hello, and welcome to the programme that brings together leading commentators in the uk with the correspondents who write, broadcast and blog for audiences back home from the dateline: london. just one topic for us this week: how 20 years of commitment to afghanistan dissolved in a matter of days and what the consequences may be for the people of afghanistan, its neighbours and the rest of the world. joining us are janet daley, columnist with the sunday telegraph; michael goldfarb, host of the podcast, the first rough draft of history, and with me in the studio,

the guardian's china editor, vincent knee. welcome to all of you. it's good to happy with us. janet, let's begin with what this means that if we can come a little bit, from the uk. brycejohnson has been trying to develop an independent foreign policy. we know it's been pretty clear that this was not a decision that the british particularly wanted to take at this moment. what is this and what's happening in afghanistan tell us about britain's influence in washington, its military capability and its ability to adopt a leadership role, do you think? well, it's not at all— leadership role, do you think? well, it's not at all surprising _ leadership role, do you think? well, it's not at all surprising that - leadership role, do you think? in it's not at all surprising that the foreign policies of the uk and us should be disparaging, because they are prominent members of nato, and nato has been an exact existence of a crisis ever since the cold war ended. it was devised, if we all remember, and when communism

collapsed, there was no morris soviet union to oppose. the obvious question is what is nato for? and within ten years of communism collapsing, we had 9/11, and the rise of islamist terrorism and so nato became basically a counterterrorism outfit, and that was its mantra. so that's why biden can say the reason that we are able to pull out of afghanistan that we wanted to pull out of afghanistan was that we felt they resolve the terrorism problem in afghanistan. they killed bin laden, they got rid of al-qaeda in afghanistan, so that has got nothing to do with the original conception of nato, which was to act not only as a military adversary, but as an ideological adversary, but as an ideological adversary to the soviet union. by now we seem to be in his peculiar vacuum where there is an entirely

new global dynamic, and it's not ideological at all, it's really crudely nationalist. the motives of china and russia and iran now it is not that black that is developing that dynamic which will involve afghanistan very heavily, i fear, it's not the old ideological argument of how should people live of a capitalist society. it's much more to do with the and maryjane totalitarian empires of china, which is really totalitarian capitalism. it's not really a communist society and all, and f nato is to survive with that kind of cooperation with had between the uk and the us and other european allies is to survive commits going to have to come to terms with this entirely new global political dynamics.— terms with this entirely new global political dynamics. michael, george robinson who _ political dynamics. michael, george robinson who is _ political dynamics. michael, george robinson who is nato's _ political dynamics. michael, george robinson who is nato's secretary i robinson who is nato's secretary general at the start of the century

and who was the man who effectively convened the meeting that said we are going in because one country has been threatened and i nato member by the attacks on 9/11, so we are all frightened, so we alljoin in. he says he thinks the decision by america now has undermined the organisation and raises real question marks about its credibility and alliance. given what janet was saying there we are now entering a much more dangerous phase where there isn't a straightforward division and where we can't guarantee are rely on the people we thought we could rely on. the neck, that was for me. this is this thought we could rely on. the neck, that was for me. this is— that was for me. this is this is the roblem that was for me. this is this is the problem with _ that was for me. this is this is the problem with not _ that was for me. this is this is the problem with not being _ that was for me. this is this is the problem with not being in - that was for me. this is this is the problem with not being in the - problem with not being in the studio — problem with not being in the studio. , , ., problem with not being in the studio. , ,, . ~ .,, studio. they will get you back as soon as they _ studio. they will get you back as soon as they can, _ studio. they will get you back as soon as they can, when - studio. they will get you back as soon as they can, when the - studio. they will get you back as i soon as they can, when the people studio. they will get you back as - soon as they can, when the people in charge tell us we can have you back, but i hope it will be very soon and stop the good, good. it's very interesting— stop the good, good. it's very interestin: . . . . . interesting clinic clinic that you brina u- interesting clinic clinic that you bring no george _ interesting clinic clinic that you bring up george robinson. - interesting clinic clinic that you bring up george robinson. i i interesting clinic clinic that you i bring up george robinson. i think interesting clinic clinic that you - bring up george robinson. i think of him as— bring up george robinson. i think of

