with me are... tim stanley, a leader writer on the daily telegraph newspaper. michael goldfarb, the us broadcaster who presents the podcast the first rough draft of history. ashis ray, who's been a foreign correspondent since 1977, including with the times of india. nesrine malik, a sudanese—born writer who's a columnist for the guardian newspaper. a warm welcome to all of you. donald trump has offered his services as a mediator — not a talent you might associate with a politician as polarising as the us president. but it offers one explanation for this week's big change — the scrapping of article 370 of india's constitution, which permitted jammu and kashmir, the only state in india which has a muslim majority, a degree of autonomy. kashmir is contested — a permanent source of tension and occasional bouts of conflict with india's neighbour, pakistan. until now, the us has treated jammu and kashmir as an internal matter. when president trump told

imran khan, the prime minister of pakistan, he was willing to mediate between the two countries, it might have convinced narendra modi, india's pm, it was time to act. ashis ray, it's a dramatic move. will it lead to dramatic change? the jury will it lead to dramatic change? the jury is out. there is a lot of controversy, and what i can confirm as we speak is that the national conference, one of the main —— which has been the main politicalforce in kashmir for 75 has been the main politicalforce in kashmirfor 75 years, in has been the main politicalforce in kashmir for 75 years, in fact the party that gave a popular ratification to the maharajah‘s accession to india, has today gone to the supreme court in india to challenge the orders which have been passed. of course, there are two parts to what happened earlier this week. the first is scrapping of

article 370, which gave a special status to kashmir by virtue of that accession treaty, but that was done away with by a presidential order. then came two equally controversial moves. 0ne then came two equally controversial moves. one was to downgrade the region from full statehood to what is called union territory. two union territories as a matter of fact, because the state has been bifurcated into jammu and kashmir, which was the original title of the state, and ladakh, which is one of the regions of jammu state, and ladakh, which is one of the regions ofjammu and kashmir are. does that mean they can effectively be run from delhi? yes, mainly by the central government. all controversial, but parts two and three have gone through the indian parliament and have been voted favourably by both houses of parliament. that said, i think this move is seen by a lot of people as

misguided and rash, for the simple reason that much of article 370 had been diluted, and it had been diluted with concurrence of the state assembly of jammu and diluted with concurrence of the state assembly ofjammu and kashmir, so state assembly ofjammu and kashmir, so in this case what has happened is that a draconian style has been adopted to do away with article 370, which gave, as i said, a degree of autonomy. to start with, when the accession treaty took place, only three items were with the indian central government, defence, foreign affairs and communications. the rest we re affairs and communications. the rest were with the state. but, over the years... it's been eroded. things have come back to the central government, but what has also happened is the assembly of jammu and kashmir, which sat between 1950

and kashmir, which sat between 1950 and 1957, finally said that article 370 cannot be abrogated, so it will be very interesting a test case in the supreme court of india. let's see what happens, what the supreme court has to say. it's a high-risk because presumably the danger is that it fans the conflict and makes people who have been pushing for independence for kashmir even more determined, because they have even less to lose. yes, but there are two parallel streams here. one is the increasingly sharp and more draconian tone of politics in india, but as you mention correctly in the introduction there is also the global context. you see this all over the world, where local conflicts that had kind of been rested but stable are being pushed

into actual volatility by heads of state that are trying to garner popular support and get votes, because they realise you can sort of get away with it now. america is not looking. if anything, get away with it now. america is not looking. ifanything, it is get away with it now. america is not looking. if anything, it is actively encouraging this instability. china was traditionally an ally of pakistan and is now in its own islamophobic crisis. saudi arabia isn't under control —— is under the control of mohammad bin salman, who isn't somebody you can go to help with subcontinental crises. before, they used to pump money into pakistan. so there are a lot of global axes that before would have stabilised these kind of conflicts but who are either under their own populist leaders at the moment, or are distracted by something else. so i think we are going to see more of

this, and we've seen this in saudi arabia and the middle east in general. we've seen people trying to push their luck to see what they can get away with. even though the 0bama administration had previous administrations were not particularly interventionist, in an explicit way, there was work behind—the—scenes, wrapping of knuckles, but that doesn't happen anymore. we are beginning to see that rise to the top. do you have a sense that he's made his bold move and he's going to get away with it? if any and he's going to get away with it? ifany indian and he's going to get away with it? if any indian leader were going to do this, now would be the time, with electoral strength, the opposition is disintegrating. i think nesrine is disintegrating. i think nesrine is right. you framed this is donald trump offering to intervene, but he

makes an entry into geopolitics and it goes the other way. it's funny, because the indian papers this morning, thank god for the internet i could read some of them, but they are leading on vladimir putin endorsing this move. this is a huge thing. it says that, in a chanel, —— in asia now, vladimir putin has reasserted himself, and geopolitically russia is as strong as it has been in decades. the other thing is the china question. what i am coming around to is the absence ofa am coming around to is the absence of a response from pakistan. that seems very interesting to me. the idea that imran khan is not capable of merely shaking his fist about that move, and that says a lot about internal weakness in pakistan. when

