our top story: sri lanka is banning face—coverings following the easter sunday attacks that killed at least 250 people. the announcement makes no specific mention of the niqab and burka, worn by muslim women, but says people's faces should be fully visible so they can be identified. spain's governing socialist party have won the most votes in the general election, without securing a majority in parliament. with almost all the votes counted, they've won 122 of 350 seats. and pictures from mozambique are most watched on bbc.com. aid workers in the north say they've not yet been able to reach many of the people affected by cyclone kenneth, three days after the storm hit. roads have been impassable because of rising floodwaters. that's all. now on bbc news, it's

time for hardtalk. welcome to hardtalk, i stephen sackur. just days ago, hopes were high that a peace deal could and afg hanistan‘s longwall might high that a peace deal could and afghanistan's longwall might be on site. talks involving the us, the taliban and the government representatives were to take place in qatar but they didn't happen. the taliban rejected the delegation coming from carpal and a familiar sight of relic resumed. my guest is mohammad umer daudzai, president ghani's peace envoy. what will it ta ke to ghani's peace envoy. what will it take to bring peace to afghanistan?

mohammad umer daudzai, welcome to hardtalk. thank you, stephen. let's start with those peace talks that we re start with those peace talks that were supposed to have an in qatar. the whole world was watching and waiting and then they didn't happen. what went wrong? it was supposed to be the first into afghan dialogue, not negotiation. breaking the ice to get familiar to each other. and because of the complexities of the past, and some weaknesses on both

sides, more on the side of the host, it didn't happen. but hopefully it will resume soon. the process will resume soon. let'sjust go into a little more detail. the taliban, out of qatar, said that the dublin was that you had tried to load the kabul delegation to be sent to these talks, loaded with officials. you wa nted talks, loaded with officials. you wanted to send more than 200 people and the taliban said you were treating it like a wedding party. like everything in afghanistan, we live within a constitution and we follow a democrat of —— democratic and inclusive process and it was ensuring that inclusive the —— inclusivity, the list got longer because we wanted all sides within afghanistan, those who live under

the flag of the islamic republic, should be represented. that is why the list got longer. and actually, we had got information from the host that the numbers doesn't matter. it's the inclusivity and the will to talk and express, that's what matters. isn't the truth of this the you are not keen on these talks in the first place. you had been very relu cta nt to the first place. you had been very reluctant tojoin the first place. you had been very reluctant to join a process which began with the united states and mr trump's special envoy, zalmay khalilzad, having his own channel of negotiation with the taliban behind the backs of your government, and you have always been deeply suspicious and sceptical of this process. that's not quite true. when the us decided on talking to the

taliban face—to—face, they discussed with the afghan government and the afg ha n with the afghan government and the afghan political forces outside government, everybody gave them a green light to go ahead and talk to the taliban. that's how it all started. when they bit —— made a bit of progress in understanding each other on at least two issues, the withdrawal and relationship with terrorism, the third issue that was the into afghan dialogue came up. that was supposed to happen. it will happen, but it's postponed. the fact is, we were preferring that the qatar dialogue take place after the loya jirga, but when the us side says that everything is sort of postponed, and they want the into afg ha n postponed, and they want the into afghan dialogue to take place soon, the government agreed with them and they started the process, they put

together a leadership council to manage the process of putting together the list of participants that would go to qatar but then the other side, the qataris send us a list —— list that they cross anyone even indirectly associated with the afg ha n even indirectly associated with the afghan government. that leads to my next question, and i don't want to spend two much on this because it is process rather than real substance, that it's important to figure out you say the talks at some point will happen involving both the taliban and your government. are you happy for them to still take place under the auspices of the qatari government because you are appear to be accusing the qataris of intruding in the process and knocking off the visa delegate list all of the representatives from your government so i'm struggling to see how you can

see the qataris is an honest broker, a third party. to be honest with you, some political addresses in afghanistan, not necessarily part of the government. their priority was not qatar for the beginning the government. their priority was not qatarfor the beginning of the government. their priority was not qatar for the beginning of the into afg ha n not qatar for the beginning of the into afghan diagram back dialogue but because our partners were keen, they also agreed. afghan government was neutral. in fact, a qatari delegation visited kabul before the process started and president ghani told them they would change the sequence so told them they would change the sequence so the loya jirga would ta ke sequence so the loya jirga would take place after qatar but because it didn't change place, we switched our priority back to loya jirga. would you say these talks, and the world doesn't regard them as important, because as we have established, for a very long time, there has been no direct talking