him as being someone from the glory days from _ him as being someone from the glory days from the anglo—american duorroiy. — days from the anglo—american duopoly, and that thing is, you know. — duopoly, and that thing is, you know, during the blair administration, the thing is that i can remember back covering vests in the early— can remember back covering vests in the early 19905 former yugoslavia wa5 the early 19905 former yugoslavia was falling apart in bosnia wa5 the early 19905 former yugoslavia was falling apart in bosnia was in agony _ was falling apart in bosnia was in agony the — was falling apart in bosnia was in agony. the ability to mar5hal the naio _ agony. the ability to mar5hal the naio and — agony. the ability to mar5hal the nato and the un and until cri5p action— nato and the un and until cri5p action on— nato and the un and until cri5p action on european soil was really hard _ action on european soil was really hard it_ action on european soil was really hard it was— action on european soil was really hard. it was like herding cat5 hard. it was like herding cats to use a _ hard. it was like herding cats to use a cliche. and now this is something that slightly different. i would _ something that slightly different. i would say that, you know... the would 5ay that, you know... the reality— would 5ay that, you know... the reality of— would say that, you know... the reality of this adventure was that the us— reality of this adventure was that the us used nato and article five was invoked and all of that, but really— was invoked and all of that, but really it— was invoked and all of that, but really it was mostly the us, a

little — really it was mostly the us, a little of — really it was mostly the us, a little of britain, and i remember hearing — little of britain, and i remember hearing stories about how germany had been _ hearing stories about how germany had been assigned to some part of afghanistan where there was likely to be absolutely no fighting because germany _ to be absolutely no fighting because germany has very, very strong reservations about how to very action— reservations about how to very action based on historical reasons. thus_ action based on historical reasons. thus historical reasons and did 75 years— thus historical reasons and did 75 years ago. — thus historical reasons and did 75 years ago, they may have to reconsider and the rest of this century. — reconsider and the rest of this century, so what you have to take on board _ century, so what you have to take on board with _ century, so what you have to take on board with this is that nidal is a multinational, multilateral organisation, but really, it's two organisation, but really, it's two or three — organisation, but really, it's two or three major european powers in the united — or three major european powers in the united states, and on afghanistan, let's be very, very clean _ afghanistan, let's be very, very clean the — afghanistan, let's be very, very clear. the us spent roughly $2 trillion _ clear. the us spent roughly $2 trillion over the last 20 years in the afghanistan adventure. the united — the afghanistan adventure. the united kingdom spends about upwards

of 80 billion. now, if you do that ratio _ of 80 billion. now, if you do that ratio and — of 80 billion. now, if you do that ratio and a — of 80 billion. now, if you do that ratio and a commercial situation, 80 billion— ratio and a commercial situation, 80 billion to _ ratio and a commercial situation, 80 billion to 2 _ ratio and a commercial situation, 80 billion to 2 trillion, you know, you are not— billion to 2 trillion, you know, you are not going to get a seat on the floor~ nato — are not going to get a seat on the floor. nato was a convenience umbrella, _ floor. nato was a convenience umbrella, but this has always been a united _ umbrella, but this has always been a united states venture, and frankly, watching _ united states venture, and frankly, watching some of the scenes in parliament this week, i am amazed that so— parliament this week, i am amazed that so many people all particularly on the _ that so many people all particularly on the conservative backbench as, you know. — on the conservative backbench as, you know, forgot that basic facts. when _ you know, forgot that basic facts. when you — you know, forgot that basic facts. when you put all that money or all those _ when you put all that money or all those lives — when you put all that money or all those lives into an adventure, basically— those lives into an adventure, basically you are calling the shots. it basically you are calling the shots. it doesn't — basically you are calling the shots. it doesn't matter whether you call yourself _ it doesn't matter whether you call yourself i — it doesn't matter whether you call yourself i nato adventure or not, this is— yourself i nato adventure or not, this is basically a united states adventure. this is basically a united states adventure-— this is basically a united states adventure. , , �* , ., ~ this is basically a united states adventure. , , �* , ., ,, ., adventure. then sends, let's talk a bit more about _ adventure. then sends, let's talk a bit more about afghanistan - adventure. then sends, let's talk a bit more about afghanistan itself. l bit more about afghanistan itself. the question that many will ask, how quickly the governments melted away, how quickly the military melted

