this is bbc news. the headlines: north korea has launched two short—range insulators of is closed. the south korean military says the missiles flew 250 kilometres before landing in the sea ofjapan, the east c. lastly, john young fired two missiles in the same area. —— east sea. —— pyongyang. ten of the us democratic politicians hoping to be chosen as the party's candidate for the twenty twenty presidential elections are holding a second televised debate in detroit — there are 20 people in total competing for the nomination to compete agianst the republican candidate. the russian government has launched a criminal investigation into what it calls the "mass unrest" at last saturday's free elections protests in moscow. state investigators are opening three criminal cases.

it is 2:30am. you are up—to—date on the headlines. now on bbc news: hardtalk. welcome to hardtalk. i'm stephen sackur. the world's was pressing in potentially dangerous strategic confrontation is playing out in the narrow waterway between iran and arabia. the united states is leading effo rts arabia. the united states is leading efforts to isolate the government into a efforts to isolate the government intoa run, efforts to isolate the government into a run, iran is responding with defiance despite severe economic disruption —— in tehran, my guest, former british foreign secretary, jack straw, is a veteran of engagement with iran. hi hi —— how high is the risk of committee must —— the maximus conflict? —— climactic conflict?

jack straw, welcome to hardtalk. welcome. your diplomatic engagement with iran spans two decades and through that period, you've been an advocate for dialogue, for engagement, with tehran. but here we are today, with relations between the us in the uk and tehran toxic. so is ita the us in the uk and tehran toxic. so is it a story of complete failure? is not a story of complete failure? is not a story of complete failure at all. and indeed, the nuclear negotiations with the french foreign ministers and i got going in the summer of 2003, by fits and sta rts the summer of 2003, by fits and starts la id the summer of 2003, by fits and starts laid the foundations for which president 0bama, and his secretaryjohn kerry which president 0bama, and his secretary john kerry had which president 0bama, and his secretaryjohn kerry had with rani and the reef from 2013— 2015 which

led to this ground breaking nuclear deal. the thing about this deal which was agreed internationally, including by the us is that it wasn't perfect, but it damn near guaranteed that iran could not develop the techniques and get necessary to make a nuclear weapon for the next 15 years. it was time—limited, for a start, let's be quite clear about that. and there was a question of what happened at the end of the 15 years. what president trump has done, and it looks as though the only reason he decided to destroy the deal, or to do his best to destroy the deal was because it had been undertaken by president 0bama, not for any other reason. there was nosing at us as i will have to clean, there was no strategy that is discernible behind this. his dawn up inside a video —— his side of the deal. first of all, if the deal fully collapses, then the guarantee that iran could not

develop a nuclear weapon for the next 15 years goes and we've already seen the hardliners in the system are desperately an anxious to ramp up are desperately an anxious to ramp up production of highly enriched uranium and of plutonium. the amount of heavy water... you've introduced several really important points and i want to go through them one by one. i want to start with your analysis of donald trump. you say its purest bite in a sense to undo the work done by barack 0bama —— purest bite. i would point to the coherent set of reasons that trump and his advisers would suggest that iran is an unreconstructed threat to us and other western powers' interests around the world today? us and other western powers' interests around the world today7m is at the rate. the point about iran is at the rate. the point about iran is it is a very divided government, and elected government, rouhani and

zarif don't have absolute power, but a huge amount of influence. the real power sits with the ayatollahs and the security apparatus goes through him. that is the error that the american right wing made, saying there simply mouthpieces at the front. they are not. this is a very divided governmental system. the supreme divided governmental system. the supreme leader in the revolutionary guards control the apparatus of the state, but, how many had to accept the nuclear deal under pressure from rouhani and other sensible people in the system who wanted iran to have an economic future? the are any of trump's position is that the one group who are cheering his position are indeed the hardliners in the revolutionary guards who always opposed the nuclear deal because they could see how restrictive it was. yes, but if i may,

