you finally this is bbc news, the headlines: buckingham palace announces details of prince harry and meghan's new status — as they step back from being senior royals. the couple will stop using their royal highness titles and will receive no public funds for royal duties. lawyers for president trump issue their first formal response to his impeachment saying it is an attack on the american people. a six page letter describes the charges as unconstitutional and a brazen attempt by his rivals to interfere in the upcoming presidential election. the lebanese capital beirut has seen its worst violence since anti—government protests began three months ago. the red cross says more than two hundred people have been injured. rain and thunderstorms have hit parts of australia's east coast, putting out some long—burning bushfires, but bringing a new threat of flooding to some areas.

there have been heavy downpours in queensland, victoria and new south wales. now on bbc news, dateline london. hello, and welcome to dateline london. i'm carrie gracie. this week — in difficult days, and with more to come, iran's supreme leader invokes god's help. but how much will that help? "it was a perfect phone call", protested the us president in an all caps tweet as his trial began.

but his more significant move to drown out the impeachment story was to sign a trade deal with china. we assess both the trial and the trade deal. and it's now life or death for the planet says a famous natural historian — but will his climate change warning shift the political dial where others have failed? my guests this week — greg katz of us news agency associated press, italian film maker annalisa piras, iranian writer amirtaheri, and ned temko of the observer. welcome to all of you. "with god on our side we slap the face of the united states." so said iran's supreme leader ali khamenei when he led friday prayers this week for the first time in eight years. he warned anti—government protestors not to serve as stooges for enemies seeking to capitalise on the tragedy of the downed airliner. how compelling is this campaign for the hearts and minds of the iranian public?

amir, let's start with you. it has provoked a big yawn because he had nothing new to say, he repeated his old themes about enemies and so on. but the focus now is on the incompetence of his regime. they couldn't even handle the funeral of general soleimani, 80 people were killed and the crowds in kerman, and yesterday it turned out they had even made a spelling error on the tombstone of the general. so they have to change, because the arabic they wrote, iranians don't speak arabic. they make a lot of mistake. so they have to change that, too. and during the friday's prayers, we saw, you can still see it on the internet, the president leaving the assembly before the ayatollah even gets up from his prayers, talking to god and so on.

suddenly you see the president getting up and walking away. was it in protest? did he get bored like the other iranians? it reminded me of nicolai ceaucescu, in his last days... the romanian dictator, for those who remember. talking about how good socialism is, how they are surrounded by enemies, the problem with a run at the moment is it is like a ship adrift in a storm, or in many different storms, without a captain. and this is really the dangerous point because at least until a year ago, people within the regime would listen to khamenei, today they don't, they just ignore him. at the same time, the vacuum that this has created is not filled by anything else.

society, like nature, fears a vacuum, it doesn't want to see nothing in place of something. and that is the main problem iran is facing at the moment. ned, your reflections? ideferamiron how desperate this is. the only thing i would say is, one, that over four decades the demise of this regime has been predicted more than once before. and as someone who was based in tehran during a hostage crisis after ayatollah khomeini took over, it is very unpredictable country in many ways, in that there is always at least two irans, one that paid lip service to the republic but went on with life. and now two things are different, one, the dire economic straits

because the so—called maximum pressure position by the us does seem to be having some effect, and the other, and this is kind of the elephant in the room, is it could be argued, assuming the islamic republic and the ayatollah survive this political challenge, that they are kind of blessed by having donald trump as an enemy, in that the americans are hostile and if you read some of trump's speeches and some of pompeo's speeches, there is a real determination to confront iranians behaviour in the region, etc.

but the other tide is trump really wants to get out, and so there is a temptation if you are the iranians to say, yes, this is a fearsome enemy, but does it have staying power? and that idea of trump is a trump card for the iranian regime, we saw president trump in response to the friday prayers from ayatollah khamenei suggesting that the supreme leader, not so supreme and should be careful with his words. but careful with his words runs both ways. and what i think is bizarre and was totally unpredictable about the events of the last ten days or so, if you look back before the airliner was shot down, president trump was really on an international hot seat for the attack and the legality of killing the iranian general, was really facing questioning all over the world for this really brazen and obviously completely effective targeted attack, but the shooting down has completely changed that and served to trump's favour. he seems to be good at thinking short—term, and if you look at the last ten days or so he has turned this to advantage