away. joe biden friday evening address the nation and use the phrase, i think he said there were 300 afghan soldiers, 300,000, but actually, nobody actually thinks it was 300,000 because a lot of this was 300,000 because a lot of this was money that was corruptly diverted. however many soldiers that recommend that all vanished very quickly. why was the afghan government so apparently unloved and afghanistan? this government so apparently unloved and afr hanistan? , , , ., afghanistan? this is the question that everyone _ afghanistan? this is the question that everyone is _ afghanistan? this is the question that everyone is asking. - afghanistan? this is the question | that everyone is asking. everyone afghanistan? this is the question i that everyone is asking. everyone is doing soul—searching about why this government collapsed so quickly after 20 years of being backed up by the united states. this is also the question that will come back to hunched joe biden in the years to come will stop when it comes to running of the governance committee afghan government doesn't really have a good reputation for being effective, being clean, and this week, there were pictures of the nephew posing in dubai, these

luxurious lifestyles. the survey examples of how this government has failed. going back injanuary talking about the uk and the us, i think this shouldn't come as a surprise. joe biden won the american presidency under the premise that his foreign policy will be benefiting american middle class. so this calculation is if it's not directly benefiting the american middle class, why don't we just go out entirely? and there were no boats in the afghan war. and there were no boats in the afghan war-— and there were no boats in the afghan war. and there were no boats in the afuhanwar. , ~ , , afghan war. absolutely. and yes i have to think— afghan war. absolutely. and yes i have to think about _ afghan war. absolutely. and yes i have to think about the _ afghan war. absolutely. and yes i have to think about the legacy, i afghan war. absolutely. and yes i | have to think about the legacy, he does not want to be that president associated with the perpetual war in afghanistan. associated with the perpetual war in afr hanistan. �* , associated with the perpetual war in afuhanistan. �* , ., ~ associated with the perpetual war in afuhanistan. �*, ., ,, ., afghanistan. let's talk about continuing — afghanistan. let's talk about continuing on _ afghanistan. let's talk about continuing on the _ afghanistan. let's talk about continuing on the american i afghanistan. let's talk about - continuing on the american being, if we may, michael. biden, in a sense, on friday, he decided to head back and hit back hard, so we had this thing about no... that it can secure

an airport, hundreds of thousands of miles away and gets people home. but that still ongoing. we will see what securing the airport amounts to. and of the practicalities of that, he's clearly trying to this is a demonstration of american power, and to some extent that that to the american homeland that came from afghanistan has gone. al-qaeda is a much diminished forest, and actually come if america looks at the places where terrorism could become a threat, there are other places, particularly the middle east and north africa. particularly the middle east and north africa-— particularly the middle east and north africa. , ., ., north africa. exactly. in one of the most interesting _ north africa. exactly. in one of the most interesting things _ north africa. exactly. in one of the most interesting things that - north africa. exactly. in one of the most interesting things that has i most interesting things that has bubbling up from people who study terrorism _ bubbling up from people who study terrorism and have been doing since, well, _ terrorism and have been doing since, well, for— terrorism and have been doing since, well, for 20 _ terrorism and have been doing since, well, for 20 years, since 9/11 is to know— well, for 20 years, since 9/11 is to know it _ well, for 20 years, since 9/11 is to know it today that there have been isis groups, isis franchise is criticising _ isis groups, isis franchise is

criticising the taliban for not winning _ criticising the taliban for not winning in afghanistan. now, they didn't— winning in afghanistan. now, they didn't win — winning in afghanistan. now, they didn't win byjihad, it was handed to them _ didn't win byjihad, it was handed to them and updates by the united states— to them and updates by the united states to _ to them and updates by the united states to simply with zero, they didn't— states to simply with zero, they didn't earn their victory, and there is a sense — didn't earn their victory, and there is a sense that some planes, to the degree _ is a sense that some planes, to the degree that — is a sense that some planes, to the degree that isis has any presence in afghanistan, that is something that the taliban may have to deal with in the taliban may have to deal with in the future — the taliban may have to deal with in the future. what has happened in the last 20 _ the future. what has happened in the last 20 years, al-qaeda was driven into the _ last 20 years, al-qaeda was driven into the mountains between afghanistan and pakistan very quickly — afghanistan and pakistan very quickly. it was a very quick victory _ quickly. it was a very quick victory. people forget that. i don't victory. people forget that. idon't think— victory. people forget that. idon't think any— victory. people forget that. i don't think any historian from even 500 years— think any historian from even 500 years from — think any historian from even 500 years from now well say that if the george _ years from now well say that if the george bush administration had not pursued _ george bush administration had not pursued the al-qaeda remnants into the caves— pursued the al-qaeda remnants into the caves and found 05ama bin laden and completed the mission in december of 2001 instead of starting to withdraw troops and starting to

