hello, and welcome to dateline london. this week: new us sanctions on chinese telecoms giant, huawei — death sentence or chance to shine? and the competence or otherwise of your ruling class — the truth according to coronavirus. my guests on socially distanced screen — isobel hilton of the website, china dialogue, ned temko of the christian science monitor. and here in the studio — vincent ni of the bbc world service. "victorious warriors win first and then go to war, defeated warriors go to war first and then seek to win." wisdom from china's favourite strategy manual, the art of war. it may have been written 2,500 years

ago, but chinese leaders and tech bosses may be reciting favourite sun tzu quotes at each other this weekend as the us imposes a near blanket ban on the supply of computer chips to huawei. ned, use outdoors. as there is a us attempt to kill off huawei?” ned, use outdoors. as there is a us attempt to kill off huawei? i think even among the most hawkish voices on china in the trump administration, there is a recognition that horse has bolted, it is simply impossible to talk about destroying a company of the size and international reach of huawei, which after all is either the second largest or largest smartphone producer in the whole world. very much on the table is a

desire to cut huawei down to size, specifically, to limit its participation is possible to eliminate its participation in the next generation of 56 telecommunications network, at least in western countries. there is a real concern in washington, and to a certain degree in other european countries have now, about the security implications of too great an involvement of huawei in things like 56. although it is nominally a privately held company, it has benefited from enormous state financial support, and like any private company in an economy which is essentially controlled by the state, it is ultimately beholden to the state, to the government, and even to the chinese security services, so that's a real concern. the only thing i would add is that

this is not just the only thing i would add is that this is notjust about technology, it is not even just about trade wards — it is something that has to be seen in a wider political context because it is also about politics. we will come to that, but let's they we re we will come to that, but let's they were huawei for a moment. huawei has had two years under intense american pressure, has not been long enough to stockpile the chips that they need to survive? huawei would say yes, depending on how long that would be. the company claims it has two worth of chips stockpiled. analysts would probably think that is overblown, it is more like six months. —— two years worth of chips. i don't think that would make it any less series even if they have there to make the year is, because then there is the question of what happens then. ned was describing, if

you like, the first phase of us hostility to huawei, which was about trying to limit huawei's markets, so trying to limit huawei's markets, so trying to limit huawei's markets, so trying to exclude from 56 and so on. this is about huawei's capacity to manufacture. 90% of huawei's productions need semiconductors. when the us department of commerce puts huawei and's rivals on the list two years ago, it found itself in the same situation— cut off from a supply of american chips. four months later, the company was pretty much on his knees and she jinping her to call donald trump and ask for a favour, which donald trump duly granted. although huawei has not been planning for sustained hostilities, the fundamental problem remains that you cannot simply

switch suppliers. huawei does manufacture a kind of custom made chip, but it relies on you is design and licensing. it is really stymied at this point, and so it's best bed, i suppose, ads and of an improvement in the us— china relationship, which is pretty uncertain, is that the chinese government puts sufficient backing and sufficient initiative into developing china's own capacity to produce these chips. so far that hasn't really worked. there are technologies that china hasn't really mastered. we tend to think it is now a technological superpower, in some sectors it is. but in others, itjust isn't and is not easy. right now, you have a situation in which a new company which uses any form of us technology or licensing is allowed to supply

huawei. in the short term, you might expect the chinese to cheat a bit. so companies not on the entity list, being coerced to putting their chips huawei's away. again, that is not a solution. vincent, what is your take on this? we haven't talked about whether there's any room for retaliation from beijing in support of what is a national champion. china's biggest weapon is a strong consumer market. i think china will be holding off a not because we do not know what who will be in at the white house next year. isobel talked about semiconductors which is real at the core of any sophisticated technology. indeed, much of the american investment in china is about technology. for example, one of the larger semiconductor manufacturers in the world is an american company which again two

