there is concern over of everyone�*s nuclear programme. tehran says it is only developing of the powerfor civilian purposes but now israel has warned that it crosses over headlines and it

will not allow iran to cover a nuclear weapons. will not allow iran to cover a nuclearweapons. it will not allow iran to cover a nuclear weapons. it covers date back follows a warning washington and the european union that iran must allow weapons inspectors full access to its workshops. my guest as rafael grossi, director—general of the atomic energy agency. as his inspection programme failed and dashed all hopes of a diplomatic solution to this crisis? director—general rafael grossi, at your headquarters, welcome to heart talk. let's start with

a van. joe biden said the us intends to return to full compliance with the 2015 nuclear deal with a van that president trump tore up. your mandate is to inhibit the use power for military purposes. so how worried in general are you about everyone�*s nuclear programme? it about everyone's nuclear programme?— about everyone's nuclear programme? about everyone's nuclear rouramme? , , programme? it is could be with ou. programme? it is could be with yom thank _ programme? it is could be with you. thank you. _ programme? it is could be with you. thank you. we _ programme? it is could be with you. thank you. we are - programme? it is could be with you. thank you. we are as - you. thank you. we are as worried as we should be. nay more, no less. we have a mission there. we have inspections to carry out and these inspections have to deal programme of the islamic republic of iran and as you are saying, this is deeply interconnected with the possibility or not to return to the famous jcb away signing of 2015 the famousjcb away signing of 2015 which the famous jcb away signing of 2015 which the united states withdrew from in 2018 and since the beginning of this year

there has been a diplomatic effort here in vienna to try to return to it. so there are many aspects and we are the guarantors of whatever is agreed or not. so we are constantly looking into this situation.— constantly looking into this situation. , ., ., situation. just for those who need reminding, _ situation. just for those who need reminding, that - situation. just for those who need reminding, that refers| situation. just for those who l need reminding, that refers to the joint comprehensive plan of action which is what the nuclear deal in 2015 is described as. look, how seriously can we take your monitoring of what is going on? you just said, you know, we want to carry out inspections and so on but on the 16th of september iran acknowledged that it has removed several surveillance cameras installed by your nuclear inspectors at a centrifuge assembly site, a workshop, now we have got america telling to grant your inspectors access otherwise iran will face diplomatic

retaliation, the european union said the fact that your inspectors are not allowed to enter this workshop is a worrying development. it does not look like you're getting very far, does it? i not look like you're getting very far, does it?— not look like you're getting very far, does it? i would say, first of all. — very far, does it? i would say, first of all, we _ very far, does it? i would say, first of all, we are _ very far, does it? i would say, first of all, we are the - very far, does it? i would say, first of all, we are the only - first of all, we are the only international presence in iran. which is essential because we carry out a number of inspections. some of which are, i would say, regular but of obligations that iran has as the signatory, as party to the treaty and then on top of that and on top of this agreement we agreed a few months ago to have some additional indispensable monitoring and verification capabilities that would allow us to store and to keep very important information about what is going on in terms of

uranium enrichment, in terms of the production of centrifuges, different technical areas. so that if and when the parties to this agreement, which you explained what it meant, is reached an agreement or a new agreement is arrived at then we can have a full picture. you you don't have a full picture. we have as full a picture as can be obtained in the circumstances, which is quite nice. i must tell you that our inspection effort in iran is vast. we are present at all fu silts that iran has. and we have inspections every day of the year, carrying out permanently this type of... you're not convincing key players in the region. take

what the israeli prime minister, naftali bennett, has issued a statement saying, "iran seeks to dominate the middle east under a nuclear umbrella. all red lines have been crossed by its programme," he says. "words do not stop centrifuges." he says israel will not allow iran to acquire a nuclear weapon. 1 will not allow iran to acquire a nuclear weapon.— will not allow iran to acquire a nuclear weapon. i don't think that what _ a nuclear weapon. i don't think that what the _ a nuclear weapon. i don't think that what the israeli _ a nuclear weapon. i don't think that what the israeli prime - that what the israeli prime minister is saying, in any way, can be construed as not having faith in our inspections. the issue there is the impression, or the conviction, that iran having capabilities in the nuclear area is a danger in itself. but that is a political thing. and i'm not getting into that political thing. what i'm telling you is that what we can see is exactly where iran is, and what makes the present moment so important — and here, i would agree with the note of,

i would agree with the note of, i would agree with the note of, i would say, preoccupation — is that, if we were to be limited in the scope, in the access that we have to iran, then we would start losing ground and losing the capability to know exactly what is happening to the last detail. so i'm not an ising what the prime minister ising what the prime minister is saying — i'm saying our effort is vast. you know by the gram how much uranium enrichment is taking place. we know exactly what is going on in different places. the problem is now that we have this possibility of an interims. this is a problem. this is a key problem, and that's why it's led to this kind of language the americans saying, "iran, let in the inspectors to this vital workshop — otherwise, you'll face diplomatic retaliation." that's the point i'm making.

