this is bbc news, i'm ben brown. the headlines at 12: the dutch husband of shamima begum, the teenager who has been stripped of her british citizenship forjoining the islamic state, has hello and welcome to dateline london. i'm carrie gracie. told the bbc he wants them this week: the first date to live in the netherlands. was love at first sight, but the second date didn't it was acceptable for you to marry go so well. a 15—year—old girl? "sometimes you have to walk away," it was her own choice, said president trump this week. she was the one who asked to look but is the world any safer for a partner for her. then i was invited, and yeah, she was very young. after his hanoi summit with north korea's kimjong—un? and how safe is it to go home when his one—time enforcer is telling the world eight lawyers who back brexit — that the president is a racist and a cheat? seven of them mps — here in the uk, tick—tock, set out the concessions they require tick—tock goes the clock. from the eu to support but with four weeks till march 29th, the pm's brexit deal. the prime minister mentions delay for the first time. my guests today are political rescuers hope to resume their search commentator yasmin alibhai—brown, for british climber tom ballard agnes poirier of french weekly news who's been missing on one magazine marianne, italian filmmaker of the world's highest mountains annalisa piras and greg katz in pakistan for nearly a week. of the associated press news agency. welcome to you all. thank you so much. there was no deal at the end of the second summit

between donald trump and kim jong—un. there was no return to the name—calling either — no "rocket man" or "deranged dotard" — it was still smiles and handshakes as they parted. but remember, the north korean leader goes back to sit at a desk on which he says he has a nuclear button commanding a fleet of weapons that can reach anywhere in the us. so what did the hanoi summit achieve? greg, you set us off. it achieved precisely nothing. it was a total failure in terms of producing any tangible progress towards denuclearisation. clearly it did not accomplish anything. i'm not one of those who criticises president trump for meeting with him. the us foreign policy establishment thinks it is a mistake to go into summits without any proper preparation or agenda. it does not hurt anything to talk, and i think one could argue perhaps it is less of a confrontational situation.

they have accomplished nothing, and the spectacle of the president of the united states fawning over quite a brutal dictator makes a lot of americans and a lot of people around the world quite uncomfortable. this is his style, the way he does business. on the achievement of nothing. they have had no ballistic tests for the last six months, they have had none of those. to a degree, that's true. that is an argument that bears some fruit. but we are no closer to an agreement. i don't believe the north koreans are serious about giving up their weapons. i am supporting in general the idea that it's better to have these talks than not. annalisa? yes, absolutely. it was always bound to be a long and torturous and difficult process, so you actually expect him to come out with something over, he will shut these down,

was a bit unrealistic. i would say it is a good process and a signal that north korea is feeling the weight of the sanctions and is feeling that they need to do something. one side of it that was interesting that did not make it to the front page of the newspapers was that north koreans are increasing cyber attacks on american financial institutions, on western financial institutions because they are desperate for cash. there is a clear sense there is a crisis going on in terms of what the sanctions have done to north korea. they are strapped and desperate for cash. all of these things mean that there probably will be more progress on the part of the north koreans. yasmin, there is a camp that says kim jong—un wins in this process, he gets to sit at the big table, present himself as an international statesman.

do you agree that he has been pushed to that table? i don't think he allows softer be pushed to any table. he is one of the worst, most murderous, and predictable dictators. it is strange to me how comfortable trump feels with men like these. he is comfortable with president putin and these men, men of a certain kind. but one must not forget the desperate need that has now been expressed over several years between south korea and north korea. they want things to change almost as much as the rest of us do, but for other reasons. this is about their lives, theirfamilies, their ancestral connections. one of the things i'm very pleased about is that this is a man who says, i never fail when it comes to deal.

he failed. some of the people who love him. the red states. they will ask, what happened here? will they? they will, but a lot of people will sigh with relief that it was cut short by a day. you don't want leader to leader diplomacy to last very long. you don't want them alone and striking a deal between the two of them. you have no idea what's going to come out. well, unless you think that that kind of personal chemistry and trust building between two key people will make a difference. but that comes after a long time of negotiation, step—by—step by both administrations. i felt sorry for the south korea leader, who put so much behind the reconciliation of the two countries, he is the one i felt sorry for.

