foreign minister kang kyung—wha in beijing, will come to hardtalk. thank you very much for having me. the german chancellor has made it we have to start, because you are in clear it is up to the british pm to beijing and if you had meetings we have to start, because you are in beijing and you had meetings with both the chinese make a deal on leaving the eu. the and japanese foreign ministers, we have to start with a troubled relationship with japan. the words of a financial times trump administration wants to end the long—standing ruling that allows migrant families to be detained editorial says that the world indefinitely while judges decided they can stay in the us. currently, migrant children can be detained for no more 20 days. amid the general has been fixated on donald trump's financial war with china, but a new war is waging between confusion over president trump's south korea and japan. apparent wish to buy greenland, the danish minister of foreign affairs has had a friendly and constructive i haven't seen that article and the issue of trade with japan phone conversation, we are told, has, quite unexpectedly and in a very unilateral with the us secretary of state, to and arbitrary manner assure each other they are still on the part ofjapan. allies. president trump, rebuffed we are prepared to discuss what the issue and insulted, has called off his trip to denmark. is and keep this as a trade issue but i think the steps that they have

taken have caused a great deal you are up—to—date on the headlines. of problems for our industries now it is time for hardtalk. and i think we want welcome to hardtalk. very much to engage with them in consultation so we can take things back to pre—julyi when i took these steps. when they took these steps. donald trump, the self—proclaimed dealmaker extraordinaire, is finding the korean it is not clear to me peninsula tough going. for all his claims of friendship, pyongyang seems not closer to giving that you want to lower up his nuclear arsenal and the strategic partnership between south and north korea is looking the temperature because of the japanese foreign minister said to you. restraint as well. he said to resolve the issue, get a dialogue going, lower the temperature and you chose to say that it is important to eliminate the foreign minister kang kyung—wha is my guest. unilateral and arbitrary trade the country is out of step with both the us and japan. 00:01:52,028 --> 2147483051:37:40,729 how vulnerable does 2147483051:37:40,729 --> 4294966103:13:29,430 that make south korea? retaliatory steps, which was clearly a job at yourjapanese counterpart so you are not really trying to sort these out. we are, in fact. we have offered to engage

on the trade issue. it is retaliatory, arbitrary. the japanese rationale for introducing these trade restrictive measures have shifted. initially they linked it to their satisfaction over how we were handling high courtjudgements on the issue of forced labour, then they found the problems with our export control measures and somehow some of these sensitive items might make their way to north korea. they have clarified that as not to be the case that they have not explained to us what inappropriate cases have been. we have offered to mate between our trade authorities, to talk through the issues. and to see how we might address their concerns. we have not had any response. let's be candid.

this dispute — and we can go into some of the details, but it has revived some very old suspicions, even hatreds, between the japanese and south korean peoples. people talking about the outrage, boycotting japanese made goods, tragically to people setting themselves on fire in protest at japan and its restrictive trade. this is supposed to be a crucial regional alliance for you. it is. 0ur relations with japan is extremely important, especially given our need for collaboration and co—ordination as we deal with the north korean nuclear issues,

and in collaboration with the us as well. the reaction to the korean public on these measures taken byjapan, you have to see the larger context. as you know, there is a very painful past and the past has drawn a long shadow over recent relations. my government has said, let's deal with the past as it passed, difficult but let's manage that and move on other areas of collaboration and japan has so far, and if is government, not responded. if i may interrupt for a second — what you have just said is very important but it does not seem to square with what is happening because when you're caught in south korea started to revive the notion that individual

south koreans could seek compensation from the japanese for forced labour during the war, that seemed to run contrary to the treaty you signed with the japanese going back to 1965 which said that all claims had been completely and finally settled. you cannot sign a legal document and reopen the whole concept of conversation. first of all, the japanese themselves have also indicated that individual rights to claim have not been extinguished. that has been their position through the 1990s. they have slightly change tune in recent years but the 1965 agreement is about claims on property rights, financial rights, debts and credits. what the courtjudgement, at the recent courtjudgement has said that that treaty between the two countries stays. we are not saying we are breaking that or asking to renegotiate it. the courtjudgement said the context of illegal

occupation, either colonial rule and the war of aggression, illegal acts directly connected to that contest have not been covered by the 1965 agreement. you think it is healthy to encourage south korean citizens to seek here, in 2019, seek compensation for the tragic and terrible things that happened during the japanese colonial occupation. it really is worth reviving and digging through all that? it is not the government encouraging. these are individuals who are living survivors. who have lived through that terrible time and personally experienced the forced labour.