between afghan government officials and senior taliban representatives, so and senior taliban representatives, so it really matters, but it seems to me if one looks at the situation right now, both the diplomatic and military situations, it is the taliban that holds the cards. would you agree with that? well, in a sense, the taliban are not yet agreeing to meet face—to—face with the afghan government or to enter talks in negotiation with the afghan government. if you put it that way, yes, they are holding the cards. government. if you put it that way, yes, they are holding the cardslj suppose i'm thinking more that the taliban clearly understand something fundamental about the american position. the americans matter a great deal to this, not least because they have 14,000 troops on the ground still supporting your government but it is quite plain today that donald trump wants to get

those troops out of afghanistan as soon as those troops out of afghanistan as soon as possible and the taliban know that very well and can exploit that. you know, the taliban were claiming they are always fighting because afghanistan is occupied by the us and now they are sitting down with the us, they should have agreed toa with the us, they should have agreed to a ceasefire at least but they are not agreeing to a ceasefire proposal against us and against the afghan government. as far as the us were to withdraw troops, we don't have any particular issue with that but the troops withdrawal should take place after the end of the war or at least on the prolonged ceasefire. but donald trump made it plain, and made it plain that the end of last year that he fully intends to draw down

troop numbers from 14,000 down to 7000, to reduce it by half, within the next few months. that's what we expect to see. how vulnerable is that going to leave your afghanistan national army. numbers doesn't matter. president 0bama wanted to zero it by the end of 2016 but it didn't happen. what is important for us as the prolonged partnership with the us. the us support in terms of finances, enabling us into the ndsf. i'm pretty sure that because i was minister of the interior, the endsf can take care of the country's interests provided the partnership with us and allies continue. let's look at the facts. first of all, just to finish the port —— thought about the americans and the reliability of their support for

you, since 2001, us reckons it spent close to $1 trillion on its operations in afghanistan. that is not sustainable and it's not going to continue. do you accept that? at the beginning, they were spending 100 million a year, but after the andsf, it is more. they can afford on the afghan economy is supposed to come up. the secretary general statement, that they will stay in afghanistan at least until the ceasefire. with respect, they are losing faith in the ability of the ashraf ghani government to represent and deliver a secure country. if one looks at the most recent us, this is us analysis of the security situation, the office of the special

inspector general for afghanistan reconstruction concluded the afghan government control of territory has fallen to just 56% of the country's district. this is a record low in the afghan national security forces casualties have risen to a record high. you are losing the war. not really. if you compare this year, march, april with last year, march, eight l, the figure of casualties is much lower on the andsf side and each year in the past, and these two months, the taliban will secure advances. this year, they failed to secure any advance and in fact, they have faced setbacks so the real situation is that andsf on the battlefield is doing very well.|j don't know how you can sit there and sound so sanguine and confident. look again at the figures, nearly

4000 afghan civilians killed in 2018 and if we look back at —— over the last five years, you've lost 45,000 members of your security forces, thatis members of your security forces, that is why desertion rates are so very high stop you are in no position it seems to me to be confident that without continued us support, you can hold the line against the taliban. the taliban know that. i think this year, reality is changing. the casualty rate is lower compared to this year compared to this time last year than the taliban's stamina to fight face—to—face against the afghan national security forces, it's much lower compared to last year. it's politically that they are pushed to a high level. that's because of the

us- a high level. that's because of the us — taliban talks which naturally boosted their political position. the back—end field is not matching their political position. politically, your problem is not just the taliban of this major boost because they are now direct negotiation, communication with seniorfigures in the negotiation, communication with senior figures in the american administration, the other political reality is, your president, ashraf ghani, a man who used to criticise until he gave you a job, ashraf ghani is deeply unpopular amongst many afghans and that is a huge problem for the credibility of your government. i don't think we can claim that. i think the election is just five months away and the election will approve who is popular and who is not popular. interesting you say it

