and our response to this specific incident, which is, as you rightly say,

utterly repulsive and repugnant. i am just wondering whether you now feel a sense of regret for things you said in a fairly recent past about saudi arabia, not least injuly this year, you said "quite categorically, saudi arabia is not, not a dictatorship." do you regret that now? well, i think historically, that is absolutely right. but actually, it does give rise to a fundamental question indeed you may want me to answer, even though you have not asked specifically, which is that habitually, the family has been the checks and balances of the royal family in saudi arabia, but i think the question is, is that still the case or have too many of them being locked up or silenced, or had all their assets confiscated? is the saudi royal family still that collective unit that over the last 70 or 80 years it always has been? it is an intellectual question, it can be answered in due course, but i think that is

a valid question. let's listen to the words of jamal khashoggi, the late jamal khashoggi himself. he wrote not long ago, of course it is now words that we see in a particular light. he said: "religious fanaticism that had tarnished saudi arabia's image for decades has now given way to a new and perhaps more pernicious fanaticism, blind loyalty to our leader." he said this is tragically the return of the arab strongman, this time in the form of mohammed bin salman. do you agree with his very worrying analysis? i think a lot of people are worried about the direction in which saudi arabia is going. there are conflicting strands, of course, in what is happening. on the one hand, women are driving, there are reforms. on the other hand, there is a massive concentration of power, which some people have labelled obvious state capture. now, i believe that at its best,

the form of government that has taken root in a lot of arabia can work very well if the broader family are part of a more collective decision—making process, that does appear to be being eroded in saudi arabia. so i think it is a legitimate question to ask. yeah, i just wonder whether you, if you are honest, would not accept that over the years you have turned a blind eye to the abuses of the saudi regime, including internal human rights abuses and external policy decisions, which since 2015 have included waging a war in yemen which has cost thousands of civilian lives, and yet you personally, for example, took an all—expenses—paid trip to saudi arabia, one paid for by the saudi arabian government in 2015, and you have continued ever since in public to defend the saudi arabian government. do you regret that now? after i was development minister,

i had a period when i was on the backbenches and i led our conservative middle east council in the conservative party, and i think it is absolutely right that we have had engagement with the gulf. i actually have some clear views on yemen, i actually think it is a war that could have been prevented. some of the failure of the west to restrain, some of the result of an initiative which removed the leader in sanaa and created a vacuum into which the houthis could take over. there is also the point of view on the saudi side that the yemenis were firing missiles into saudi arabia and therefore, the saudis have the right to defend themselves and to defend the legitimate government of yemen. so this is a very complicated issue, as always, in the middle east. it is not so complicated. the united nations panel of expert report which concludes that most of the documented civilian casualties — and we're talking about thousands of them — most of them are the responsibility

of the coalition airstrikes, led by saudi arabia, and there are serious concerns, said this un panel of experts, serious concerns about the targeting processes used. that is a pretty straightforward proposition, isn't it? the saudis have been bombing civilians, they have killed children in school buses, there is now a call for an international war crimes investigation, and the labour party opposition in the uk says britain must stop arming the saudis now. i think there are serious concerns. i never think — thought it possible to control yemen from the air, i have to say. but there is a legitimate foundation for the origins of the war and the purpose behind it, in many respects. we are not part of this coalition, but where possible, we will give the sort of advice, be it

legal and practical, to do this. now, politics and world diplomacy is not always straightforward and morally black and white as in your question. if they were not buying weapons from us, who would they turn to, china, russia? what kind of argument is that? it is a decision to take on its own merits, on its moral merits, apart from anything else. the labour party has been quite clear that they demand that those arms sales, which have been worth over £4 billion to the united kingdom, the labour party says never mind the money, there is a moral imperative to suspend those arms sales now. are you saying the government rejects that? what i am saying is that the labour party have the privilege of opposition without the responsibilities of government. what we want to do in government is to start a proper political process to bring this conflict to an end, so that you can have a government in yemen which is not supported by iranian backed missiles, which is not