you heard the chinese say, you guys must get together and resolve this because it is very bad for regional trade, jeopardizing free—trade agreement across the region and the japanese have put that restrictive export controls on some key goods that normally are exported from japan to your country — and we will talk about that — but you seem to be very petty in this dispute. for example, your government has announced it will double the amount of samples and the frequency of tests and radioactive substances on radioactive substances coming in in food and agricultural products from japan. we saw that kind of rhetoric after fukushima in 2011. why are you putting very tight controls on these

japanese agricultural and food products? there is still concern on the part of the public about fisheries products and agricultural products in the vicinity of the fukushima plant. and we have to listen to the consent of our public. it is only now that you are in a bitter trade war that you have decided you suddenly need to impose these extra tests. we do our policy reviews and take steps in accordance with our concerns for the public concern of that safety and health. given the release of a recent report on the possible releasing of contaminated wastewater into the sea, we have asked japan for explanations about this and we will continue to engage them

on this issue. that has raised a lot of concern and it is a legitimate response. a couple of quick questions onjapan — are you now saying to the japanese that, not only economic ties but security intelligence and strategic partnership ties are at stake? we want to minimise the issues. and given the japanese rationale now that trade control issues are technical and we are saying, let's discuss it at that level and work through the technical issues. we have not had any response from the japanese on that.

obviously it is tied to their displeasure over our courtjudgement. we have to abide by that. a democracy that abides by the rule of law would not do otherwise. that is the situation in my country. the japanese position was that everything was settled by the 1965 so we are trying to find a way forward that helps us to resolve this issue. and we have thought through very seriously on all the options. some have not been seriously considered by japan. we are committed to open discussions and consultation on all of these issues. where does these and then? where does this end then? if you look at the

economic battle, to be honestjapan is a bigger and more powerful economy than yours. you depend on some key strategic points and things that come from japan and outsiders thinkjapan holds more holds more of the cards. particularly as your expert businesses are suffering already and if these will hit them hard. the south korean economy looks vulnerable and you look vulnerable in battle with japan. exactly. exactly, and we depend on the japan and our trade with japan has always been in the minus for us. of all of the export items we get from japan, those three critical items that are critical to our industry they put restrictions

on and to think that a country that is so mutually interdependent, people to people exchanges and growing, that they would do this without prior notice, without prior consultation, very unilaterally and adjust three days after the g20 in osaka committed the country to nondiscriminatory and predictable tried, to have this on us three days later i think is completely unacceptable so we are asking, through consultations, let's find a way to roll things back to pre—july 1. you sound very angry. we are. the latent sense of injustice because japan has not fully come to terms with the past and that has meant fully come to terms with the past and that has meant that people, the living survivors in particular, who have lived through those difficult days, have a deep—seated sense of injustice, that they have not been given at claims

about the harms done to them. if i may, let me stop you there. your opposition, the sour relationship with japan is clear in this interview but another thing important to talk about is the strategic and diplomatic position of your government with regard to north korea and donald trump's continued effort to make what he always described as the big, grand deal of denuclearising north korea. he describes kim jong—us as his "friend", a man who wrote

him some "beautiful letters", and yet, diplomacy appears to have achieved nothing. are you worried about the donald trump strategy? we are in a bit of a lull. i think the disagreement in hanoi has been disappointing. they have not been a ready or prepared to come back to the negotiating table. the north korea laid out promised in late june that they would come back to the negotiating table when they met in the dmz but by now there is no communication between the us and north korea to set the agenda, to set the date and place for working level negotiations and when they take place. to say this has been a failure or disappointment, no progress has been made, when you look at things

on a day—to—day basis, week—to—week or a month—to—month basis, things look different. it is a huge change to where we were two years ago. a huge change in it that donald trump has given all sorts of diplomatic process to kim jong—us but he appears to have got little in return. you in south korea appear to have been cut out of the entire korean diplomacy.

the north korean said that it would not talk to you again. they said it would make the boiled head of a cow laugh. and donald trump does not seem to be coming to talk to you either. i would not say so. i think our collaboration with the us at all levels is extremely close and i think is the north korean challenge has brought us closer. for the north koreans do think they can cut us out of this, i think that isa can cut us out of this, i think that is a bit ludicrous. we also know north korea's diplomatic behaviour is very unique, to put it mildly, and some of it is quite unacceptable, given the seriousness of the matters. but surely the point is that these, kim jong—un has donald trump precisely where he wants him. the north korean message to you is

quite simple. unless you are prepared to raise economic sanctions and offer assistance to north korea and are prepared to enter your strategic military partnership with the united states, north korea has no interest in talking to seoul, so over to you. are you prepared to consider their requests? i think ithink our i think our strategic alliance with united states is something the north koreans to not demand or comment anything on. we are absolutely confident about the strength of the alliance and of the day—to—day co—ordination. you also have to distinguish between north korea and its rhetoric and their internal calculations are. i think, in all of these matters, we share it with the analysis