build _ to withdraw troops and starting to build up _ to withdraw troops and starting to build up to invade iraq, the whole story— build up to invade iraq, the whole story that — build up to invade iraq, the whole story that are talking about and it would've — story that are talking about and it would've been very, very different. and while — would've been very, very different. and while there has been all this focus _ and while there has been all this focus and — and while there has been all this focus and concentration on afghanistan and a lot of, you know, troops _ afghanistan and a lot of, you know, troops tied — afghanistan and a lot of, you know, troops tied down from a lot of money tied down— troops tied down from a lot of money tied down some of the franchise of isis, al-qaeda have grown, metastasized, isis grew out of the iraq occupation from people who were imprisoned _ iraq occupation from people who were imprisoned by the americans in iraq. now they— imprisoned by the americans in iraq. now they are across central africa. they _ now they are across central africa. they are _ now they are across central africa. they are in — now they are across central africa. they are in the horn of africa. and you know. — they are in the horn of africa. and you know, they are also, let's not forget, for— you know, they are also, let's not forget, for the most part, they are no longer— forget, for the most part, they are no longer operating on american or european _ no longer operating on american or european soil. so another thing for european 5oil. so another thing for americans— european soil. so another thing for americans and europeans to forget. unfortunately, if you live in those countries, — unfortunately, if you live in those countries, northern parts of nigeria. _ countries, northern parts of nigeria, but they are a part of daily— nigeria, but they are a part of daily life _ nigeria, but they are a part of daily life. they are a danger to you every _ daily life. they are a danger to you every single day. you daily life. they are a danger to you

every single day-— every single day. you mentioned that, and every single day. you mentioned that. and it's _ every single day. you mentioned that, and it's a _ every single day. you mentioned that, and it's a very _ every single day. you mentioned that, and it's a very good - every single day. you mentioned that, and it's a very good point. | that, and it's a very good point. janet, on some of these broader questions that got caught up in the aftermath of the afghan invasion, there was an interesting quote from joe biden in which he said the idea that that we are able to deal with the rights of women when he was being interviewed earlier in the week, around the world, by military force, is not rational. but without that military presence in afghanistan, does america have any potential leverage over the regime that will be left there?— that will be left there? probably not. it american _ that will be left there? probably not. it american policy - that will be left there? probably not. it american policy on - that will be left there? probably not. it american policy on this l that will be left there? probably l not. it american policy on this has been incoherent for a long time when obama was first elected. afghanistan was the right work, so we will persevere with the war in afghanistan and pull out then. janet is resent, afghanistan and pull out then. janet is present. i— afghanistan and pull out then. janet is present, i will— afghanistan and pull out then. janet is present, i will come _ afghanistan and pull out then. janet is present, i will come back to you. vincent, let me ask you, does this play to china's hands at all? because china is just about

afghanistan. it’s because china is “ust about afghanistan._ because china is “ust about afuhanistan. �*, . , ., afghanistan. it's a small border shared with _ afghanistan. it's a small border shared with afghanistan. - afghanistan. it's a small border shared with afghanistan. i - afghanistan. it's a small borderj shared with afghanistan. i think afghanistan. it's a small border l shared with afghanistan. i think if we come into this question with the mindset of a great power of competition. american �*s losses china's gain, then probably yes, but i'm afraid that duality is much more complex. it's very, very nervous about it. you know, china thinks afghanistan is a quagmire, and they look at history being afghanistan as neighbourfor a long time in the 19th century and early 20th century, it was britain, and then 20th century it was soviet union. now the zist century it was soviet union. now the 21st century is the united states. such chinese state media are calling afghanistan the graveyard of empires. so you can see how china actually thinks of this issue. it's not necessarily american glass and china's gain. not necessarily american glass and china's gain-— china's gain. that's interesting. has afghanistan _ china's gain. that's interesting. has afghanistan proved - china's gain. that's interesting. has afghanistan proved that. china's gain. that's interesting. | has afghanistan proved that the british empire and the concept was to no longer project power in a way