they could see how restrictive it was. yes, but ifi may, there is substance behind the american list of reasons why that deal, to use trump's melodramatic phrase, was the worst deal ever. for example, ballistic missile technology and development continues in iran and that represents a fundamental danger in the view of the americans. for instance, another instance, iran's funding of different groups in the region and beyond, which are absolutely contrary to western interests, has been ramped up. one only has to look at has below, the situation in syria, and that it is in yemen. all of these are instances where iran according to trump and many others, is simply unacceptable. i'm not here as a spokesman for the uranium regime, farfrom it come back —— far from uranium regime, farfrom it come back —— farfrom it, in fact i have written about in my book. however,

what trump did, was to dispose of the one good thing, the nuclear deal, which ensured some sort of guarantee on the nuclear capabilities, yes there were other things on the agenda. in fairness to the iranians, use of missiles, all of their activities elsewhere in the region were not part of the nuclear deal. in my view, if the nuclear deal. in my view, if the nuclear deal had settled and started to produce economic benefits for iran, which it was beginning to do, notwithstanding efforts by the united states even before the latest trump abandonment of the deal to undermine the economy in iran, then those other items could have been... that logical leap you've just made simply doesn't work. that, yes, there were economic benefits for a run there were economic benefits for a ru n after there were economic benefits for a run after the 2015 signing of the jcpoa —— for iran, but the result was iran was able to ramp up spending on its military, ramp up

spending on its military, ramp up spending on its military, ramp up spending on military in syria, on his bother, those with a very real consequences of the easing of sanctions. where is the falsehood in that? i think it's entirely true. iran is supporting its erstwhile allies. what i think is completely exaggerated is the extent to which iran was able to use the normalisation of privations as a result of the jcpoa, in normalisation of privations as a result of thejcpoa, in your phrase to wrap this up. in my view, i understand why, exactly why iran has been doing that. it's because it's wea k been doing that. it's because it's weak militarily, very weak, it spends one fifth of what saudi arabia spends on armaments, and invincible amount compared to the united states. it is its

neighbourhood as its form of defence. now in my view, since most of the iranians are desperate for a normalisation of the relationships, that, had we settled the nuclear deal, then those other issues would have been subject, could have been subject to negotiation. your book makes me wonder, too, you've written this book understanding iran and why distrusts britain, it's a fascinating book and indicates that the links go with the country very deep diplomatically. know foreign minister is a reef very well, your wife travelled through iran and had adventures in the country yourself, ijust wonder adventures in the country yourself, i just wonder whether you have consistently overestimated the influence and the power of people like your friend influence and the power of people like yourfriend mr influence and the power of people like your friend mr is a reef? and indeed, in the course of writing that book, my attitude towards the hardliners and viewers of the needs of the system, actually toughened up, and that is illustrated by the conclusions. —— mr zarif.

up, and that is illustrated by the conclusions. —— mrzarif. rouhani and zarif are presented as if they we re and zarif are presented as if they were a similar government to any other elected government, but when you look at the iranians constitution, you will see that they are literally, as it is a parliament, subordinates to the supreme parliament, subordinates to the supreme leader and the so—called guardian council, a preacher. so don't accept that. i'm far from deviate about it. my concern is the —— dewey—eyed about it. i think the way president trump is going about it will have the opposite effect of which is proposing. what we now have is an iranians government and we can talk about rouhani and zarif being the front man for this particular policy, saying we are no longer going to live with the uranium enrichment restrictions put on us,

we're going to go beyond the 3.67% purification limit that was put on by the jcpoa deal and that purification limit that was put on by thejcpoa deal and that does suggest that iran is saying to hell with the deal. if that is their decision, i think that is very unwise of them. it is. i understand. and if they decide to continue with that strategy, what they will do is alienate their erstwhile allies within europe, the united kingdom, france, britain, macron's beingjust as tough as britain, and the germans. if those three countries pull away from the deal on the basis that the united states has broken it and now iran has, then that will be the end of the deal. is it your belief is a former british foreign secretary, looking at the way the europeans have handled this, that they have failed to do enough to ensure that iran was somehow shielded and protected from the