leading to the houthis firing those missiles into saudi arabia. we want to see an end to this conflict, where the houthis preferably go back to their traditional areas and we restore proper government in yemen. you are not prepared to do something that the german government has already done, which is put a halt to those arms sales? you are not, it seems, prepared to accept what chrystia freeland, the canadian foreign minister, has just said, when she said that there are very big questions about the relationship with saudi arabia and those questions need to be addressed now. it sounds to me like you just want to carry on as normal. no, we keep this constantly under review, under a very, very strict set of rules for determining whether we supply arms or not. but the events of the last few days, the last three weeks, are of course calling into question anyone‘s view of saudi arabia, and this impulsive murder in istanbul is not going to go uninvestigated and unresponded to. a final thought on practical actions

that could be taken. it is quite clear you are giving the message there will not be the halt and suspension of arms sales. in your party, the chairman of the foreign affairs committee in the house of commons, says if riyadh has murdered khashoggi or sanctioned the killing, there should be, it should be a downgrading of diplomatic relations now and a boycott of saudi arabia by uk ministers. you at least accept that the government must go that far? well, no ministers have gone to the business summit that is taking place at the moment. indeed, liam fox has pulled out of it. so to some extent, that very point has been answered. well, look what happened after skripal, we expelled a bunch of russian diplomats, intelligence people from london, other countries followed suit in a show of solidarity. if skripal‘s murder merited

that kind of action, surely the outrageous murder of jamal khashoggi merits at least a similar sort of british reaction? well, i am sure there will be some reaction more broadly across the world, but it is not an exact parallel with the use of a military grade nerve agent on british soil, killing one person in amesbury a few days later, in what was directly traceable to stocks that only the russian state could have made, which were illegal and which they should have got rid of years ago under an international treaty. and the detective work was absolutely precise, with both us and by all of the people involved to really trace it absolutely to the kremlin without doubt, so it was — i agree the murder of khashoggi is absolutely heinous, but this was of a scale that also threatened international treaties, where military grade nerve agent could equally have been used in madrid, or paris, or rome or berlin, or something. and it was on our soil, so we were in the lead in terms

of the accusations and investigations in the way that the turks are in istanbul and ankara. yes, interesting you use that phrase we were in the lead on skripal, there's no question i think that over many years the british government and your particular department, the foreign office, has prided itself on its influence, the degree of leverage it has in the international arena. let me change focus if i may and talk to you about brexit, something taking up much of your time, much of the government's time. would you agree withjohn major, former leader of your party, former prime minister, who said of brexit, "much of the world will now perceive britain, that is brexit britain, to be a middle—sized, middle—ranking nation that is no longer supercharged by its alliances",

ie brexit is doing profound damage to britain's place in the world. i think there is a danger that it might and we have to make sure that it doesn't. and in order to make sure that it doesn't, we do need to reach an agreement in the next few weeks with the eu, which is mutually beneficial and not mutually harmful. and although some voices in our own governing party are very critical of the prime minister, my view is you've got to be 100% behind her, otherwise you weaken her negotiating position. parliamentary arithmetic is very tight. and we have to back her all the way to the point where i hope, in what will probably be the last minute, we end up with a deal which can determine our future relationship with the eu and make sure that we do not suffer the consequences that sirjohn major described. the point of all this is that the prime minister is being manipulated by the almost impossible pressures inside her own party. no. yeah. if one looks at her positions on things like the northern ireland backstop, which the british government had signed up to,

this notion that there will always be a safety net, whatever the status of a future trade agreement between the uk and the eu, there will always be a safety net which ensures that northern ireland and the irish republic will not have a hard border between them. that guarantee offered by the british as long ago as last december, it now seems, has been taken off the table because theresa may can't get it by the brexiteers and her allies in the democratic unionist party. no, i think you're wrong on this. i don't think that she has, you know, been ducking and weaving. i think her great quality is that theresa may is unflappable and she doesn't get pushed around. now, there's no doubt that every waking day the poor prime minister takes in a lot of incoming fire from many angles, mostly from those who want a very hard brexit, or no deal at all. but she doesn't budge. and what she is doing is she is saying very clearly that the union of the