thirds of revenue from chinese markets. coming back to the point nat ned made about this being part ofa nat ned made about this being part of a wider strategic front between the us and china as the world's of a wider strategic front between the us and china as the worlds to big superpowers. we obviously now have on the table notjust huawei and big tech, notjust cancel trade talks, but also hong kong, south china sea, taiwan, sinnjang. how long will these issues play in a us presidential election? it is a fairly long mania. i'm not sure in how much —— detail each of those issues will play. what is certain is that us—china relations writ large are going to be a big deal. one reason is that president donald trump has made china a kind of a key issue in the sense that is a way of

deflecting accusations about the us federal government's response or lack of response to the covid pandemic on to china. that is clearly been the strategy for some one now. it is now aligned with an attempt to try and paintjoe biden and the democratic party, as a whole, as somehow soft on china. in a way, you have a kind of political arms race emerging in which both major parties are going to be talking a lot offered on china. add to about the fact that there is genuine concern and upset among, for instance, senior democrats in congress over the crackdown in hong kong, over the treatment of the uighur muslims and the confinement cou nts uighur muslims and the confinement counts on the mainland. generally, there is a chill in superpower

relations, which is not helped by the fact that popular views in china and the us are at a low. in part due to the background effects of the covid pandemic. isobel, giving two of the actual meat of the arguments between the us and china and the strategic ways that they play out, soon zoo's victorious warrior analogy, is there a side that has made sure to win for going toward or is there a risk of this calculation in washington or beijing? —— sun tzu's victorious warrior analogy. i'm sorry, i didn't realise that was for me. there is clearly miscalculation. camp makes a lot of noise about his china policy,

particularly on things like tariff, which is damaging and pay for it by the american consumer. even at this technological war, if apple loses its china market, it's a big deal for them so they are definitely missteps an own goals. i do not see much confidence on either side, quite honestly. i don't think donald trump is famous for planning. we like to think china is famous for planning, although that might be a bit overblown. on the one hand, i think she jinping has benefited from the mistakes of the current us administration, but at the same time he has overreached. as ned said, china's reputation around the world is pretty low. i think in terms of how china sees the situation, leaving aside its own internal

difficulties, i think that china is fairly confident that its particular culmination of state power and business muscle remains strong, at the huge internal market if the worst comes to the worst. president 6 pink does give the impression of steady leadership, but neither leader is gaining popularity in the world. after all to be a leader, you need to have willing followers. the chinese system does not appeal to many parts of the world any more than the person of donald trump appeals to any part of the world. it is easier to fix the donald trump question line the chinese system, so i guess in the long run the united states will recover its position. but i don't see this as a win for either side right now. how do you read the situation inside china? you

spend a lot of time watching the formation of policy in china. who are the voices, who makes the policy and such a vital relationship such as us and china? when it comes to such a relationship, it is ultimately the politburo and she jinping who calls the shots. there is also some really interesting debate coming out of china, it is a pity it is not covered by english media. there is a perception outside of china that there is only one strand of thinking and china, but actually some of them had value for provoking banking on us—china relations. for example, a professor who famously criticise the president. a former academic from the central party? the core of the communism party reeling in the country. these are the voices are

brewing in the country, they do exist in china. going back to isobel's point, i think this is exactly where the problem lies. at the moment, us and china leaders are trying to undermine each other false arts of tactics, but we do not know exactly what they want. in other words, it is about lack of leadership, it is also about a lack of vision. that brings us to our second large topic of the programme. what do you want in a leader? americans, tanzanians, new zealanders and others will ask themselves this question in elections over the coming weeks. but we've all been forced to ponder the question in the eight months since the coronavirus pandemic tested public life across the globe. have we changed our view of what constitutes competence and have our leaders changed accordingly? isobel? it seems to me that what we

wa nt isobel? it seems to me that what we want ina isobel? it seems to me that what we want in a leader is based on the date are now emerging from the pandemic is that you are far better off if you only doubt is a women. that is more than an impression of the top there was a recent study in more than 170 countries which measured pandemic performance in terms of death rate and so on. the countries led by women came out way in the front— leaders were responsive and willing to take risks, they lock down earlier and listen to the science more intelligent. they suffered for your desk by a factor of six in some cases, they came out earlier and stronger. —— they suffered deaths. the majority of countries led by men, the worse ones appear to be brazil, the us and the uk. again, judge on the data. what do they have in common? well, all of these three