domestically because he can say look at all the pressure the iranians are now under because of what we are doing. it has been a bizarre and unpredictable turn of events. the european damage, europeans have played an important role in getting around the nuclear table with a deal in 2015, and holding that together with all kinds of sticking plaster and bandages over the next couple of years, and after trump withdrew from it, and now the europeans are invoking the dispute mechanism which may call time on it altogether. and that is one of the saddest aspects of the current iranian crisis. the absolute absence of the eu diplomacy which has played such an extraordinary role to get to the iran nuclear deal. mogherini, the former top european damage, europeans have played an important role in getting around the nuclear

table with a deal in 2015, now we see an absence of any strong voice from eu diplomacy as a block. and we see the supremacy of the voice of conflict, the american way of doing things. so i think it is incredibly sad and worrying moment for the world as a whole. one brief sliver of hope is, before trump pulled the americans out of the nuclear deal, the europeans were working very hard behind the scenes to say, don't pull out, and we will negotiate with you, kind of new deal, a kind of deal plus one with trump tower logo on it, and then we can all claim victory and they won't have a nuclear weapon. it is interesting that borisjohnson revived that idea. and trump tweeted that

that is a good idea, so if we are looking for hope maybe watch that space. amir, do all of these challenges and threats from outside, if you are the iranian government facing all this, where can they go next? ned mentioned the economic crisis, we've heard about the european angle, you talked about a vacuum of leadership, where has it come from and where will it go? the problem in discussing iran is too much attention is paid to foreign policy aspects, for example a little bit of trump bashing, a little bit of european adulation, and things like that. for a nuclear deal... they are all irrelevant. the problems is that, tt the moment in iran, there is an absence of leadership, the iranian government or whatever it is called cannot take any decisions and khamenei himself says they will neither fight a war no negotiate, so what you do? there are two ways of solving a problem. yes, but you talked about the vacuum

before, but as ned points out the economic challenges, the imf are talking about a nearly a10% contraction of the iranian economy in prospect this year. how can i sit there doing nothing with a vacuum? they say they need $60 billion, they are trying to arrange loan share here and there, and survive until after the american presidential election. but that is not going to solve their problem. of coming out with any solution for iran's main problems. we have to wait and see. of course this wayward ship will find a captain. i am confident of that. but at the moment, as our friend here said, there are two irans, iran is a country and a nation, continuing life, and iran

as khamenei and his ideology who are leading it into bigger and bigger problems. we are out of time on the problems of the iranian leadership. now we turn to the problems of the american leadership. that president is on trial for only the third time in american history. the senators responsible for trying mr trump have sworn an oath to deliver impartial justice, but the impeachment drama has been bitterly partisan until now and this is an election year. so, greg, will we get impartialjustice? no, not at all, not even close. it's not even clear whether witnesses will be called, what sort of testimony might be permissible. and the senate majority leader was talking about dismissing the charges out of hand, which will not happen. but given the strong majority in the senate for the republicans and the need for a two thirds vote, this is a predetermined result that the president will be acquitted.

the key question and the difficult question is, if you look to november, our election, the only thing that really matters from this is what is the impact on 300, 400, 500,000 voters in the upper midwest and pennsylvania, wisconsin, michigan. will this drama over impeachment sway any minds in trump's base... why do you say those are the only minds that matter? i think it is likely the democrats can hold on to the states they had last time around with hillary clinton, and i think it is likely trump can hold onto his states with the exception of those contested states that gave the presidency to trump. and it is a relatively small number of voters who could swing there, and you could look at discrete polling, you could look at how white women are feeling this or how african—american voters are seeing it, but the real question is no one

knows yet and that's way too early. that is what this means, how will it affect those electoral results, those states in november? ned, your assessment? i would only add there is a deeper irony to this, because even though the republicans, as greg says, there is a vanishing small number of republican senators who are likely even to break ranks to ask the witnesses, for example, but it is against a background of unlike previous such controversies, the facts are already known. in other words, there is no great mystery, this happened. if it were not for the partisanship in the us, the issue the republicans would face is not whether this was wrong or whether it happened, but whether it rises to the level of an impeachable offence. do you have a view on that? whether it does? i have a view on that because i think this president has been bad on so many levels

for the us. but my view is supremely irrelevant. the view i have that i think is more important is that i think it is important for the american system of government that this impeachment, even if it ends an acquittal, which it will, that the process not be a circus, that there be some sort of sobriety. and one of the interesting things to watch as this unfolds will be the effect of the chiefjustice of the us who is the presiding officer, who will do everything he can not to intervene, but who i think, given his record and his beliefs, does care about the importance of the institutions and making this a serious trial. there is not only donald trump on trial. there is the entire american constitutional system,

