to keep away from beaches amid fears the anak krakatoa volcano could trigger another tsunami. over 280 people are now known to have died after the waves struck late on saturday. and over 1,000 have been injured. president trump has announced that his current secretary of defence, jim mattis, will leave office two months earlier than originally announced. general mattis resigned last week over mr trump's plans to withdraw us troops from syria. he will be replaced by his deputy, patrick shanahan, on january first. billionaire elon musk‘s space—x company has launched a falcon 9 rocket into orbit. the craft took up a new ultra—precise navigation satellite for the us air force, which could eventually improve domestic gps systems, too. now on bbc news, it's time for dateline london, where our panel take a look back at the big global stories of the past 12 months. hello.

welcome to dateline. for the last two programmes of the year, we're in a seasonally reflective mood. next weekend, we'll look forward to what 2019 may bring. today, though, a reminder of the things we've loved and loathed about 2018. if there's a theme, it's leadership and why it's been lacking. with me to discuss the year almost gone, the usjournalist stephanie baker from bloomberg news, suzanne lynch, washington correspondent for the irish times, back from the us capital, marc roche, belgian—born british resident writing for france's le point,

and the uk political commentator steve richards. a warm welcome to you all. thank you for breaking off from your christmas shopping. now, if we look at the prospects for the year, and the yearjust gone, i suppose it is no great surprise to end and begin with the united states as the year ends with the united states almost in shutdown. at least part of the federal government in shutdown. is this leadership? i think 2018 will go down as the year the trump presidency kind of went off the rails, really, culminating in this shutdown. but, looking back, he has had an unprecedented turnover in his administration. he has lost two national security advisers, two chief of staffs, a secretary of state, justice department attorney general as well as just recently the departure of mattis as defence secretary. huge turmoil, that he is governing by chaos, while at the same time

under unprecedented investigation by special counsel robert mueller, who, although he has now handed down or secured more than 30 indictments and guilty pleas, is really only getting started. laughter we don't know what he has got, but i think the big turning points we will see in 2019 with special counsel investigation. the shutdown that we saw happen last night over his border wall funding is really a push by trump to try to play to his base and stick to his guns in terms of getting this extra $5 billion for border wall funding. but, remember, the republicans have controlled both houses of congress and he hasn't been able to get his border wall funding, and it doesn't look like it's going to get any easier for him. and i think it has opened up a split within the republican party. the republicans were ready to do a deal, a stopgap funding bill, and, you know, they're in a state

of sort of disbelief that he has continued to push ahead with this, right, you know, in the christmas season, sending people home as well as forcing people to work without pay. it is a rather shocking way to end 2018. susan, you've just escaped, as i say, from washington. there are lots of things that trump supporters will say, actually, this has been a good year, not least the economy and donald trump pushing back hard against china. is that an area where — a kind of fair assessment to say that he has enjoyed some success? in terms of the economy, and this may be where we see the republican party splitting with trump, if you like, in the last month, and in the second half of the year, we have seen a real fall in the stock markets, and that is the kind of thing that worries donald trump.

he keeps an eye on the stock market. almost as if it is a running opinion poll. exactly, so i think it will be alarm bells for him. but, i mean, the big event this year was the mid—term elections in november. there are two ways to spin this. in a way, the democrats did well in the house, but i do feel — i was there covering the midterms — that there was an expectation that trump would have gotten more of a battering in the midterms. i know the numbers did support republicans, they were going in with a mathematical advantage into the midterm elections, particularly in the senate... because they had fewer vulnerable seats to defend. exactly. but at the end of the day, the republicans did increase their majority in the senate and that gave trump a bit of a boost. the sheer churn of personnel at the top of the trump administration is unprecedented. brookings institute recently did some analysis on this. but the danger is that this masks some very significant domestic policy changes that are happening in the us.

nobody is covering it in the media. the trump drama is dominating. one example of this is what's happening in the judiciary — not only do we have the supreme court nominee, the brett kavanaugh nomination was a huge news story this year, but at lower levels of the judicial system, the republican party has been packing those courts with conservative justices and that is going to have an impact in america long after donald trump leaves office, and that is one of the main reasons why a lot of his supporters voted for him. they held their nose, but they voted for donald trump because he said he was going to hold up their conservative values. and, steve, he delivered on that. the brett kavanaugh example is perhaps the extreme but it is not the first. he has delivered conservative judges, and that is what republican activists say they want. he uses his power where he can. the power of patronage is huge. he is heavily constrained in some areas, but that is an area where he isn't. let me be counterintuitive for a moment and say some of the things which make me feel warm to him.