united kingdom, the four countries of the uk, must be held together, and that the peace process behind northern ireland mustn't be interrupted by treating northern ireland differently from the rest of the united kingdom. now, she has stuck to that, but the problem we have got is to try and find a solution which squares the circle between the principles of the eu and the principles of holding together... yeah, and these circles can't be squared. well, they can. if i may interrupt you, because we don't have much time, but the irish foreign minister, simon coveney, said yesterday, "there will be no withdrawal agreement without the irish backstop, end of story." so all of this shuffling of papers and different positions for different people, in the end it's quite simple, theresa may is here, the eu position is here, the brexiteers, who appear to have a means to stop theresa may from making any more concessions to brussels, they sit over here, there is no way of making this work. well, i think there will be a way and, actually, once you analyse it,

simon coveney, who's very smart, and you know, very fair—minded, essentially has the same objective as we do, which is that we don't want to undermine the northern irish peace process, we don't want a hard border between northern ireland and the rest of the island of ireland, and that is essentially sort of more or less is the backstop. so we are all heading for the same thing. we all want the same thing. it's just a matter of how we construct it so that it is consistent with the principles of the eu... with respect, you say, "we want the same thing", not all people in the tory party want the same thing. no, of course they don't. we have a0 mps in the stand up for brexit group, including your former boss, boris johnson, who are adamant that theresa may's so—called chequers plan must be chucked and there must be a complete renegotiation based on a so—called canada plus free trade deal, so you don't all want the same thing. and people like emmanuel macron in europe are saying, listen, your political problems,

mrs may, at home, cannot be our business, just come to us when you've actually got an idea of what you want. no, we did that in the chequers deal, but negotiations then follow. but the point about canada plus is it doesn't address the ireland problem, it's still a problem, so, you know, people can argue among themselves and adopt postures and positions but it doesn't mean that they're ones that in any way can be delivered. and you mentioned a0. this is just a website. in the end, we don't know the names are and the numbers may tail off. of course there are differences. that's why we had to have a referendum, because these differences have been going on for a0 years. and they are tearing your party apart. nicky morgan, a former cabinet minister, said the other day, this party, the tory party, your party, is now under "existential strain", friendships between colleagues are being irreparably damaged because of these bitter arguments over brexit. the language has become toxic, including talk of, from brexiteers,

of killing zones for the prime minister, her carrying a noose into a meeting so she could hang herself, a hot knife being turned in her body, what on earth is going on inside your party? well, i think briefly, it is disgusting to use language like that and it should be condemned totally. it is happening every day. yes, i know and it has happened before in politics and i think i quite agree that some people's, if you like, sense of decency and decorum is getting out of control. but the point is your party, given the atmosphere, the toxic, poisonous culture within it now over brexit cannot possibly deliver a coherent brexit deal. actually, i think it can. because i think that in the next few weeks, if the prime minister gets a deal

and comes back to parliament with it, the whole chemistry of all this will change and we will have a vote in parliament which i actually believe would vote for a deal. and i think that would... hang on, this is interesting, so you have a vision of a deal, it's a deal that she's done with the eu 27, you're telling me it can get through the british parliament but it won't have the support surely of some of the people i've just referred to with the language they're using, so presumably you're thinking you can peel off some members at least of the opposition labour party, is that it? no, i think we'll peel off a lot of those who are making noise against, because i think in the end, you know, it is probably, or will be, the only deal that's on the table. and this will be what, chequers of a sort? of a sort. yes, that is my belief and i think we should support it and if the prime minister reaches a deal in what will probably be november, we must back 100%. i don't see how your party can survive that. yourformer boss, the foreign secretary borisjohnson, he says chequers is akin to a suicide vest being wrapped around the british nation. your response to that was: "it's one of the most disgusting

things i've heard in modern politics", you said, "this is the end of borisjohnson, if it isn't now, i will make sure it is later." i put it to you that if you and people like borisjohnson, whom you used to work for, are at war with each other even before this chequers deal is put back on the table before parliament as the final deal with europe, your party is finished. no. the conservative party is always bigger than the event it has to cope with. in the case of boris, he's as much a journalist as he is a politician, so sometimes he uses this florid language, and what was happening was that he was clearly intending to go to the party conference in october with a wish to undermine the prime minister. you expressed an explicit desire to finish him. you can fire a bit of boris back at boris in order to try to just get him to back off ahead of the party conference. in the end, actually,