because the impeachment process was never meant to be partisan and there was always this idea that evidence and proper trial would matter. what we are seeing now, which is extraordinary, is the complete demolition of any apparent respect for evidence and truths. so the fact that almost everybody assumes that donald trump will get away with it, regardless of the tonnes of evidence, damning evidence that is put on the table, that in my mind is blowing incredible damage from all over the world to america and really affecting the credibility of america as a constitutional system, because it has become a mockery ofjustice. going back to what the president himself can do to distract

attention, i mentioned at the top that he, while the trial was beginning, he was declaring and signing his trade deal with china. and contrasting himself with what he called the "do nothing democrats". here i am, fulfilling my promise to bring backjobs. is that an effective stance for him? absolutely. i have been impressed with his media operation, maybe a one—man show, but he has been really effective, in my view, since he escaped the mueller report unscathed. the last six months he has really been able to set the agenda, to distract attention, to sort of sail through things, and my guess is he will sail through this senate trial relatively unscathed and just come out tweeting. we have not looked at the kind of trade element of the deal, because one of the things about the us—china trade deal is it puts in place a kind of slightly different version of us free trade, it is a kind of managed trade, eu,

you china will deliver on this this and this, rather than the straight message we are used to of old. so notjust the politics of the us on trial at the moment, but the economic model. the us has always talked about free trade but not practised it when it came to its own interests. they will find an excuse, there are hundreds of examples. even the rules they wrote, the us is the inventor of the modern world, all the institutions and so on, they wrote it themselves with a little bit of second violin from the british. so you are saying there is quite a big gap between rhetoric and reality? absolutely. and now trump finds china in a weak position because chinese growth rate is declining, china is finding some political problems in hong kong, the europeans are getting cool about china and so on. so he is trying to use

the opportunity to put his own imprint on a very small part of trade with china. but going back to the impeachment business, i think it is also important to note that the democrats are trying to cover their own nakedness with this impeachment. they have nothing to offer, they don't have a candidate, or their candidates are weak, as you can have a look at them, and they don't have an alternative programme, so the best thing is to impeach. and this is bad for american democracy. just before we leave this topic, last word, ned, on the rhetoric and reality in the trade message, and the democrats. first, i think the democrats were reluctant to go down this road, certainly nancy pelosi was. and i think the facts forced them into this, and i think they realise the dangers. and i agree, i don't know how this election will transpire because the democrats don't have an obvious strong candidate yet, but that is what the nominating process is for.

and finally on trade, it is important to recognise this is a small sliver of the trade dispute with china, and i know it is just a first tranche, but some of the big issues like chinese state support for industries and deep competition issues have not yet even been addressed, so there is a lot of road ahead. we will leave the road ahead for now on that score and turn to a different big road. climate change. politicians once presented climate change as a crisis that might happen in the future if we're not careful now. but the natural historian sir david attenborough says australian bushfires have demonstrated that the crisis is now. tech company microsoft is among those vowing action, with a promise to be notjust carbon neutral but carbon negative by 2030. so what is holding up governments? annalisa?

there are a lot of terrifying news and australia is one of those on the front of climate change. but this is a matter of life and death, and i think the tone is changing everywhere across the board. so there is a clear awareness now that capitalism and being profit driven is killing the planet so something has to change there. so there is to be a kind of complete radical shift in the money world, and this is happening... one of the interesting things about davos next week... the meeting of the world's elite of government and business. is that it will be entirely dedicated to climate change. yes, there will be greta thunberg,

but there will also be mark carney, one of the most important bankers in the world, the former head of the bank of england, and there will be larry think who speaks for blackrock. the biggest investment fund in the world. and they are leading the way, saying it is a money problem. so there is a stanford university study which will be presented in davos which has put a price tag, so the world needs to find $73 trillions to change the way we run energy, to transition to carbon zero economy we need $73 trillion. where will it come from? did stamford come up with the answer? no, but the eu which is one of the richest blocs in the world has taken this direction very clearly, there will also be the new commission president in davos with the new green deal which has put the money on the table. and basically this plan is very