everybody had high hopes —joe biden comes in and says, "look, we're going to have the talks..." you have the iranian foreign ministry in the past few days saying, "we think talks are going to start in a matter of weeks." now, this is a setback. do you accept that or not? . . �* a setback. do you accept that or not? , , �* ., or not? this is. but we are working — or not? this is. but we are working on _ or not? this is. but we are working on it. _ or not? this is. but we are working on it. i— or not? this is. but we are working on it. i think - or not? this is. but we are working on it. i think that. or not? this is. but we are i working on it. i think that the possibility of a return to an agreement — i wouldn't say it's dependent, but it would be extremely difficult if our inspection capabilities are limited. so we are trying to keep them there. we have them. there is a certain issue at the place. the americans are not asking — i am asking. the iaea is asking iran to respect what i agreed with them past sunday, september the 12th, where we

agreed that we would be able to service all our equipment you were referring to there that's part of it, it's not the whole thing, there's much more than that. so that we can carry on with this work. i that. so that we can carry on with this work.— with this work. i should 'ust remind everybody �* with this work. i should 'ust remind everybody that h with this work. i should just remind everybody that the l remind everybody that the international atomic energy agency was set up in 1957. you're an autonomous organisation. you're not under the direct control of the united nations. but you do report to the un. 0k. united nations. but you do report to the un. ok. so, give us an idea, then, of how confident you should be? because you recently returned from a visit to iran where you had talks with mohammad slami, chief of the atomic energy organisation of iran. however, we have a new hardline president, ebrahim raisi, in iran. what's your assessment? what are the dynamics? do you think you're going to get the full access that you want? we are pressing _ full access that you want? - are pressing for that. by the way, as part of this trip, as a result of this trip, we agreed with iran that i will be

returning soon — probably to meet with the president or the foreign minister — because, as you're saying, this is a new government. and it's a government. and it's a government that has quite firm views on the issue of the nuclear programme and the collaboration with the iaea or the international community in general. so i've told them and they agreed and i hope we are going to be able to do this very soon, that we need to get to know each other. we need to start the conversation. i was working with a previous government and there is a new one, now, and there is one that has had, in its platform — if we can use this term, in the case of the political system in iran — a tougher approach to collaboration with international community. so i need to sit down with them. i want to listen to them, what

their idea is, and i hope they would also listen to me. shill would also listen to me. all riiht. would also listen to me. all right- but — would also listen to me. all right. but you _ would also listen to me. all right. but you know what? as naftali bennett said, words do not stop centrifuges. are you worried about a possible escalation to this crisis? centrifuges are not supposed to be stopped, i must say, because the international community has agreed that iran can enrich uranium... agreed that iran can enrich uranium. . ._ uranium... yeah, but not weapons-grade. - uranium... yeah, but not weapons-grade. not - uranium... yeah, but not weapons-grade. not to l uranium... yeah, but not- weapons-grade. not to weapons weapons—grade. not to weapons grade. i weapons-grade. not to weapons irade. ., ., weapons-grade. not to weapons rade, ., ., . ., weapons-grade. not to weapons irade. ., ., ., ., grade. i mean a certain amount. of course. _ grade. i mean a certain amount. of course, some _ grade. i mean a certain amount. of course, some countries - grade. i mean a certain amount. of course, some countries have | of course, some countries have different views.— of course, some countries have different views.- some - different views. sure. some countries — different views. sure. some countries would _ different views. sure. some countries would rather - different views. sure. some countries would rather iran | different views. sure. some i countries would rather iran not do anything in the area, but thatis do anything in the area, but that is not a matter of discussion for me.- that is not a matter of discussion for me. ~ ~ ., ., discussion for me. we know what he means - _ discussion for me. we know what he means - weapons-grade - he means — weapons—grade uranium. he means - weapons-grade uranium-— he means - weapons-grade uranium. , ~ ., ., uranium. yes, i know what he means. uranium. yes, i know what he means- just — uranium. yes, i know what he means. just to _ uranium. yes, i know what he means. just to finish - uranium. yes, i know what he means. just to finish this - means. just to finish this particular _ means. just to finish this particular conversation i means. just to finish this - particular conversation about iran, then — have we seen dashed hopes of a diplomatic solution to this crisis, and is there a real possibility of

some kind of conflageration or escalation or diplomatic retaliation, or whatever, against iran? i retaliation, or whatever, against iran?— retaliation, or whatever, against iran? i cannot afford to iive against iran? i cannot afford to give up- _ against iran? i cannot afford to give up- i'm _ against iran? i cannot afford to give up. i'm concerned i against iran? i cannot afford to give up. i'm concerned at| to give up. i'm concerned at this moment because i have a problem. i'm not denying it. i'm working on it. this is my job. i'm working on it. this is my 'ob. �* ., , ., i'm working on it. this is my 'ob. ., , ., job. another big part of your 'ob job. another big part of your “0b is, job. another big part of your job is. of— job. another big part of your job is, of course, _ job. another big part of your job is, of course, to - job. another big part of your job is, of course, to ensure l job is, of course, to ensure that there isn't, you know, weapons proliferation, nuclear weapons proliferation, nuclear weapons proliferation, nuclear weapons proliferation, all over the world. and another big area of worry is china. so the arms control association said this month that china's constructing at least 250 new long—range missile silos in a sign that it may be expanding its nuclear arsenal. the us secretary of state, antony blinken, has expressed his concern about what he describes as "the rapid growth of china's nuclear arsenal". he said that in august. so, we talked about iran. how worried are you about china? i iran. how worried are you about china? ~ ., iran. how worried are you about china? ~' ., ., , china? i think we have to be reminded — china? i think we have to be reminded of _ china? i think we have to be reminded of a _ china? i think we have to be reminded of a fundamentall china? i think we have to be - reminded of a fundamental fact, which is that china is part of the countries that were