you also never know... trump said that north korea wanted the lifting of all sanctions. they haven't provided an inventory of the production of their nuclear missiles. it is the fourth us president entering negotiations with north korea. and i think there will be more. they were the first to meet, obviously. coming back to yasmin‘s question about what trump's base thinks about all of those. ego to say that it was a diplomatic bright spot, he did something, he took the initiative. what are people back home going to think of hanoi? back home is very diverse and, more important back home

was cohen's testimony. in hanoi, he did what he said he was going to do. the trump sceptics are saying, why is he buddying up to this man and papering over the death of an american citizen. that young man, his young family were not impressed by president trump talking about how he believed kimjong—un earn, that he didn't know what happened there. if the litmus test forjudging a nation's behaviour is whether donald trump believes personally the words of the other leader, then i think it's hard to know how anything will get accomplished or established. americans don't buy it when he says, i understood him to be telling the truth, or he says the same about vladimir putin. george w bush said famously that he looked into the eyes of vladimir putin and had

seen his soul and understood him. i'm exaggerating a bit. then he came to regret that position over the years. looking deep into the eyes of the opposite leader, i think, has fallen flat. is it falling flat for his base? what does his base make of this cosying up to ruthless dictators? there is nothing that donald trump is doing that is falling foul of his base at the moment. let's talk about the next big issue for donald trump back home. the line is... he's a racist, a conman and a cheat — the character reference this week from a man who once said he'd do anything to protect mr trump. but did michael cohen's testimony to congress tell americans anything about their president that they didn't already know, guess, or discount as lies? greg, i know you watch this, because you were ill at home and you watched all seven hours of his testimony.

was it showbiz or something else? this was not showbiz. i will be brief, but this was very real, very direct, under oath, if he is found to have been lying to congress, his jail sentence will go from three years to ten, 15, the rest of his life in prison. this was not showbiz, this was very high—stakes and very much on the record. what cohen did was present evidence that trump was engaged in illegal activities. we will not know for another six or 18 or 2a months. this was not showbiz, this was real. donald trump and supporters say he is a proven liar, so why other believing anything

he says, even under oath? that is the most tragic aspect of what otherwise could look like a farce. the moral corrosion, the kind of complete disappearance of the border between being a good man, of integrity, and being a cheat, racist, a lawyer, someone who pays a porn actress. we are now at a stage in which it is a gang against the world. whatever their leader does, he is always their leader. it is phenomenally tragic, because american democracy has been inspiring for countries all over the world. as you were talking, i was thinking it sounds like italian politics. some of it must be familiar to you? absolutely. when the rest of the world was laughing at italy because of silvio berlusconi's

actions, nobody felt that there was some kind of great democratic tradition and inspiring values that were under attack. when it comes to america, and you see the indifference of the biggest majority of americans to this moral corrosion of their own democracy, that is tragic. one of the interesting things is that it's even worse than that. i agree, when you put it so well. there are people there. there's a wonderful line in salman rushdie's new book, which is set in trouble's america, where a character says, we know he is all of this, we know he is a liar, a criminal, that's why we like him. he is like one of us, he says it like it is. it is almost the appeal of trump is that he is this morally dodgy chap,

which is even more frightening. coming back to what greg was saying, there is a legal process under way here as well. the president's pit bull has bitten him on the bottom, and the question is, what next? exactly, but i think there is this problem that this guy was a liar, was an operator, a middleman for the president for the longest time, and even i feel, do i believe him? i wish i had watched. i want to be persuaded. the point remains, though, that there is this very important process going on, legal process, political process, but they seem to have no bearing on populism, the populace of america. sound and fury signifying nothing very much, or did you watch it glued and thinking this is the beginning of something? i watched it and went to somebody because the president of the united states of america

a bigot, cheat and con artist, we are not even shocked. this is the more shocking thing. we probably know it is true. we have lost complete trust in this man, and the institutions to appoint when i think the democrats are quite right not to talk about the i word — impeachment. they are just waiting for all of these different words of enquiries to come to an end, so that we know everything there is to know, and something is going to happen. impeachment is so divisive, so partisan. i'm not sure it's the right way to go, and they know that. he might for one be considered for tax evasion. that is probably the only thing left. or obviously for collusion with russia. but facts are important.