that so comfortably and confidently for a couple of centuries or more. you can certainly say that about how humiliating it was, janet, for the soviet union after having to withdraw afghanistan. it didn't last very long after that.— very long after that. soviet union's vietnam. very long after that. soviet union's vietnam- they _ very long after that. soviet union's vietnam. they got _ very long after that. soviet union's vietnam. they got bogged - very long after that. soviet union's vietnam. they got bogged down i very long after that. soviet union's i vietnam. they got bogged down and across them enormously that ability. they had terrible consequences in terms of deaths of their own troops and very right with difficulty in withdrawing. america's policy generally an intervention has been so inconsistent i think before you lost me, president obama's failure to intervene in syria had phenomenally damaging consequences in damaged america's credibility as an intervention. so i think without the presence or at least the possibility of a military intervention, america is nowhere in this game and the chinese which is

definitely on the merchant has serious intentions, for at the start of at least economic empire building, if not military empire building, if not military empire building, its can go unchecked. michael, both president obama and therefore biden was in the end biden administration and nowjoe biden both seem to believe that the us needs to tilt towards those come in at the very least because of its concerns about china as janet was saying. how well those countries it seeks to influence in the region, do you think, look at what has happened in afghanistan and about the time however as he put it, relatively abrupt departure of the americans? well it's not relatively abrupt, and that's— well it's not relatively abrupt, and that's the — well it's not relatively abrupt, and that's the first thing. and one hopes— that's the first thing. and one hopes that the leaders of the pacific— hopes that the leaders of the pacific region countries don't spend all day— pacific region countries don't spend all day on _ pacific region countries don't spend all day on twitter, because that's no way— all day on twitter, because that's no way to— all day on twitter, because that's no way to learn about the world. i

wanted _ no way to learn about the world. i wanted to — no way to learn about the world. i wanted to pick up the two things that both — wanted to pick up the two things that bothjanet and wanted to pick up the two things that both janet and fends wanted to pick up the two things that bothjanet and fends into wanted to pick up the two things that both janet and fends into a saint— that both janet and fends into a saint because in some ways they are related _ saint because in some ways they are related -- _ saint because in some ways they are related —— been since. one thing about— related —— been since. one thing about american intervention over the last 30 _ about american intervention over the last 30 years is that it's become 'u5t last 30 years is that it's become just a _ last 30 years is that it's become just a little bit too much like other— just a little bit too much like other forms of american politics, in other— other forms of american politics, in other words. — other forms of american politics, in other words, we went to in iraq and that was— other words, we went to in iraq and that was a _ other words, we went to in iraq and that was a bush administration thing. — that was a bush administration thing. so — that was a bush administration thing, so now we are not going to stay there. — thing, so now we are not going to stay there, that's obama. but we will stay— stay there, that's obama. but we will stay in — stay there, that's obama. but we will stay in afghanistan because there _ will stay in afghanistan because there is— will stay in afghanistan because there is a — will stay in afghanistan because there is a very strong constituency within— there is a very strong constituency within the — there is a very strong constituency within the democratic party for women's — within the democratic party for women's rights, and we would all endorse _ women's rights, and we would all endorse that, but is the military a way to— endorse that, but is the military a way to bring and bring those rights in perpetuity and countries like afghanistan, because women's rights are introduced and all manner of countries — are introduced and all manner of countries all over the world violently, so it is the us going to send _ violently, so it is the us going to send its — violently, so it is the us going to send its armies everywhere to to protect _ send its armies everywhere to to protect women and make sure young -irl5 protect women and make sure young girls can _ protect women and make sure young girls can get educated. they are