because this will be counter—intuitive. notjust because it's christmas. you were talking about leadership, one of the things that protects an american president from intense scrutiny at times is the aura of the presidency. he has humanised the presidency. i like the way he does two—hour press conferences. in the past, it was three questions each if you were lucky. he's there for hours. i don't mind the fact he attacks journalists or political leaders. he shows the disdain. there is a transparency. the tweets are beyond belief, what you read, but i think that method of communication has changed the way presidents will have to engage with the people forever. i am interested in the way he breaks through barriers to try and get some peace process with north korea. nothing of substance yet, but he does it because he does whatever he wants. so, there are ways in which i think... i mean, there are many catastrophes

arising from all this, but i think the way he has changed the nature of the presidency and leadership and scrutiny and accountability is quite interesting. i mean, on allthose points, i would take a different view. with his two—hour press conferences, he reminds me of a dictator, you know, or north korea, is this an impulsive decision? this is a president who not only tweets, and you're right, and that does bypass the medium of the media, but he seems to me — and in certain cases it's been proven — that he is actually making policy on the back of things he has seen on fox news. he watches something and all of a sudden we have a tweet about it. a president who doesn't listen to his advisers i think is very worrying. yes, he has got the power of patronage, but that is worrying. and a very interesting example this week with the decision over troops in syria and afghanistan. a reduction in troop

numbers from afghanistan. we understand from things that have been written about life behind the scenes in the white house this year that he has said he wants out of afghanistan. what is the point? what is it achieving? "nothing, let's get them home." he is doing it in syria. that is leadership, but it is apparently without counsel. well, for the europeans, it has been a fantastic opportunity trump has given to have european defence, because he cannot be trusted. and on top of it, the european defence, which the british basically killed in 2018, it's becoming a big issue, because you can't rely on the british, because they are out of the eu, you can't rely on trump, because he's unpredictable, he doesn't listen to his miltary, he doesn't care about nato, so it's time for europe to go on its own way on defence and, in fact, it is important that governments in europe increase their defence budget, because i think american

protection has gone with trump. i think, to pick up on your point, i don't think it is leadership. the way he did this. i mean, you have some people, non—interventionist on the left, saying, yes, they wanted this move for a while, you have liberatarians on the right, like rand paul, who pushed this, but the way he did it was lacking in leadership. he did not consult his allies, he did not consult anyone in congress, he pushed it through without a plan or strategy. what is the us strategy in syria? what is the strategy in afghanistan? there's been a lack of thought over that. i think that's whyjim mattis stepped down and what we are going to see now is trump unleashed. you know, he has been held back from his worst impulses by a circle of advisers, and now we are going to see america first in his foreign policy without any

restraints whatsoever. so trump unbound. but that's a good thing for europe, because you have an america who doesn't care about europe, and that is good for europe. to do their own way. i don't think it is. we don't need a president like that. it's a decoupling for the first time with the us. i think the scariest thing is what does he do with nato. withoutjim mattis at his side. but that's why i said the only way for nato, because the americans are out of it, nato was america and britain, now you have germany and france. let's talk about the syria decision and the broad implications in the middle east, because this is a part of the world where so much has been changing during the courtse of the year. 0ur perceptions of countries has changed. we have the iran nuclear deal with the americans going one way and the british and other european nations going in another direction. we have israel, with its decision to move the embassy,

a kind of symbolic decision, but one it is interesting in the way politics has been developing over decades over the middle east. and of course we have what is happening in syria where president assad ends the year apparently in a stronger position than he began it. what is the picture of the middle east this year, in 2018? for me, it is a victory for putin, erdogan, netanyahu, all people who are basically against peace, and there is no voice of peace in the middle east. also, the middle east, with the withdrawal of the americans, it is getting it off the agenda, the good news of 2018 is what happened in saudi arabia. the realface prince salman has come out because they ordered the killing of thisjournalist, they are responsible for what's happened in yemen, almost a war criminal there, and he's cracked dissent, and the west put him on a pedestal. in 2018, saudi arabia has

shown its real face. it is a dictatorship — autocratic regime. i think that's if you like of the positives that came out of the brutal murder ofjamal khashoggi, it has propelled the issue of yemen to the forefront of american political discussion, and also has raised questions about america's long—standing relationship with the saudis. significantly, donald trump's first trip abroad was to saudi arabia, his son—in—lanared kushner has been hugely influential in trying to cultivate further links with bin salman, and also using that as a way into the middle east peace process, trying to get saudi arabia on board. trying to get them on board with regards to israel. but i think that has been one of the big changes, towards the second half of the year, and if we are talking about the republican party, what we have seen this year is that donald trump has kind of hijacked the republican party. they have rolled in behind him