that is what happened, and i think that the prime minister will be able to deliver this. i think talk by people of challenging her are much exaggerated. a final thought, if you're wrong, if parliament rejects the deal that theresa may brings back, for you, what's the best option then? is it a change of leader in the tory party, and a different kind of deal? is it a general election? or is it a people's so—called vote, another referendum on britain's relationship with europe, including the possibility that we actually stay in after all? well, ithink, you know, to have what they call a people's vote, you need an act of parliament to make it possible and that ain't gonna happen at the moment, but if a deal were put to parliament and it was rejected, that would cause far greater uncertainty than anything we have been discussing today. so you basically have no idea what would happen? nobody does, we'd be in completely unknown territory if that were to happen and that's why i don't want it to happen, which is why i as one of the older members of parliament appeal to my party to stick

together, to stop having a go at the prime minister all the time and to realise that, you know, if we get all this wrong we might end up with the muckiest brexit of all, plus a labour government, led byjeremy corbyn, which is like having fidel castro in downing street. sir alan duncan, we have to end there, but i thank you very much for being on hardtalk. thank you very much. thank you very much indeed. hello there. sunshine on wednesday took temperatures very close to 20 degrees, but you can expect those temperatures to drop away over the next few days. and also through the day ahead, thursday, we're going to see a bit more cloud around in many areas. for most, it will stay dry, but not for all. on the earlier satellite picture, you can see the way this cloud has been streaming its way

in from the north and west. there will still be some breaks in the cloud, where we have breaks to start the day, particularly down towards the south, there could be the odd mist patch around as well. as we go on through the day, we will bring areas of cloud in from the north—west, with the best of the sunshine to the east of high ground, maybe the east of the pennines, parts of east anglia and the south—east. all the while, we'll see some outbreaks of rain setting in across the north—west of scotland, some of this turning heavy late in the day, and those temperatures a little bit lower than they were on wednesday, 9—15 degrees. this rain across scotland will start to push its way south—eastwards as we go through thursday night into the early hours of friday. not much rain around actually, as we see this weather system sliding into england and wales, but behind it, quite a big change in the feel of the weather. the winds switch round to more of a northerly direction, and as you can see, we're going to start to tap into some pretty cold air for the end of the week. that air coming from a long way north. so, things are going to feel decidedly chilly.

the remnants of our band of cloud and rain, a cold front continuing to slide across south—eastern areas early on friday. then we will see some spells of sunshine, but in areas exposed to this keen northerly wind, there will also be some showers, and yes, those showers will start to turn wintry across high ground in the north. temperatures 6—10 degrees at best. we stick with that chilly feel as we head on into the weekend. a biting northerly wind. a mixture of sunshine and showers, some of those showers wintry over high ground in the north, and the risk of frost and some ice. so let's take a look at saturday. we'll see some sunshine, yes, but some showers pushing in across parts of eastern of england. one or two for west wales, the south—west of england, a few up to the north—west as well. one or two showers inland. many inland areas should stay dry with some sunshine, but temperatures ofjust 7—9 degrees. then we add on the strength of the keen northerly wind, this is what it will feel like. it'll feel like one, two, three degrees in some places.

not much change on sunday, but again. we will see some spells of sunshine. the winds switch around to more of a north—easterly direction, that means most of the showers will be in eastern areas, not as many further west at this stage, but those temperatures still struggling, with highs of 7—10 degrees. this is the briefing — i'm sally bundock. our top story: the fbi hunts those behind pipe bombs sent to prominent us democrats, including barack obama and hillary clinton. going, going, gone. asian markets follow wall street where this year's stocks gain are wiped out over fears of a global slowdown. a leading saudi dissident tells the bbc that people feel betrayed after the country acknowledged involvement in the death ofjamal khashoggi. back on track — electric car maker tesla comfortably beats wall street's expectations and posts a profit in the third quarter.