we talk about ladakh and gemma and kashmir, i looked at the map and the north—eastern border is with china, andi north—eastern border is with china, and i think, long before we get to any kind of violence, china will have a lot to say about some kind of resolution of without violence. have a lot to say about some kind of resolution of without violencelj would say though that pakistan has already made several noises. the fa ct already made several noises. the fact is that i am disappointed to inform pakistani friends that they don't really have a legal case in this situation. what pakistan can do, and they are already doing, is to take this matter up diplomatically and politically, equally the indian government a right to defend their position. but what you mentioned to start with, russia has indicated that this is an internal situation, and i also see this is really kashmir versus delhi, because that is really what the battle is about what is being feared

in india is that kashmir will become more anti—name—25— macro and therefore disaffection and militancy will grow. —— more anti—delhi. security forces will get bogged down, human rights violations will ta ke down, human rights violations will take place,. on the question of militancy, one way in which pakistan has been accused in the past on situations like this is by arming and supporting the militant groups that then use violence to reverse the cause. india's argument is it is the cause. india's argument is it is the pakistani intelligence forces encouraging radicalism in kashmir that has caused the breakdown of security, and effectively kashmir has been run by the central government since december. it is their argument for why they need to step in, to bring security, stability and economic development to kashmir. that's the indian argument. i think the problem with

thatis argument. i think the problem with that is threefold. 0ne, it is likely to radicalise the ticks within kashmir, which would undermine security. second, it is likely to radicalise politics in pakistan. any conflict over kashmir usually strengthens the army in pakistan, and conservative muslim elements will react strongly. third, there is a great fear that what india might be about to engage in is what is happening in many countries, where you use ethnic displacement, where you use ethnic displacement, where you use ethnic displacement, where you use the large mass movement of people in order to extend political control. so the argument is that, up until now, hindus from outside kashmir have not been able to buy land or property or to settle within kashmir. 0nce land or property or to settle within kashmir. once you get rid of the special status, once new delhi is in control, they can move in, and it's estimated it would take something like the move of 2.5 million hindus

into kashmir to change the ethnic status of kashmir, which would change political control. that's the sort of thing we've seen taking place in china and tibet, and it's something i've personally seen recently in iraq and the northern parts of iraq, where it is alleged that groups booked by sheer militias are displacing christians. —— shia militias. the long—term fear of kashmiris is that political control will be taken over. notjust hindus, but nobody from any other part of india can settle in kashmir. that is why imran khan this week talked about a fear of potential ethnic cleansing in kashmir. doubtless, we will return to this topic. borisjohnson looks like a man who's enjoying himself. the british prime minister, two weeks into the job, is at last able to do stuff. he's instructed the treasury to come up with the money for 20,000 more police officers — roughly equal to the number lost as a result of the austerity policy

pursued by the two previous conservative prime ministers. as part of plans for a competitive, post—brexit uk, he's changing the rules on immigration, turning the country, mrjohnson says, "into a supercharged magnet drawing scientists like iron filings from around the world". but that magnet won't be powerful enough to attract the minority of his party colleagues who oppose leaving the european union without an agreement. as the risk of that grows, so does talk of options for parliament to block a no—deal brexit, and ways prime ministerjohnson could stop them. tim, what do you think the prime minister and his team are up to? what they would say they are trying to do is to accomplish in three months what they would say theresa may failed to do in three years, which is to have a proper negotiation between equals, then with the eu, and they would say what equalises that negotiation is britain being ready and willing to walk away from the table, and that is why they are stepping up preparations for no deal. at this

stage, when you are this close to crashing out by legal default on 0ctober crashing out by legal default on october the 31st, it doesn't matter if preparations for no deal is a bluff, which i suspect it is, or if britain is actually preparing for a no deal, because when it comes down to spending the money, putting the infrastructure in, preparing the tax plans, there is no difference between that and just bluffing. in effect what the government is trying to do is to accomplish what they would say theresa may failed to do. don't forget, when they do this, they are talking to two audiences, one is the eu, to say, you need to renegotiate and take out the backstop so we can sell it to the tory brexit rebels in parliament. they are also talking to the brexit party, because they've done the maths and they know, if the conservative party is seen to pursue a soft, theresa may style brexit, they will win over a handful of moderates but they will lose about 20% of the electorate to the brexit party. if they pursue a harder brexit, even if it can't be done, evenif