are insurgent governments— leaders who came in promising to smash the syste m who came in promising to smash the system which they claimed was not working. so they are not collaborative, they are using untested theories, and they have a very low willingness to use the machinery of government intelligently. the machinery of government, we can complain about bureaucracy, but when the civil service works, it is there to stop politicians making complete idiots of themselves by pointing out their bright ideas were tied 20 years ago and did it work there and won't work now. that is a very important safety net when you have an untested set of politicians. so it's all a bit of a disaster. the second factor, i would say, is that an insurgent government, ideology tends to matter more than competence. so you don't to have loyal ministers, chosen for loyalty i do not necessarily for the

past performance. when they make mistakes, as we have discovered in this country, they are not sacked because loyalty matters more than anything that is a set of characteristics, honestly, that you do not want in a leader.|j characteristics, honestly, that you do not want in a leader. i want to build on something that isobel said. that is that it is a crucial question because we are in a period pre—covid work there was this tide of populist leaders, one strand of which that the notion that experts don't matter, the civil service as pa rt don't matter, the civil service as part of nefarious deep stage. it drew ona part of nefarious deep stage. it drew on a kind of sense of alienation from existing is distrust of government, angered. covid has been a wake—up call and isobel is com pletely been a wake—up call and isobel is completely right. most of the successful cases of near competence

are government run by women, but they share other things. they have all of the science, the facts, they have communicated well, they have told the truth to their own people. asa told the truth to their own people. as a result, by and large, they have brought people along with them. that is what governments, in theory, in this pre—populist age, werejudged on. what is going to be fascinating now is whether this renewed sense of that government actually matters, and that when you are faced with a crisis, particularly a crisis like covid, which can't be treated away and doesn't listen to rhetoric, doesn't follow a particular ideology— what you need a government to do is do itsjob. people like jacinda and hearn in new zealand, angela merkel, with a scientific

background herself in germany. i will take one non—women example. after a disastrous start, the state governor of new york, andrew cuomo, who by and large followed the new zealand and germany playbook— which was follow the science, communicate clearly. as a result, he got his own constituency to follow him. one other women to add to the list is the leader of taiwan. taiwan having a very notably low death rate. vincent, i want to ask if there is a third group? we have talked about the successful and unsuccessful, but is there a third group that started slow but has actually risen to the challenge? some might say that might include shejinping of china, for example. china was initially criticised for the handling of the

coronavirus. this week, there was in an circling on the internet in wuhan where thousands of people were having a pool party. this shows that china is handling quite well. there is also damaged on to china's image globally because china was the first victim of the virus, then is the permit started engaging in conspiracy theories with american diplomats, then you see that this tit—for—tat. this is time of a great health and political crisis. it in his collaboration, it's music superpowers to come together and talk about the solution rather than engaging and the sort of tit—for—tat conspiracy theory. you are now about national leadership, but global leadership? exactly. given the two economies, military sizes, etc — they should naturally take a global leadership when it comes to bulk

global goods, iea global health crisis for example. you talk about high wine, it was credited for handling this critical quite well. —— you talked about taiwan. we are talking about the competency of leadership, we are also talk about the competency of state institutions. on top of that, i would also say that it is a trust in state institutions which it is very important. these days in asia, a lot of people are still questioning why there is still such political debate in the west when it comes to wearing face masks or not. hasn't everyone agreed to wear a face mask now? governments, at least. and, finally, there's so much that we haven t had time to talk about. so, in the few minutes we have left, why don't you each tell us briefly

what news story has caught your eye in the past week and why? ned, what has caught your eye in the past week? one thing that i think will be getting a lot more play, the bbc is giving some play, is the plight of alexei john michael alexei navalny, the russian political leader who was poisoned and has now been evacuated to germany for medical care. more broadly, politics in this age of covid has gotten much less attention that it would ordinarily do, particularly move earlier this year of vladimir putin, whom navalny has consistently criticised, to amend the constitution and in effect and term limits and give him a pathway to become president for life. thank you for bringing that went to our attention. isobel, what about you?” have to say, i was momentarily cheered mostly by the news of the