in a way that is so disappointing for so many people, but on the saudis, they have flexed their muscles. in the last few weeks, we saw a senate resolution, a very strong message from congress, from some of trump's strongest allies in the last few months, lindsay graham, like the south carolina senator, so we are going to see a very strong message. but isn't it interesting, with the vivid murder of a journalist... which the prince says he denies anything to do with. despite widespread allegations against him. the line has been accepted by trump and it shows in some respects the powerlessness of power. the united states condemned the murder, but nothing much has happened since. in britain, you know, we were going to be really, really tough and the foreign secretary said, "don't do this again, will you?" laughter this is not a coordinated, strategic response to this. so, it raises questions vividly. but not much has followed in practice. the problem with the middle east is it is dependent or has been

on american leadership, but it also highlights the problem. i mean, trump is clearly going to withdraw from the middle east. the syria thing is typical, this put america first policy will manifest it sometimes in him doing nothing at all. the border wall with mexico means more because it tells you about the mental perception of the outside world, that the outside world is hostile... in fact, i would argue he would rather redeploy the 2,000 troops in syria on the border with mexico. that is his idea of military power. it is isolationist. and i do think you will see a pushback. we have already seen a pushback from republicans in congress to this move, saying they are dismayed at the decision to pull out of syria and reduce troop levels in afghanistan. they are very worried. the applications are enormous in terms of the balance of power in the middle east,

if one could call it a balance of power, or balance of hostility, are these going to become hot areas again? the top players are putin, erdogan, saudi arabia and the americans are out. one thing to watch, the united nations, nikki hayley stood down. she was widely seen as one of the adults in the room. the us ambassador to the un. and now donald trump has appointed someone who was formerly a fox news tv host to be the face of america at the un. this is going to be— and there are reports that he is making that into not a cabinet position any more. and that again sends a signal, doesn't it? and hugely important on the israeli—palestinian issue, a lot going on there,

a real hot button topic, so that is going to be something to watch. does iran feel involved in all this? do they start to say, actually, the americans are backing out, they are not going to play ball over our nuclear programme, we think israel is threatening to us because of our nuclear programme, but israel is saying if you didn't have a nuclear programme, we wouldn't have to feel so frightened of you. but given that syria, because of russian intervention, is now apparently assured, does that mean iran can say, we are in a position to start to flex our muscles? i actually think that the us policy has been quite consistent in a singular focus about curtailing iran's influence and that is why you have seen this extraordinary blank cheque written for the saudi regime as well as a sanctions policy and the ripping up of the nuclear deal and that is the one area where the republicans have remained united and i think it is why some republican senators are so dismayed at this decision to retreat

from syria, because they think it might give iran the upper hand. in iran there is a problem because the economic situation is terrible in iran. they have a young population so what could happen is the political power in iran is hampered by the economic situation. but crucially, the european union is still committed to the iran deal. they are working on a way to bypass the sanctions, but they still have that political support from europe, which you can't underestimate, and at the un level, the iranians are constantly at the un. but europe will have the post—brexit situation. vladimir putin said that the us was wise to pull its troops out of syria. he also says it is wise for britain to leave the european union. has this been putin's year? i think it has, but more important

it has been a good year for the european union, which has stayed united through the negotiations on brexit. britain tried everything to try to get the support of traditional allies, the scandinavian countries, benelux, germany. they feel the european union was strong, was united, britain was weak and terribly divided, and at the end, the european union imposed this deal on theresa may which is basically a british capitulation. is that how it looks in dublin? well, ireland has ended up inadvertently being at the front and centre of this debate. no—one saw a backstop in northern ireland being such an issue. they are walking a very, very difficult line here. britain is by far ireland's closest trade ally, and we must remember, the trade negotiations

about a future deal haven't even started. when that does happen, ireland will be one of the countries, with the benelux countries and germany, arguing for as close a relationship as possible on trade. ireland have taken a gamble, they thought they would put the backstop there because they felt that this would be used as a political football at the final stages, if they didn't get it in writing now, the fact that it would be sacrificed ultimately by the eu. i think it is a bit simplistic to say ireland is not... completely blinded... it is not naive. if theresa may's deal is back and there is a close enough trade relationship, that is going to be a huge political tool for ireland. if they exit without a deal, it will have backfired. i think ireland was left with no choice. but they did very well because certainly the only issue is the backstop in northern ireland. let's talk about how theresa may

has played this year because huge criticism, she is still standing at the end of the year, she looks a little more confident in this last week of the year than she did even ten days ago. she was magnanimous in calling in some of her opponents like jacob rees—mogg. to be counter—intuitive again, she has shown in recent weeks the power of a prime ministerial position because everyone says she is weak and hopeless and so on but actually she decided to withdraw the vote on her deal, she decided or will decide when that vote will take place, so she has many levers to pull. however, the wider context is still incredibly fragile. she didn't do that because she was being magnanimous, she wants their vote, these internal dissenters. maybe in the end she will get them. however, i don't think she's

going to get some legal guarantee about this so—called backstop because it would be a contradiction in terms. it is an insurance policy to guarantee the soft border, basically. you can't say to one side you can pull out of it when you like because then there is no insurance policy. what sort of insurance policy is it because if there is no—deal brexit, which would be the consequence of the vote being lost, you end up with a hard border anyway. if there is no—deal brexit, that whole arrangement falls. the bluff has been called... but it will be one of those, if there is no deal, and it is possible, it would be an extraordinary moment. when you have a british prime minister, a british chancellor, a leader of the opposition, a shadow chancellor, a governor of the bank of england, all believing it would be a catastrophe and a majority of mps in the house of commons with that view.