brexit, even if it can't be done, even if it means they are forced to hold an election, even if it means political chaos, they are more likely to win an election if one is then held. so this is a huge political gamble. nobody is denying that. but i also suspect that, at this stage, this close, with the choice really between leaving this year or not at all, my suspicion is that boris's very precarious path to brexit is probably the only path now left to britain for leaving the eu. so europe will blink first? no, it's not. this is my first time on the show since boris became prime minister, and throughout theresa may's premiership and towards the end it felt like an increasingly more precarious game of django, when is this going to collapse? and then, when she resigned, it seemed it was going to collapse even quicker, and now boris is really bringing the endgame, i think, now boris is really bringing the endgame, ithink, notjust now boris is really bringing the endgame, i think, notjust for the brexit process but i think for the

tory party. it feels like there is some sort of running out of road for them as an ideological entity and as a practical government. and i agree, i agree with tim, i think that boris has cornered himself in this position, whether he believes in it or not, that this is the only way he can get some more road for the conservative party, because they've pinned them self to end they cannot afford to lose brexit votes, and they are now really selling a hard brexit as a good thing. that's as opposed to a thing they'd rather avoid. now it's suddenly something that's great. what is genuinely disturbing, actually, is this whole the eu is going to blink first, the eu will blink at one minute to midnight on the 315t of october. the eu doesn't want a no deal, and that's the only card we have in our pocket. i just that's the only card we have in our pocket. ijust think, if you are negotiating and doing this really

complex, very smart, svengali —type back door negotiations, you ought to be waving the cards that are in your pocket all over the media all the time for this is what we have, you are going to blink because we will threaten you with no deal. so the eu has complete ingress and insight into what the british cards are all you have is no deal. that is going to harm you more than us. we have made this very clear. why would we suddenly change our position, so close to the end? what is happening now in preparation for that, what is happening is this very disturbing, parallel universe, post—truth situation, where michael gove and other brexiteers are saying, very disappointed in the eu, they are refusing to negotiate, not been very grown up, refusing to negotiate, not been very grown up, and we refusing to negotiate, not been very grown up, and we are refusing to negotiate, not been very grown up, and we are being up and coming to the table. it's completely upside down. you said we hold all the cards the morning after we vote

to leave, and there are no cards, just a bluff card. yes! and what's interesting is... i kept thinking of what donald trump said when boris johnson became prime minister. he couldn't even remember the guy's name, hejust couldn't even remember the guy's name, he just said couldn't even remember the guy's name, hejust said britain trump, andi name, hejust said britain trump, and i keep remembering what boris said, his criticism of theresa may was, she didn't follow donald trump's advice to go in well hard. i think he even said those precise words, like he is a well hard guy himself, you know, playing rugby against ten—year—olds. i have this terrible feeling that there is a similarity in their approach to getting things done between donald trump and boris johnson. getting things done between donald trump and borisjohnson. donald trump and borisjohnson. donald trump was a real estate developer. he used to go to brownfield sites

with local politicians and say, we are going to build a great thing right here. didn't have the money light up or anything light up. —— lined up. when i hear the daily, oh, here's a billion quid to build hs2 between leeds and manchester, 1.9 billion for the nhs, as if he can magic this up! i don't think it is an unknown quantity in brussels, and when they see this kind of behaviour, they willjust when they see this kind of behaviour, they will just think, it's just gas, there behaviour, they will just think, it'sjust gas, there is no thing there, and i do worry about how you complete, if we are headed towards the exit, and it's clear that the remain groupings cannot agree on when to have coffee, much less a strategy to stop this train, i just worry that we'll end up on october the 31st with this hot air balloon suddenly being pricked and we will

exit in the worst possible way. we do have cards. group which card? the extraordinary thing with theresa may was to say in the manifesto she believed no deal was better than a bad deal if that was true, you have to prepare for the possibility of no deal. the covenant is arguing that u—turn disadvantage to our advantage, and they are saying, we are suddenly outside and we don't need to attract scientists, so we suddenly change the visa system to attract scientists. you suddenly cut taxes. there is a lot of stuff that will be costly, things like operation kingfisher, to essentially compensate... custom how are these negotiations... ? compensate... custom how are these negotiations...? the compensate... custom how are these negotiations... ? the eu compensate... custom how are these negotiations...? the eu will be hurt by us crashing out without a deal for the. of multiple cards. what

about theresa may? the day after, assuming the worst case scenario on november the 1st, the day after, you are still going to have to negotiate are still going to have to negotiate a new free trade agreement with the eu, and so they will say, what about that 39 billion quid you owe us when you crashed out? that's one of the cards. if we leave without the deal, we don't play that. that's a card for later on. so you'd say you have no free trade in the future... the government, i'd presume, would seek to negotiate an eta. government, i'd presume, would seek to negotiate an fta. but i'd say they would say the same things they said during the referral agreement which is, fine, you still owe us that 39 billion. —— during the withdrawal agreement. there would have to be a backstop. what you are