not _ girls can get educated. they are not on— girls can get educated. they are not. on then sends planes, what's interesting — not. on then sends planes, what's interesting to me as i remember reading — interesting to me as i remember reading about oats one of the world's— reading about oats one of the world's largest copper deposits is in afghanistan. it'sjust world's largest copper deposits is in afghanistan. it's just south of kabut _ in afghanistan. it's just south of kabul. and the chinese for 15 years has been _ kabul. and the chinese for 15 years has been trying to organise a mine there. _ has been trying to organise a mine there. and — has been trying to organise a mine there, and when i first read about it, i rememberthe article there, and when i first read about it, i remember the article describes you know. — it, i remember the article describes you know, chinese mining engineer is going _ you know, chinese mining engineer is going to _ you know, chinese mining engineer is going to visit — you know, chinese mining engineer is going to visit deposits passed american soldiers, and i thought, my god, we _ american soldiers, and i thought, my god, we are — american soldiers, and i thought, my god, we are paying all this money to provide _ god, we are paying all this money to provide the — god, we are paying all this money to provide the security for our biggest economic— provide the security for our biggest economic rivals to go and dig up one of the _ economic rivals to go and dig up one of the great — economic rivals to go and dig up one of the great deposits of copper, one of the great deposits of copper, one of the _ of the great deposits of copper, one of the most — of the great deposits of copper, one of the most important raw materials on the _ of the most important raw materials on the face — of the most important raw materials on the face of the earth. now that chinese — on the face of the earth. now that chinese if— on the face of the earth. now that chinese, if they want that copper, by the _ chinese, if they want that copper, by the way, — chinese, if they want that copper, by the way, the mind has never been open, _ by the way, the mind has never been open, they— by the way, the mind has never been open, they are still negotiating with the — open, they are still negotiating with the last afghan government. china _ with the last afghan government. china will— with the last afghan government. china will now have to make its own

way in _ china will now have to make its own way in afghanistan, and it's part of the built-in — way in afghanistan, and it's part of the built—in road commander think it will be _ the built—in road commander think it will be very— the built—in road commander think it will be very interesting to see. my own best is — will be very interesting to see. my own best is that the chinese come as janet _ own best is that the chinese come as janet was _ own best is that the chinese come as janet was saying earlier, they are kind of— janet was saying earlier, they are kind of capitalist totalitarian states, _ kind of capitalist totalitarian states, and if their relations with countries — states, and if their relations with countries in africa are anything to id countries in africa are anything to go by, _ countries in africa are anything to go by, they— countries in africa are anything to go by, they won't care about women's rights _ go by, they won't care about women's rights too _ go by, they won't care about women's rights too much. theyjust want to be secure — rights too much. theyjust want to be secure or— rights too much. theyjust want to be secure or digging up the copper. interesting, people know more about that, they talked about this on that programme at the weeks ago, you will find it on previous editions of dateline on the bbc iplayer, we believe that women's rights issue. we can help to achieve something in helping to undermine it, we talked about china, what about russia and iran? they are an islamic republic, but it says in a lot —— an islamic republic that's much more ( n. it's a different brand of islam,

presuming he is not comfortable with the way things are going in afghanistan, and consuming —— about its non—muslim minorities. afghanistan, and consuming -- about its non-muslim minorities.— its non-muslim minorities. russia and iran its non-muslim minorities. russia and iran are _ its non-muslim minorities. russia and iran are both _ its non-muslim minorities. russia and iran are both very _ its non-muslim minorities. russia and iran are both very rate - its non-muslim minorities. russia and iran are both very rate aboutl its non-muslim minorities. russia| and iran are both very rate about a security issue. as was china. i go back to the later. they will constantly be reminded of their own defeat in afghanistan decades ago. it's a very short period of time ago, actually, if you look at the long history of afghanistan. but, you know, it's an economic and security interest, because ultimately they traded quite heavily with each other, but at the same time, iran will be very concerned about the influx of potential refugees. about the influx of potential refugees-— about the influx of potential refugees. about the influx of potential refu~ees. �* , ., , refugees. and the stands as well? absolutely _ refugees. and the stands as well? absolutely. this _ refugees. and the stands as well? absolutely. this was _ refugees. and the stands as well? absolutely. this was a _ refugees. and the stands as well? absolutely. this was a hasty - absolutely. this was a hasty withdrawal by the united states, and it will completely change the geopolitical landscape in the region and. maybe that says a time as monsters, but maybe this is also a