the last thing i would like to say... i was of course shocked but not so astonished by what i heard about trump, but the response from the republican party is extraordinary. the cool calculation of standing by a guy... they are willing to overlook everything that he has done wrong and know he has done wrong, just for tribalism, and the republican party is going to go not well. it is such an ugly look for history books. and yet, greg, coming back to everything that you charted as those seven hours went by, people know he is not a boy scout, as we have heard from this side of the table, and yet there is a difference between unethical behaviour and criminal behaviour. coming back to the politics, is there a point at which the republican party looks at the legal process and says, 2020 is getting closer, should

we think about another candidate? i don't think there is a point at which they say we will nominate a different candidate for the presidency. they may look when the mueller report comes in. they might say, i see evidence of criminality here, here, here, i see a pattern of criminality and i'm no longer willing to support this presidency. that is how president nixon lost his power in congress and came to the conclusion he had to resign. something similar could happen in the us, but it is nowhere near happening yet. one thing i want to say quickly, something cohen said in his last paragraph did not get much attention, but i did not see him say it, but i saw it written down. he said, in the end, i fear that if president trump loses in 2020, there will not be a peaceful transition of power. i also had that thought myself because i remember how he said he would not trust the result if he didn't win

the first time around. that was chilling, that he said that. that deserved some attention, but it got lost and everything else. we will leave the job discussion on that sobering thought and we've closer to home. brexit needs no introduction when we're less than four weeks away... orare we? the prime minister has set out a careful list of ifs which might result in a delay. will those ifs come to pass and, if they do, what then? so, agnes, take is away on that one. i was interested by what michel barnier said in an interview he gave to spanish, german, french and italian papers yesterday. he sort of changed his tune. a week ago, he said... he was huffing and puffing and saying that an extension, what for? we need a decision. you need good reasons for an extension. yesterday, he said an extension is unavoidable, and will be granted,

although he is not the one to grant it, it is the 27. that is slightly different. so it looks as though we are going there, if her deal is not voted on on the 12th of march, because that is another possibility and we will go back to that later. he also said some other things. the backstop will not be removed, or there won't be any time limit on it. and he said the eu is ready for no deal, which i'm not sure is the case. so different language. when you say you are not sure, are you implying that this is a bargaining position as we get closer to the line? the whole thing is not a bargain, because it's not something the eu wanted from the start. what i'm saying is that i doubt anybody on the continent or here is ready for no deal, because nobody knows what will happen.

you'd be surprised, i was talking on television last week with nadine doris, an adamant leader, who said on television, we are ready, this country is ready for a no deal exit. everybody is ready. honestly, there is this mad fantasyland we are living in. according to her. she is strong for the no deal side, so... i should intervene here and you say it is a mad fantasyland. she would say that you are a project via person. exactly what she said. everybody is worried. we have had a relationship with the eu for so long, i wouldn't be surprised if nobody was worried about it. leaving how much people care or don't care about no deal, other negotiations going anywhere? no, i don't think so.

nobody... the two parties are divided. the resignations say... one of the cleverest lawyers, theresa may's, said that if you don't agree to my deal, it is no deal. that one is playing even amongst those who are very pro—eu. but i think the numbers don't add up. the numbers and the time are too short now. greg. what you are calling theresa may's ploy, she may be able to get together a deal that gets enough support to pass by two or three votes. that is possible, and people at the ap also agree. there is this implied threat that you might go off the cliff, and there will be no connection between calais and dover, and good luck getting fresh fruit and vegetables. it is project fear.

i did not hear what barnier said, but in general the tone from europe in the last 14 days has been harsher and a bit more exasperated, why in the world can't they agree on anything? also what you said earlier about what happens with those who will not agree with anything? nigel farage is now threatening a march. promising a march. if he pulls that off, which he could, he is a big influence, one of the biggest in this country. there will be an after—shock to whatever the decision is. we are in a bad place. just dealing with the parliamentary arithmetic. we have heard that the prime minister may be using