economic damage done by the reinstatement of us actions under toughening up of us sanctions?” think the europeans have done more than i expected they could do, but it is less than the iranians want. and the reason for that, not to do with the lack of will or practical action by the europeans, is to do with the extent and ubiquity of america's extraterritorial sanctions. it is very difficult for any company in the world to trade with iran if they have any contact at all with dollar trades as well. is that the truth? because we spoke on hardtalk to foreign minister zarif in new yorkjust the other day and he is clearly extremely exercised about the failure of what he sees, the international community outside of the united states to do enough to help iran. he's as if the europeans, the chinese, japanese, all of them don't allow the united states to bully them into abiding by these decisions, with the us really

go to destroy the global commie, to put out sanctions on all of them?m isa put out sanctions on all of them?m is a good rhetorical point, but it doesn't work that way. it's about what would happen to the individual entities, the chinese company which wa nts to entities, the chinese company which wants to trade with iran but also has dollar trades. a russian company in the same position. so the possibility, the united states would not propose sanctions against the other five world powers involved, not propose sanctions against the otherfive world powers involved, it doesn't have too. i am looking at the analysis of matthew bay, who studies the uranium commie for stratford consultancy, his at the level of financial pain is that the iranians are going now face as a result of the toughening you are saying since is unprecedented. i do not think he says we can rule out a humanitarian crisis. no, ithink that's absolutely right. just before the sanctions were imposed, iran was exporting about 2.5 million barrels of oil a day, that's dropped to less than one sixth of doubt to 400,000.

—— of that, the iranians currency was trading at 9000 to the us dollar, it is now trading at 42,000 to the us dollar on the official rate, but on the unofficial rate, which is what most people get hold of, 135,000. so what was worth a pound, is now worth less than ten p. iran is desperate and britain is in a difficult position. britain is, with the europeans, keen not to see this agreement with iran completely disrupted, but at the same time we know the reasons that we will discuss in a moment, that britain is extremely eager to stay close to the trump administration. the trump administration is talking about putting more military vessels in the area, written has seen one of its

flagged oil tankers detained by the iranians ina flagged oil tankers detained by the iranians in a tit—for—tat after britain detained and iranians shipped in gibraltar, how close do you believe we are in that stretch of water to a confrontation? i don't —— i don't think we are that close to a confrontation in a conventional sense but i'm quite clear that you could easily get an increase in skirmishing and something accidental but very serious could happen. you could easily see a number of boats being sank, you could see the iranians landmines in retaliation, you could have one of the mines going off and you could get a serious escalation. the problem is that the iranians are indeed desperate, they feel they have to do something. it doesn't excuse what they're doing but it's an explanation. as i have sat again, as you contribute often enough, the

power has shifted very markedly from the elected government to people like the major general in charge of the external force of the revolutionary guard, who was a politician in his own right and reports only to the hotline supreme leader. one specific point about britain, do you think britain needs to consider releasing that oil tanker detained in gibraltar to defuse tensions and then hope and a response measure the iranians might release the british flagship.” wouldn't do a deal actually, i would be searching for a multifaceted deal which involved the release of the iranians tanker in gibraltarfor which involved the release of the iranians tanker in gibraltar for the uk flat one, and also the release

plus, for chieftain tanks which were paid for but never delivered. there would have to orchestrate this because it would be... this reminds me thatjohn bolton who is now the security adviser, you are called the jack of tehran to keep the dialogue, the notion of engagement... indeed, butjohn bolton the notion of engagement... indeed, but john bolton has the notion of engagement... indeed, butjohn bolton has called iran wrong on every occasion. the problem with whatjohn bolton and president of have been doing is not undermining the people who take objection and so do i, they have been strengthening it. you served as foreign secretary to tony blair, his contention that him to put british forces into iraq. in britain could not afford to be anything but the closest butter to the united states was not it was always good to be as he said in britain's best interest, is that still true today? it is less