time of the opportunity to far countries to get things right. the economist magazine published an interesting article last week in which they said across asia, democracies are under strain. they mentioned a report by the institute at the university of gothenburg an annual survey of the strength of democracy. it's that india had gone from and neglected democracy to the elected his sacristy. i think of companies like me and my entire incoming effects to military coups. is there a longer—term issue here, do you think i'm about the viability about what after all started out as about what after all started out as a western model of multiparty democracy and a very different part of the world. democracy and a very different part of the world-— of the world. that's a good question- _ of the world. that's a good question- i _ of the world. that's a good question. i think— of the world. that's a good question. i think yes. - of the world. that's a good question. i think yes. we l of the world. that's a good l question. i think yes. we are of the world. that's a good - question. i think yes. we are seeing and witnessing the rise of authoritarianism. countries are being more transactional rather than ideas driven. it's really difficult to say how the future what the

future holds for asia in particular. it's a hugely diverse, but what we see now is another variable, like pandora's box it's very cautious, we are talking about this one week after the us withdrawing history is much longer than that. so we both have to wait and see to see how things will evolve. going back to the coppermine issue. of course, china well talk up its belt in the road, its economic benefits, but if you look at the data, before this withdrawal last year, according to china's on ministry, china's investment, foreign direct investment, foreign direct investment in afghanistan was only $4.4 million. now, given a bit of background, there is a bit of a myth. there is a bit of a method about chinese investment in afghanistan. in comparison, and neighbouring pakistan, china's involvement last year the foreign direct investment was 110 million us

dollars, so you see the difference, despite their rhetoric. i think that's rhetoric will also be very useful for china that's rhetoric will also be very usefulfor china because that's rhetoric will also be very useful for china because china wants something in return, after all, the corridor is boarded but this region in china, and beijing has long been concerned about the islamic militants, uighur muslim militants attacking chinese mainland. and they would certainly want to tell that taliban just do not provide shelter for them. taliban just do not provide shelter forthem. let taliban just do not provide shelter for them. ., . ,, ., for them. let me go back to janet and michael. _ for them. let me go back to janet and michael, michael, _ for them. let me go back to janet and michael, michael, pakistan i for them. let me go back to janet i and michael, michael, pakistan is an interesting example of that vincent mentioned because you can say its relationship with the taliban has been ambiguous to say the least, and that has had consequences for america, which has regarded pakistan as an important ally in the region. should it be rethinking that relationship? i should it be rethinking that relationship?— should it be rethinking that relationshi? ~ , ., ., relationship? ithink it should, and i hoe it relationship? ithink it should, and i hope it does- _

relationship? ithink it should, and i hope it does. journalists - relationship? ithink it should, and i hope it does. journalists and - i hope it does. journalists and historians— i hope it does. journalists and historians get to work on trying to -et historians get to work on trying to get to— historians get to work on trying to get to the — historians get to work on trying to get to the core of the relationship between — get to the core of the relationship between the taliban and pakistan over bits — between the taliban and pakistan over bits and pieces of more than 20 years, _ over bits and pieces of more than 20 years. 25— over bits and pieces of more than 20 years, 25 years when they are trying to get— years, 25 years when they are trying to get the _ years, 25 years when they are trying to get the russians out of afghanistan in the late 19805. i don't _ afghanistan in the late 19805. i don't have time to talk about refugees, but, you know, many people well actually _ refugees, but, you know, many people well actually go into pakistan. they will never _ well actually go into pakistan. they will never try to get to europe. it'sjust— will never try to get to europe. it'sjust too far. will never try to get to europe. it's just too far. many afghans well try and _ it's just too far. many afghans well try and afghanistan to go across as they did _ try and afghanistan to go across as they did before into iran. you know, these _ they did before into iran. you know, these two _ they did before into iran. you know, these two countries, i think it would — these two countries, i think it would bear the united states and european — would bear the united states and european allies, whether through the eu or— european allies, whether through the eu or britain, going it alone,