arrest of steve banning on money laundering charges. only perhaps are balanced by the fact that... inaudible. extraordinary persistence of a very wild conspiracy theories, . inaudible. . allegations, charges at the moment, rather than a conviction. in the

case of the navalny, sudden sickness suspected as poisoning, not yet confirmed by medical staff. vincent, has there been a story that has jumped out for you?” has there been a story that has jumped out for you? i have been paying a lot of attention to belarus. president lukashenko has vowed to crush these protests in the next few days this is quite unfortunate if it happens. today, we have been talking a lot about sun tzu and his wisdom and the art of winning a war, but he also has something to say about the art of leadership. he says that i eagerly doubt leads by example, not by force. in this age, it is very easy force. in this age, it is very easy for authoritarian leaders to fit in their population with state forces. then we have seen in the past these tactics often backfire. words of wisdom are found in china notjust apply to china, but also europe. that lukashenko apply to china, but also europe. that lu kashenko point. apply to china, but also europe.

that lukashenko point. with congratulations on his victory from beijing and moscow. whatever sun tzu 40,500 beijing and moscow. whatever sun tzu 110,500 years ago, the fact is that the domination of force in your country can do so could you all kinds of country. —— 2500 years ago. we have a leadership which has loosely formed a camp in supporting each other when it comes to crisis. we have also seen, at the same time, the west trying to form lines for themselves to counter countries like china or russia. at the moment, there is no global leadership. what we have seen is a line sees with each other. going back to the russian story at that ned was talking about. isobel, a word on that situation and what the outside world is about russia? how many

seconds do i have too sort the russia problem? any sign of any kind of organisational coherence from europe and north america on the issue? i think, actually, the europe and north america on the issue? ithink, actually, the eu is becoming increasingly coherent in its approach, both to russia and china. as the us electoral season gets under way, i think increasingly the steady shift in global diplomacy is going to be europe. ned, a line from you to close? i think thisjust underlines the importance of the november presidential election, because among one of the many things on the ballot is the contrast between trump kind of going alone foreign policy, if you can call it that, and a more traditional approach which joe biden that, and a more traditional approach whichjoe biden and the

democrats when it is likely to begin with a reinvigoration of old alliances. we have to leave it there. thank you to all three of my guests. that's it for dateline london for this week — we're back next week at the same time. goodbye. yesterday's gales have eased, but it is still a little on the breezy side outside, quite a few showers in the forecast today. some of us have already had them, one or two blustery, but for the vast majority of the uk today isn't looking too bad at all. lengthy sunny spells. you can see the clouds swirling over the uk, all linked to a very large area of low pressure, but it is now

in the process of pulling away out into the norwegian sea, and behind it still some showers lurking around, and the wind hasn't completely died down. so, the forecast for this afternoon — showers moving through northern ireland, the irish sea, the lake district and the north west, and scattered showers elsewhere. but the vast majority of us should have a fine day. 23 in london, 18 expected in glasgow and edinburgh. the showers continue through this evening and overnight across the central swathe of the uk, and then it dries out for most of us, clear spells and not a cold night, temperatures no lower than 14 in london, cardiff or liverpool a little fresher in northern scotland, around nine or ten. sunday's winds will be lighter still, but showers again looking around the north west of england, wales and scotland too. temperatures will range from 23 again in london, but only round the mid teens in aberdeen, so a little fresher across scotland on sunday.

here is a heads—up for the weather into the week. it will turn very unsettled again, particularly around tuesday and wednesday. another bout of gale force winds and heavy rain. the jet stream will whip up an atlantic storm, it really does look as though it is going to be a particularly unpleasant spell of weather sometime in the middle of the week. monday's weather forecast, a few showers across some western and northern areas, some of them moving further east too during the course of the day, but essentially speaking not a bad one. it is this area of weather that will beat fast approaching, possibly as early as the early hours of tuesday. here is the summary for the next few days, a mixture this weekend with sunshine and showers, monday a few showers around, but the really wet and windy weather will probably arrive tuesday.

this is bbc news with the latest headlines for viewers in the uk and around the world. russian opposition leader alexei navalny is receiving treatment in berlin after being airlifted out of russia, where he fell seriously ill.