true. we never did what you noticed has taught us to do, on many occasions we had disagreements but because personal relationships are so because personal relationships are so good and george w bush's administration included some very, very senior and highly respected diplomats. as well as other people in the white house. we were able to resolve these difficulties internally the critical thing about that. was that it occurred in the shadow of 9/11. do we want very close relations with united states? of course we do. any end of the united kingdom that didn't would what —— would need their head examined but that does not, should not has meant that we should do with united states want us to do. which is more difficult to deal with for britain right now? the fact that it has significant differences with

donald trump in washington or the fa ct donald trump in washington or the fact that it seems still, differential spite —— despite confusion, exiting the european union? the potentially more catastrophic thing to the united kingdom is exiting without a deal. i was in favour of remain advice to the house of commons, i will be arguing with colleagues to do everything we could to stop prime ministersjohnson from everything we could to stop prime ministers johnson from exiting without a deal because ijust don't think he and his colleagues in the government have thought through the potential consequences. you are emphasising exiting without a deal, are you suggesting that exiting with the deal, goodness owes up looks unlikely but it might happen, you are suggesting that exiting with an arrangement with the eu wouldn't have any impact on britain's influence and the ridge around the world ? influence and the ridge around the world? i think it well. that's one of my many arguments for staying in but it will be far less disruptive to our economy and our standing in the world without any question. i

would prefer that to be a second referendum and for the british people to decide that it wasn't a good idea. that's not going to happen. it is not going to happen? frankly, i would happen. it is not going to happen? frankly, iwould imagine happen. it is not going to happen? frankly, i would imagine you are still a member of the latter party, grave differences with the leader of the party, jerry cobb, but you still vote they were. some of colleagues didn't. i did so i'm not here to... would you say that your party has a clear coherent position on brexit? no. we would say the men to be in those european elections of which you have just spoken, those european elections of which you havejust spoken, for us, we got 996 you havejust spoken, for us, we got 9% of the popular vote in scotland. we used to dominate them, we lost seats to all the other parties, it was awful and what did we do that? because were standing in the middle—of—the—road. i'm afraid that jeremy corbyn who represents a very

strong remained constituency, to my experience, he is a brexit year in what prime ministers johnson experience, he is a brexit year in what prime ministersjohnson said about it, it happens to be true for supplement what he said. his whole instinct is to see the european union as a capitalist club and he was out of that. so is your position that labour needs right now, as people like tom watson and emily thornbury have said, needs to come out as a party of remain. notjust a referendum but remain? yes, did needs to be clear about that, and of course it would please everybody. some mps have made it clear that if it comes to a nodal brexit on a brexit at all, they will choose to deal brexit. but not pleasing anybody because you are trying to ride these two horses and they are diverging. and jeremy corbett has fallen in between those horses to

continue with the might of the and the politics of britain has radically changed the last week was a firstjohnson has changed the political atmosphere. canada jeremy corbyn led labour party when a general election in fighting against bothjohnson? general election in fighting against both johnson? i think that is extremely unlikely. i actually thought that we would do very badly on the 2017 election, so did most people in the labour party until last week. so you can be surprised and you're predicting people ‘s behaviour. but things have changed radically since it 2017 election. bothjohnson is a far more effective campaigner than theresa may. she was never a campaigner anyway. the scales have fallen from people ‘s eyes about germany corbin. for the 2017 election he was able to be packaged as his father, kindly grandfather figure and he wasn't put under great examination, not least