now, it could well happen, like the first world war, there are historians who say in july 1914, not a single leader of any country contemplated or wanted a war and it happened. but that would be the context, against the political consensus, that we just fall out, in which case the backstop will go so there is no arrangement in place of any sort. i think the dup is a crucial part, partners to the conservative party. there would be a view that, a bit like a backstop in ireland, are the dup being used? how committed really would everyone be to the dup's concerns if they weren't dependent on them for votes? if you are in a situation where there is a general election, that might change things slightly, but i think they have huge leverage at the moment. and in terms of how this yearfor the government, george osborne spoke this weekend, he said theresa may was a dead woman

walking last year after that rather disastrous general election campaign. his argument is that the mistakes she made at the start was to embrace the 70 million who voted to leave and effectively say to the 60 million who voted to stay, we are not interested in you, the decision is made, and she has ended up in the position she should have started with. i think he is right and it is fascinating because when she first became prime minister, she was in a strong position. she behaved weakly, she felt she had to reassure the brexiteers, even though she could have told them some candid truths. now she is in a weak position, she has no choice but to be assertive and tell them some candid truths about the irish border, amongst other things. she should have done it the other way around, said at the beginning, i am going to deliver this for you but here are some of the tough, tough obstacles. instead, she announced her red lines

as if it was going to be have your cake and eat it, and it was an utterly misguided policy. i think the thing that is stark relief in 2018 is the mistake in triggering article 50 when she had no plans and she did it under tremendous pressure, to satisfy the brexit wing of the party. i think that, coupled with the agreement to not allow a hard border with ireland, two things that ended up being... hampered the negotiation. removed room for manoeuvre and negotiate. and stepping back on the leadership theme, given trump the white house, if there had been someone else in the white house, perhaps the negotiations would have turned out differently, if there had been someone in the white house who could put pressure on the european leaders, pick up the phone, get to a good deal, this is not in anyone's interest, and i think people

have forgotten that. now what we have is not just weak leadership in washington but throughout europe. macron is a weakened figure given the protests and the fact his economic reform push has stalled and his support has weakened. angela merkel is stepping down. there is no real leadership. the european commission is becoming stronger in 2018. which is the nightmare for eurosceptics in the uk. jean—claude juncker, everyone was laughing, he has played the negotiations stronger, very well, but strangely the commission is strong. so we end 2018 with a stronger european commission elected by no one, elected leaders around europe, and the united states. exactly. they couldn't get away with things without having the backing of leaders. stay united, otherwise britain...

that's 2018. thank you all very much. we got through a lot there. next weekend we will be back with a look at what is to come in 2019. from all of us on the programme, for those celebrating christmas, have a good christmas and we will see you at the end of the year. goodbye. good morning.

no snow in the forecast this christmas week, but no real severe weather either. many places will get through the week dry. the biggest problem we'll have is some overnight frost, but also some lingering fog here and there, as we had to start christmas eve in parts of ireland, north—west england, east wales and the glasgow area. lots of frost, too, for many, the big exception being across south—west england, south wales, the channel islands. cloudy and damp here, with outbreaks of rain becoming lighter and patchier through the day. always a bit more cloud across southern parts of england, and still some lingering fog for one or two. but a lot of sunshine to take us through daytime on christmas eve, and after that chilly start, the cooler day compared to yesterday for many, with temperatures away from the south—west in single figures. could be some dense fog to finish christmas eve in eastern england and into christmas day. this is where it could linger through the day. christmas day itself, variable amounts of cloud, some sunny spells. cloudy at times in the west, temperatures around 11 or 12. but, for most, christmas day temperatures in single figures. goodbye for now. welcome to bbc news, broadcasting to viewers in north america and around the globe. my name is martin stanford.

here are the top stories: urgently searching for trapped survivors of the indonesian tsunami, at least 280 people are now known to have died. these cars, i am told, were parked on the other side of the road, and they've been pushed into each other, on top of what was a holiday villa. pushed before he jumped. president trump forces out his defence chief two months ahead of his expected departure. pakistan's former prime minister nawaz sharif learns his fate shortly. an anti—corruption court will release its verdict.