and information very frequently with the united states. so the — in fact, in many ways, the alliance is stronger than ever. i wonder whether your words about the strength of your partnership with washington will convince anybody around the world when we look at the reality of donald trump, in recent days, questioning the point of military exercises. he says he does not like paying for them, he wants to be reimbursed and he says he has told the south koreans of that. he says south korea has agreed to pay substantially more money to the us in order to defend itself from a north korea. something to which you said it had not been settled yet. so, what's it the truth here? is it that they are a dispute with us

about how much you are prepared to pay to help defend you? this is not a dispute. this is an issue we will work for in the spirit of the alliance. we have worked every ten rounds of this cost—sharing agreement and we will work through the next round. we read his tweets very carefully but we also look at them in the larger policy level of the united states. i understand that is your job. how did you feel when donald trump mimicked a south korean accent and was reportedly said to say disparaging things about the south koreans? "it was easier to get $1 billion from south korea than $100 from a rent—controlled apartment in brooklyn." this is the man you want to be your partner? you are trying to instigate me and i won't fall for that. i won't comment on the words

and actions of president trump. i think his — overall his determination and his political will has been instrumental, together with my president, to bring us this far on the engagement with north korea. but that, i think, is also then supported by the policy establishment of the united states as represented in the state department and the defence department. you can only take your own diplomacy so far. when john bolton, trump's national security advisor, suggests that in the future south korea should pay all 5 billion dollars' cost of the troops in south korea, how do you feel about that? as we have not yet started

serious negotiations, that's for sure. they have a team in korea for the 1st round of initial sounding out. the serious negotiations will begin in september. we have yet to see where this leads to, but we will certainly go to the negotiating table on the cost sharing, based upon our position of arriving at a reasonable level that is acceptable to us, that is, that we can handle and that we can pass through our national assembly. minister, we are almost out of time. can you remember a time in the recent past when south korea looked more economically and politically vulnerable? we have talked about the impact of a trade dispute with japan on your economy, but frankly, strategically, you are in dispute with japan, the north koreans won't talk to you, your relationship with trump is, shall we say, troubled to say the least. you have got china and russia, which have ambitions in your region which don't necessarily match yours. south korea is in a lot of trouble. well, we have lots of challenges.

i wouldn't call our relations with the us "troubled". i think we have our disagreements, all relationships do, but we are in an alliance of 65 years and we have been able to work through difficult issues in the past in this spirit of the alliance. we have our challenges with japan, we have our issues with china and russia, but one fundamental goal we share is that the korean peninsula must be wholly denuclearised, and we must find lasting peace on the korean peninsula. we very much have that goal in our sights, and we must deal with daily challenges as they come. foreign minister, i thank you very much indeed forjoining me from beijing. thank you for having me.

hello, there. as we move into the latter part of august, it looks like summer is going to go for it with a real final flourish, and temperatures up to 30 celsius through the weekend and on into monday. which for some, is of course a bank holiday. the reason being, we want to get rid of these areas of low pressure, that have brought some quite cool weather and wet and windy conditions which will be squeezed away to the north by high—pressure building from the continent, and as we move into the southerly airstream we will have some real warmth coming into the continent too. well, this morning, quite a breezy story, we're still under the influence of the area of low pressure to the north of us, and there

will be some showers on the tail end of a weather front. this front will affect northern england, more persistent rain for northern ireland, and it will then run into southern and central scotland as it goes through the afternoon. temperatures in the south—east up to 2a, maybe even 25 degrees. then, as the week continues we will start to pull that warmer airfurther north. as we do so we'll squash away these weather fronts, not before we have seen a significant spell for western scotland. take a look at the overnight temperatures. down into single figures earlier this week, five and six in some areas of northern england and wales, and into the midteens as we go into friday. here is friday's chart. there' the high across the continent, we're still feeding air in from the south—west, but it will feel already much warmer than it did earlier in the week, and we start to put away those fronts in scotland, so it is a much drier day here. temperatures of 22 through the southern uplands,

up to 27 — 28 across parts of southern england, and then we get to the weekend and that high reorientates and we start to pull our air from the south and real warmth arrives. notice some weather fronts coming into play there. can't promise you an entirely dry weekend, some isolated showers to the north and west, but a lot of sunshine. a core of temperatures in the mid to high 20s across england and, hot air getting up to wales on sunday and scotland. a shade cooler across northern ireland and scotland for monday. further south, temperatures still hitting the mid—to—high 20s. and it looks like some of that warmth could cling on for much of the week ahead across england and wales. a little more unsettled later in the week for scotland and northern ireland, with the arrival of some showers.

this is the briefing., i'm victoria fritz. our top story: the brexit tour continues — borisjohnson heads to paris for talks with french president emmanuel macron. appalling and inhumane — critics condemn white house plans which could see migrant children

detained indefinitely. more allegations about prince andrew's links with the convicted sex offenderjeffrey epstein. buckingham palace says any suggestion of impropriety with minors is categorically untrue. in business, ryanair pilots begin a 48—hour strike at the peak