because nobody including broadcasters thought he was going to do well. but in the last two years, he has important scrutiny and he will be still more, and we have had a taste of that in the last premises questions, sorry, statement that bothjohnsonjust questions, sorry, statement that both johnson just before questions, sorry, statement that bothjohnson just before the recess, where he skinned corbin. in your opinion? it's interesting you feel so opinion? it's interesting you feel so strongly. alistair campbell, he was the director of operations, just this morning he hasjust said i can no longer be a member of the labour party. it is not a party i want to be in, corbin ‘s labour does not represent my hopes and my values. do you feel the same? not quite assembled by feel —— i understand exactly what he feels that for him to be expelled just like that in a millisecond, for having said that... just to be clear, for voting liberal democrat. against serious

allegations of anti—semitism, have had their cases postponed. why on earth, lacking, can't you say, this is not a party i can be in? because i'm still a member of the labour party. blackburn labour party remains a very good party, it is a momentum free zone, it continues to attract support and for me to leave the labour party would be for me to betray people who voted for me. so you're burying into a little hole and you can't see the big picture? there may come a moment where i take a different view. if you ask me why, i'm giving you an explanation. you mouth i could but it's about my personal loyalty to people who have been loyal to me and to a town and toa been loyal to me and to a town and to a cause and blackburn which remains the same course, i am as distressed as anybody about the way thatjeremy corbyn has brought down and more to the point people he is allowed to have around him, and that

his greatest responsibility, bringing down the spread party and corrupting its values. allowing us to, ongoing reason, —— on good reason, is just to, ongoing reason, —— on good reason, isjust extraordinary to, ongoing reason, —— on good reason, is just extraordinary to stop we have got to the end, i thank you very much for being on hardtalk. tuesday brought a destructive combination of weather to some parts of the british isles. across the southern counties it was all about the strength of the wind which downed a number of trees at a number of locations but further north, particularly

across the northern parts of yorkshire it was the rain and thunderstorm activity brought by this area of low pressure that cause real problems, with anything up to 100 millimetres of rain falling in a very short space of time, hence the flooding in northern parts of yorkshire and indeed elsewhere across the north of england. we are not done just yet. that low pressure taking time to drift offshore into the north sea. a much improved day across the southern counties of england and through the midlands into wales. fewer showers to report here and less in the way of wind. still some intensity about the showers in the north of england and also into the western side of scotland. from wednesday on into thursday, the low pressure will eventually drift offshore but the western flanks still supply a gaggle of showers into some of those eastern facing counties. with, again, the possibility of thunderstorms developing later in the afternoon across central western and north—western parts of scotland. northern ireland faring decently and again the southern counties for the most part escape any shower activity. that trend to a spell of somewhat quieter weather will take us out

of thursday and on into friday. a very weak area of high pressure will just about kill off the remnants of the showers for most parts of the british isles. the odd one or two could not be ruled out but you do get the sense from the broader picture that many areas will enjoy a fine day with a decent amount of sunshine and just a couple of showers left behind. with that increase in sunshine, less in the way of wind, i think we will find temperatures picking up by a degree or two. into the weekend and i must say there is some doubt at this stage about just how fast this atlantic frontal system will spread its cloud and rain into the western side of the british isles. as a general rule, the further east you are, saturday looks to be a dry and fine affair. as one set of weather fronts gradually work their way across the british isles, weakening probably all the while, eventually on the latter part

of sunday we will bring another weather system in towards the western side of the british isles and again after a fairly decent start i think we will begin to thicken the cloud and i would not rule out the possibility of another belt of rain working into the western side of the british isles to finish off the weekend. take care.

welcome to bbc news, i'm mike embley. our top stories: north korea fires two short—range ballistic missiles from its east coast — the south korean military says they landed in the sea ofjapan. the democratic party's 2020 presidential hopefuls are starting a second round of debates on the road to the white house. haunting image of a child clinging on for life in war—ravaged syria and her remarkable escape. we hear from her remarkable escape. we hear from herfamily. russia launches a criminal investigation into saturday's ‘free election' protests in moscow — anyone found guilty could face up to 15 years injail. and why this tiny village in the alps has become a must—see attraction for tens of thousands of tourists from asia.