is five months away, the election should be in may. ashraf ghani should be in may. ashraf ghani should be in may. ashraf ghani should be out of his office in may. many afghans believe that if he continues beyond may, he has no mandate, no legitimacy. we live in a constitutional system and the supreme court has given a verdict that he can continue until the next election produces a new president. here are the words of the former deputy foreign minister. he wrote this in foreign policy magazine recently. the government of ashraf ghani has alienate it and sidelined the overwhelming majority of senior afg ha n the overwhelming majority of senior afghan politicians because it has not included them in major policy making decisions, it has failed to improve security and economic conditions and the security conditions and the security conditions have worsened. that is the view of a very senior and it has to be said, a man who was loyal to

the government for a long time, official. if one person does make a few matters then until a few months ago, as you said, i was a critic of the president but then i realised that his doors are open and he is committed to inclusivity. that his doors are open and he is committed to inclusivitylj that his doors are open and he is committed to inclusivity. i don't mean to sound rude but he brought you off with a job. i needed a role to play in the peace process and peaceis to play in the peace process and peace is a priority for me and this is very close to my heart and close to all afghans. i am the main player within the whole peace process. that is an honour for within the whole peace process. that is an honourfor me within the whole peace process. that is an honour for me that he has given. the principle of inclusivity, he has implied inclusivity and that's why his doors were open...m

he is serious about inclusivity and you have used that word many times in this interview as a means to get toa in this interview as a means to get to a better future for afghanistan, why, after may, when his initial term runs out, does he not leave power and allow a national unity firm to be created in the interim before new presidential elections? that is an interim government that could be truly inclusive? there was no word in the institution about an interim government. he has to abide by the verdict of the supreme court and the supreme court provided the interpretation of the constitution. iam interpretation of the constitution. i am quoting senior people in your country. the former national security adviser thinks ashraf ghani has no mandate to go on beyond may.

he says they must support a ca reta ker he says they must support a caretaker government which on the zist caretaker government which on the 21st of may should take over because this current government will have a mandate that has ended and given his record, we are much better off without after afg hani. —— record, we are much better off without after afghani. —— without ashraf ghani. ifi am without after afghani. —— without ashraf ghani. if i am free to have an opinion, his views are elect 0riel. it is a campaigning view and i think it is against the constitution. what's going to happen nextin constitution. what's going to happen next in afghanistan? the peace process , next in afghanistan? the peace process, if we can call it that, is now in limbo once again. you're talking about this grand lawyer, a peace process which is going to happen in the next few days but what will it achieve if the conflict in your country is as deep as ever? for peace to come we need development in

three layers. international witches there, regional co—ordination and cooperation we are building but the most important one is the national consensus. “— most important one is the national consensus. —— international, which is there. we need a mechanism to build the national consensus about peace. it is supposed to provide a framework for talks with the taliban. it is also supposed to identify mechanisms of reaching a sustainable peace in the country. but nobody seems to buy it in afghanistan. i'm thinking about the chief executive of your own government which isn't supposed to be working with aftra ad ashraf ghani, abdullah abdullah, he is going to boycott. he doesn't believe it will achieve anything. same with the presidential covered —— candidate, he will boycott as well because of where on earth is it going to go? these are grassroots

level leaders. coming from villages, provinces. there have been huge struggles across the country. everybody trying to get in to become a member. this is going to be the most represented in history. the biggest in history. all districts, including those that are controlled by the taliban, will have representation. they are on their way to arrive in cadboll. already some members have arrived and the rest are arriving tomorrow. —— table. —— kabul. this is not about the top leaders consensus. to build the top leaders consensus. to build the top leaders consensus. to build the top leaders consensus that there are mechanisms such as the leadership council. that is supposed to bring top leaders' consensus. the

other one is a national consensus, grassroots level consensus. listening to you, i am tempted to think afghanistan is a vibrant democracy in rude, good health and of course, the reality is entirely different. your country is divided and half of it is in control of the taliban and if one looks at one of the other fundamentals about afghanistan, you remain one of the most corrupt countries on earth and the afghan public is very well aware that ashraf danni for all of his promises to root out corruption has overseen a administration just as, if not more, corrupt than the ones before. —— ashraf ghani. if not more, corrupt than the ones before. -- ashraf ghani. we are building it in the middle of a war that has continued for 40 years. we are building democracy in the middle of the huge flow of aid that came to