detailed, the green deal from the eu, it has been analysed last week in the european parliament, and it is real. it is basically putting a lot of money, 100 billion euros for the time being, which is going to go where it hurts, so how do we close down the carbon fossil fuels industry? there will be a lot ofjob losses, a lot of restructuring to do, and how do we transition? that is the money on the table. and i think this is new. some will say, sir david attenborough said, it was china that needed to set an example. annalisa mentions europe, but what about the big fast—growing economies, china, india, and of course what is the us doing? the us is not as catastrophic as one would think, because some of the big important industrial states like california are passing legislation and taking action and some of the us—based tech companies are taking a very strong, aggressive stance to go carbon

negative in ten years is really ambitious. i'm not quite sure how one does that. but the federal government, donald trump does not believe in it, so that is having a very strong impact rippling through the system. so the us, the people who believe in climate change are hanging their heads at what's happening in the white house on that. going back to the point about financial incentives and capitalism regulated to what degree, do you see 2020 as potentially a year that is a watershed, that people really do something different rather than just talking differently? i think the political atmosphere has changed. i am a little sceptical, i want to think this is a real watershed because i think it is such

an important issue. i think we still have not seen the political proof of that, i think if you look at emmanuel macron in france, for instance, who raised fuel duties and, in part, led to the gilet jaune and the national demonstrations against him. other leaders around the world will use that as either proof or a rationale or an excuse to say, look, this all sounds good on paper but this costs money, it requires economic choices, and i'm not sure we are there yet. and i think annalisa is right, i think when you have people like mark carney saying that, serious members of the economic... financial elite insiders. and indeed greta thunberg. it takes around 50 years for an idea to become fashionable in the west,

and this idea has not become fashionable. the first time they talked about it was harold wilson in 1964 during the general election, that the planet is in danger and so on. mrs thatcher talked about it at the united nations during her speech day, but gradually it has become fashionable, for example a few years ago it was the ozone hole we were worried about, before that it was colonialism, before that it was development... and is fashionable enough to trigger action? i don't think so. i don't expect anything to come out of places like davos. i went to davos for the first meeting in 20 years because human affairs cannot be planned. this is a pseudo—marxian idea that some people can sit down... i am going to take your pseudo—marxian idea and one word from each of you on the individual action that can be planned, i know the big structural issues

are less easy to plan. greg, what is your resolution for 2020? i have dropped red meat and pretty much all meat. annalisa? yes, the same, trying to be much more vegan and i cycle and i recycle. ned, do you still fly? i fly less and less but it's a function of being 98 years old, i do a lot less of a lot of things! yeah, have you given up fast fashion? you look very fashionable. maybe i buy fewer shoes, i am obsessed with shoes. but i never wear them. i wish we had longer to discuss that. that's it for dateline london for this week. we're back next week at the same time. goodbye.

hello. it's bitterly cold out and about. it looks like it will be the coldest night of the winter so far. and frost, ice and increasingly patchy fog will feature in the forecast for the next few days. in fact, with some sunshine and a lot of dry weather as well, though the sunshine will tend to fade as these weak weather fronts come around our area of high pressure and bring more cloud with them. but for the most part it's dry, some showers lingering in the far north and west of scotland and some rain and sleet is coming into eastern parts of england, especially east anglia. so with a widespread frost, —5 or —6 in the countryside, obviously ice will be a concern, especially where we have had the showers, but it has been so damp. freezing fog, especially

in the likes of the severn valley up through the welsh marches, the cheshire plains, not exclusively here, parts of northern ireland and scotland as well, it will struggle to lift. for most of us it is dry, plenty of sunshine, mostly hazy in the north with the approach of this weather front. temperatures should get to about average where we clear the fog. some bright and crisp sunshine. however, we do pull in more cloud and a stronger breeze and a little bit of rain for the far north of scotland, the northern isles, and that cloud will tend to hang around as we go through sunday night and into monday, which means if we run the temperature profile through the night, the drop in temperature, it will not get quite as cold through tonight, sunday night into monday, as it does again, harsh frost for many of us further south. again, freezing fog. that is going to be a concern for the morning rush hour on monday. with patches around, being patchy makes it more dangerous

welcome to bbc news — i'm maryam moshiri. our top stories: a deal‘s agreed on harry and meghan dropping royal duties — the couple lose their royal titles and public funding. president trump's lawyers give their first formal response to his impeachment — they say it's a brazen attempt by his rivals to interfere in the upcoming election. in the lebanese capital, hundreds are hurt in clashes between police and demonstrators — the worst day of violence since anti—government protests began three months ago. from fires to floods, scorched parts of australia's east coast are now battered by heavy rain and thunderstorms.