examining what diplomacy over the next decade should be with iran and pakistan— next decade should be with iran and pakistan stop by 30 seconds or so, janet, _ pakistan stop by 30 seconds or so, janet, just— pakistan stop by 30 seconds or so, janet, just your last thoughts. the reason the — janet, just your last thoughts. tie: reason the taliban are janet, just your last thoughts. ti2 reason the taliban are making what everybody thinks are funny statements about how respectable they are going to be is notjust to appeal to america and to nato, it's also to appeal to russia and china, russia and china both have their problems with islamic minorities, and the taliban are politically manipulative and sophisticated enough to know that, and they can be very useful to china and russia, particularly china with the supplies of copper and let them. i’m particularly china with the supplies of copper and let them.— particularly china with the supplies of copper and let them. i'm sorry to interru -t of copper and let them. i'm sorry to interrupt you. _ of copper and let them. i'm sorry to interrupt you, we _ of copper and let them. i'm sorry to interrupt you, we have _ of copper and let them. i'm sorry to interrupt you, we have some - interrupt you, we have some interference on your line, but we've got your point. vincent, ten seconds or so, last thoughts stop but we have to look at the internal —— internal dynamics of the taliban wrapped with afghanistan as well. the taliban may well end up fighting their own domestic insurgents and notjust

their own domestic insurgents and not just those their own domestic insurgents and notjust those think their own domestic insurgents and not just those think you all very much for being with us. thank you to forjoining us here in dateline. back at the same time next week. from all of us here, goodbye. hello again. for most of us, it's been another cloudy day, and that cloudy theme is one thing that we've noticed a lot actually this month. it's been a particularly dull month so far. but like yesterday, there were a few gaps opening out in the cloud. inverness sitting in one of these, so a bit of sunshine here, but the gaps have been fairly few and far between. the main driver of today's weather, low pressure to our west. we've had this weather front moving into western areas bringing outbreaks of rain, particularly for northern ireland, but we've also seen some rain at times in southwest england and wales as well — bringing these rather dull looking skies into pembrokeshire. the rain's been quite heavy here for a time as well.

now, overnight tonight, that rain is going to quite erratically push its way northwards and eastwards. it's coming along in pulses. there will be some heavy rain, then it will turn a little bit lighter and drizzly. some mist and fog patches around the hills and the coast as well. it's quite murky for some, and a mild night, temperatures no lower than 16 in both liverpool and for hull as well. now, the weekend is going to start off wet with these weather fronts slowly progressing eastwards. sunday, the better of the two days of the weekend, in that, the rain will ease to a mixture of sunshine and showers. saturday's forecast then, we've got the rain with us. and the rain is probably going to be heaviest, really, across wales, northern england, perhaps the midlands as well. many of us will see some pulses of rain through the day, perhaps northern scotland one of the drier areas, and later in the afternoon, wales and parts of northern ireland and southwest england brighten up with some sunshine. but there will be some heavy showers following in here. temperatures generally high teens, might reach about 22 celsius across eastern most areas of england, but for most, temperatures a bit below par.

now, for sunday, as i say, this is going to be the better of the two days of the weekend. cloud will tend to thin and break up with some sunny spells coming out. there will be some heavy showers around, though, maybe a few thunderstorms. these are likely to affect parts of central and eastern scotland, central and eastern england, drier southwest england, wales, northern ireland, western scotland, for the most part with some sunny spells. but, there is a big change in the weather on the way for next week, as this high pressure builds in. winds coming down from scandinavia, so no heat wave on the way, the hottest air stays in southern europe and around about the mediterranean, but that said, next week is still looking fine. and in the august sunshine that we'll have quite a bit of next week, it's going to be a pleasantly warm with temperature generally for most areas reaching the low 20s, perhaps something a bit cloudier towards the end of the week. that's your latest weather. bye— bye.

this is bbc news. the headlines at 8:00... president biden says the us has made clear to the taliban that any attack on the evacuation mission will be met with force. 2,5 on the evacuation mission will be met with force.— on the evacuation mission will be met with force. as we continue on the logistics _ met with force. as we continue on the logistics of — met with force. as we continue on the logistics of the _ met with force. as we continue on the logistics of the evacuation, i met with force. as we continue on j the logistics of the evacuation, we are in constant contact with the taliban. ~ , taliban. the uk prime minister, boris taliban. the uk prime minister, lboris johnson. _ taliban. the uk prime minister, boris johnson, says _ taliban. the uk prime minister, boris johnson, says he - taliban. the uk prime minister, boris johnson, says he has - borisjohnson, says he has confidence in his foreign secretary after heavy criticism of his handling of the crisis in afghanistan. desperate for help that hasn't arrived. why is it taking so long for aid to reach the victims of haiti's earthquake. and reinventing their lives.