the country. but we still appreciate that aid that the international community provided. the present main have a lot of questions but i am sure the country's future is bright. we will remain together and united and we will find a solution soon. of course, the country is not united, it's absurd to claim is united, that is why we have seen war for the last 40 yea rs. is why we have seen war for the last 40 years. the wall will only come to the end when people like you explicitly say yes, the taliban is going to have a very significant role in the future of governance in afghanistan for .ru prepared to say that to me now? yes, of course, the taliban and are a militant force and a political group also. they have

every right to be part of the political system in the future. so you are prepared to say here and now, yes, foreign forces, led by the united states, must leave our country. we must give the taliban and a role in the politics of the future of our country and that is something that you will commit to?|j would say that yes, the international forces might leave one day when the right time comes... crosstalk. with respect, you are being called a puppet regime and so you are being propped up by foreign forces and that afghanistan can only be truly free and find a free political future when those forces leave. well, on the day i have come to the high peace council, i have established a culture of respecting

each other so no matter what language the taliban use against us and against government, i will use the language of respect to them. i consider them afghani and i welcome them and i work for that. so they become part of a larger political system because that is their right. however, i would advise them than to get there there are other ways than violence. violence may not get them where negotiations can get them. and 2019 be the year of peace for afghanistan? there were high hopes that it might be just a short while ago. can it be? yes, i have already declared that in december last year, in london, i declared that. i am still claiming that the significant beginning of a meaningful piece will start this year. —— peace.

beginning of a meaningful piece will start this year. -- peace. we have to end there but mohammad umer daudzai, i thank you forjoining us on hartog. pleasure. -- hardtalk. hello there. a weekend that began with wind and rain ended on a relatively quiet note across most parts of the uk. that is how we start the new working week, with some dry weather for most of us. western areas will see some rain, and that will slowly spread eastwards over the next few days. could be some fog patches to contend with, and for a time, butjust for a time, it will turn a little bit warmer. this is what's going on — the view from space, the satellite picture

from a little earlier on. you can see a few stripes of cloud pushing in from the west, but all these frontal systems making very, very slow progress, so this monday morning really only dragged across the far west of the uk. elsewhere, high pressure in charge, very light winds, hence we have some mist and fog patches around. they should tend to clear through the morning, and in most places monday will bring some spells of sunshine. best of the sunshine likely to be found across scotland. but remember, that front in the west still dangling its way down into northern ireland, west wales, the south—west of england, with some patchy rain at times. here, relatively cool — 12 in belfast, 13 degrees in plymouth, but come further east will be up into the mid—teens, maybe 18 or 19 degrees across some parts of scotland. then we go through monday night, and we'll continue to see these areas of cloud and patchy rain in the west. perhaps some heavier rain reaching northern ireland later in the night, elsewhere some clear spells, some mist and fog patches, also some low cloud rolling in from the north sea. most of us not having

a particularly chilly night, mainly parts of eastern england and eastern scotland getting relatively close to freezing. so we get down into tuesday, and it's more of the same, to all intents and purposes. still some rain in the west, heavier rain for northern ireland, maybe fringing into northern scotland, the far west of wales and cornwall later in the day. further east some spells of sunshine, and for many of us tuesday will be the warmest day of the week, with highs between 17—20 degrees. i say tuesday will be the warmest day of the week, because that warmth is not going to last. as we move out of tuesday into wednesday, this front which will have been in the west eventually moves its way eastwards, taking cloud and showery rain with it. the rain will be quite sporadic, quite on—and—off, there's some uncertainty about how quickly this band of cloud and rain will slide its way eastwards. there will still be some holding on across the south—east corner. temperatures here could get close to 20 degrees. but behind the weather front, this is where things start to change. it turns much cooler and fresher from the north—west, that cooler feel extending to all parts on thursday,

and by friday it could potentially feel very chilly indeed, with northerly winds across the uk, and showers for some of us.

you see how you doing those the high

i'm sharanjit leyl in singapore, this is newsday. the headlines: sri lankans unite in grief a week after the easter sunday attacks. prayers in the street for the 250 victims of islamist extremists. here they espoused a kind humanity — the very notion dismissed by the bombers. aid workers in mozambique say they're struggling to reach thousands affected by cyclone kenneth as floodwaters continue to rise. i'm kasia madera in london. also in the programme: a win for spain's socialists, but no outright majority. talks begin to form a left—wing coalition.