assuming is that everything stays equal on november the 1st. you know andi equal on november the 1st. you know and i know that what is likely to happen around the uk is a movement breaking it up. how many years did the uruguay round take? i will tell you, it took a long time. if you can't come to an agreement, what is owed from previous arrangements and the backstop, these negotiations will go on and on and on and, in scotla nd will go on and on and on and, in scotland and in northern ireland, and other parts, you know, you are assuming tantra the problem with the model. nobody is denying the fact that the eu will be harmed by a no—deal brexit, i wouldn't say they are going to come out unscathed, but the point is that the impact on the uk will be much larger than the eu, and all these cards people are talking about... because it is

spread among few people? yes. all of these cards are remedial cards. we have seen the first warning in the contraction in the economy in the quarter ending in june, contraction in the economy in the quarter ending injune, so that should be a warning to people who are still sitting on the fence. that said, let me take a little step back and say this, that, at the end of the day, a political party exists to fight elections, win elections and to be in power, and i take him's point to the extent that it is very important for the conservative party politically to reclaim the support that has haemorrhaged to the brexit party, so therefore, to that extent, boris's strategy is understandable. that said, i think we are otherwise into somewhat uncharted territory,

because is this may be boris johnson's strategy, but equally there is strong opposition in parliament, and there could be a scenario, and i see this happening, that there will be a bit of a contest between parliament and the executive, and what that means is that parliament will have to find a way of stopping borisjohnson. that parliament will have to find a way of stopping boris johnson. and the final thought on that, according to the constitution unit, effectively, if borisjohnson were to lose a vote of confidence, it would be possible for parliament then to mandate him as a caretaker prime minister pending a general election or some other executive coming in to say, you have to go to brussels and ask for an extension. is possible nobody knows. my experience is, as soon as you say this will constitutional happen, and other expert comes along and says the opposite. people are put forward

the opposite. people are put forward the models of the worst scenarios. the government is emphasising its models of the best case scenarios. it is the known unknowns and the unknown unknowns. donald rumsfeld, where are you when we need you? that's it for dateline london for this week. we're back next week at the same time. goodbye. hello. whilst there will be some sunshine around this weekend, it's not the ideal weekend if you've got travel plans or plans for the outdoors. we've got some pretty disruptive weather. some heavy downpours still to come today and through the weekend. today, the focus really is on the strength of the winds,

particularly for england and wales. an area of low pressure has been with us since yesterday, slowly moving its way eastwards. strongest winds on the southern edge of it and, as that pushes its way east, we continue to see those strongest winds feed in across england and wales especially. winds over 40, 50 mph. nothing untoward for winter or autumn, but we are in mid—august. that will cause a few trees to come down, no doubt, given that they are in full leaf, and some disruption to travel plans. the strongest winds in the south. we will continue to see some showers and more persistent rain in central areas. further north, the winds will pick up later across the hebrides, touching gale force, but for much of scotland, northern ireland, lighter winds today. whilst we will lose the persistent rain across the far south of scotland, we will start to see some intense thunderstorms develop elsewhere. if you get caught underneath those, there is a risk of some flash flooding, but with them being slow—moving, some of you will sit under sunny spells for the rest of the day. outbreaks of heavy rain across northern england, with the wind picking up through the afternoon. the winds remain strong across the midlands, wales and southern england throughout.

the showers perhaps becoming fewer in number with a bit more sunshine around. temperatures this afternoon, down on recent days — 22, 23 in the south and east, mid—teens across parts of scotland. into tonight, we continue with some dry weather across the far south, but more in the way of rain for the north of england, into parts of north wales, and rain comes and goes across scotland and northern ireland. a strengthening breeze in the north of scotland. temperatures here around 9 or 10 degrees, but most in the low to mid—teens as we start sunday. it will be not quite as windy across southern areas compared with today, but northern areas feeling a bit breezy. clearing away some of the early rain in northern scotland, and brightening up as well in northern ireland, but for central and southern scotland, the far north of england, there is potentially heavy and persistent rain, which could cause further issues. some thunderstorms brewing across central and western parts of england and wales, but the brightest conditions in the south—east corner — 22, 23, compared to up to 12 or 13 in the north of scotland. that cooler air pushes for all of us this week. it's going to be a week

when temperatures are below average for the time of year and we'll see some further rain at times, but also still some sunshine.

this is bbc news. i'm shaun ley. the headlines at 12:00pm: the energy watchdog demands an explanation from national grid after nearly1 million people across england and wales lost power on friday — the electricity provider says it an incredibly rare event, the simultaneous loss of two large power stations. we'll be looking very hard at what happened to make sure we will minimise disruption in future. i am at kings cross station, one of the worst affected following yesterday's power outage. trains are now running a normal service outbound but it is the inbound trains where commuters have complained of delays of up to one hour to get to the capital. michael gove says there'll be a bail—out fund for