the threat of no deal to get people in line behind her deal. the other stick that she could use to get the brexit supporters is the threat of a delay, hence the talk of delay? yes, but all of these tactics are not working. so it's hard to see how they will finally kind of work closer to the 29th of march deadline. i think it's more likely that an extension of article 50 will be granted because, at the end of the day, apart from the gesticulations and big announcements, the reality is that nobody is ready for brexit. this reality will hit hard the closer we get to the 29th of march. what will the extension be for? that is the question. the 27 are ready to grant an extension as long as there is good reason for it. it is not for theresa may to keep kicking the can down

the road, that is clear. it will need to be substantial reasoning and preparation for the extension. what would be realistic would be for theresa may to say, let's give ourselves one year for a deal, or for a second referendum, putting the deal, whatever that deal would look like, to the people and trying to reconcile this country, which has been split in the middle for too long. she has said again and again she would not agree to a second referendum. she might not, but she might be forced to. let's talk about what labour are doing on this, because obviously this weekend there are huge ructions about anti—semitism within the labour party. however, over the past few days, we have seen white smoke coming out of the top leaders,

about letting that deal through in order that they can go to a ratification referendum. do you believe that? no, i don't believe that and i don't think that jeremy corbyn, who is a brexit supporter, is being sincere about this was top nobody is being sincere. it is about keeping the party and each party going and winning, or whatever. if we had a more coherent position on what the opposition wants, we might be in a better place. but that's split. labour party mps... they say one thing at 10pm and another one at ipm, and by sam it is obsolete and nobody remembers. they have got four or five people speaking. keir starmer knows what they want, what he wants. yvette cooper presented

herself well. what i'm hearing is that, as this clock ticks down, we are in the month of march now, where are we headed? we have less than four weeks to sort this out? i would not be surprised if there is an extension. but not a year long, because basically this would mean that the uk needs to organise european elections, and this is out of the question for may. this means three months, three month extension. there are two conditions. labour says, ok, but we need a second referendum on your deal. so how would they tailor their question in the referendum?

because the remain option is probably not what corbyn wants. the other thing is that the tory party says, we will vote for your deal, but tell us when you are going to go, because we want you out. those are the three options. you are really sitting on the fence! is anybody coming off the fence? i sort of think that theresa may has a strategy which is slowly and an embarrassing way working. i think the opposition has no strategy, and no strategic goals. so i have a feeling, if we don't think of march 29 but we think of six months down the road, theresa may will have gotten a lot of what she wants, in some form. we have to leave it there, i'm afraid. we will have opportunities to discuss this before the 29th of march was. that's it for dateline london for this week — we're back next week at the same time. goodbye.

hello. we have already seen some rain across many parts of the uk but the winds are really going to pick up the winds are really going to pick up this afternoon across england and wales. all because of storm freya. hidden underneath all that cloud is a deepening area of low pressure, the wind is continuing to strengthen and rain is moving northwards. we have seen the strongest winds across the northern half of scotland, showers becoming fewer and more sunshine but the rain is heavy at times. pushing into parts of northern ireland. behind it things may dry up later in wales and south—west england and temperatures up south—west england and temperatures up to 13 degrees. by this stage the

winds won't be strong across northern scotland, the lightest of the winds will be in northern ireland. the strongest in south—west england and south wales. that is where we start to see the impact coming in from storm freya. the track of the storm, that area of low pressure hasn't changed much. the essentials of the forecast haven't changed much. through the afternoon and evening the main core of the winds are going to be as across south—west england and wales. 60 to 70 miles an hour on the map. the winds ease down a bit overnight, the strongest of the winds then push into northern england. there may be snow over the pennines and southern uplands. overnight, rain which could be heavy across southern parts of england. clearer skies developing elsewhere as the winds ease down a bit and temperatures drop to three 01’4 bit and temperatures drop to three or 4 degrees. the warning from the met office runs from three o'clock in the afternoon to six o'clock

tomorrow morning. there is likely to be some travel disruption, may be damage as well. still windy for the rush hour tomorrow morning in the north—east of england in particular. but not for long, the storm pushes into the north sea and sunshine following on behind, blustery showers taking all day to reach eastern areas. temperatures down to eight to 10 degrees which is normal for this time of year. those temperatures are likely to stay at those figures for the week ahead. monday and tuesday sunshine and showers, the middle part of the week though another area of low pressure bringing heavy rain and strong winds.