recognised in the international order, nuclear order, that we have, as being one nuclear weapon state together with the united kingdom where you live, together with france, with the russian federation, with the united states of america. yes, all ri . ht. united states of america. yes, all right- so — united states of america. yes, all right. so the _ united states of america. yes, all right. so the fact _ united states of america. yes, all right. so the fact that - all right. so the fact that they have _ all right. so the fact that they have nuclear- all right. so the fact that l they have nuclear weapons all right. so the fact that - they have nuclear weapons now doesn't mean they have proliferated. they have had them for a long time and, as them for a long time and, as the other countries... them for a long time and, as the other countries. . .- them for a long time and, as the other countries... you know what i'm getting _ the other countries... you know what i'm getting at, _ what i'm getting at, director—general. i what i'm getting at, director-general. ~ ., director-general. i know where ou're director-general. i know where you're getting. _ director-general. i know where you're getting, but _ director-general. i know where you're getting, but i _ director-general. i know where you're getting, but i think- you're getting, but i think it's important to clarify this, otherwise people think china has nuclear weapons and other countries don't. i think what you're perhaps aiming at is the fact that we are seeing the possibility of a new nuclear arms race, which is of course worrisome because it is also part of the obligations of nuclear weapon states to disarm, or at least to take measures in good faith, to walk

towards less nuclear weapons, less dependence on nuclear weapons. and we are seeing the opposite. but, here, this is a matter that reflects current geostrategic tensions in the world. ., �* . geostrategic tensions in the world. ., �*, . , world. that's it. it reflects current geostrategic - world. that's it. it reflects i current geostrategic tensions in this world, precisely. and it's notjust the proliferation or the arms race, as you talk about — it is what those arms might be deployed for. and a republican congressman, mike turner, says, "the build—up in china is unprecedented, and china is unprecedented, and china is unprecedented, and china is deploying nuclear weapons to threaten the united states and its allies." so what's your assessment of why china is doing this? i what's your assessment of why china is doing this?— china is doing this? i don't have views _ china is doing this? i don't have views on _ china is doing this? i don't have views on what - china is doing this? i don't i have views on what american politicians say about china. as i say, china politicians say about china. as isay, china has politicians say about china. as i say, china has nuclear weapons. the united states has nuclear weapons. weapons. the united states has nuclearweapons. france weapons. the united states has nuclear weapons. france has nuclear weapons. france has nuclear weapons. france has nuclear weapons. they have motivations. and political objectives. and we do recognise them. what we do at the iaea is

to try to ensure that the problem does not get even worse thanit problem does not get even worse than it is at the moment. mi than it is at the moment. all ri . ht. than it is at the moment. all right- 0ne — than it is at the moment. all right. one problem you don't want to get even worse than it is at the moment — a country not recognised as one of the recognised nuclear powers, of course — is north korea. exactly. course - is north korea. exactly-— course - is north korea. exactl. ., �* ., ., ., ., exactly. you've got a ma'or problem i exactly. you've got a ma'or problem with d exactly. you've got a ma'or problem with that. i exactly. you've got a ma'or problem with that. kim i exactly. you've got a major - problem with that. kim jong-un, problem with that. kim jong—un, the leader of north korea, has restarted a critical reactor widely believed to produce weapons—grade plutonium at its nuclear materials complex for the first time since 2018. in september, he tested long—range cruise missiles which could be —— cruise missiles. all worrying developments. how tough can you get with north korea? you haven't had inspectors there.- korea? you haven't had inspectors there. no. we were kicked out _ inspectors there. no. we were kicked out from _ inspectors there. no. we were kicked out from the _ inspectors there. no. we were kicked out from the dprk - inspectors there. no. we were kicked out from the dprk in i kicked out from the dprk in 2009. .,. , kicked out from the dprk in 2009.- this - kicked out from the dprk in 2009.- this doesn't| 2009. exactly. this doesn't mean that _ 2009. exactly. this doesn't mean that we _ 2009. exactly. this doesn't mean that we don't - 2009. exactly. this doesn't mean that we don't know i 2009. exactly. this doesn't - mean that we don't know what's going on. my last report to the board of governors of the iaea

indicated that we have clear signs that the programme, the nuclear weapons programme in the dprk, is running full steam ahead. they are enriching uranium again. they are separating plutonium. so there is an effort that seems to be ongoing to increase their nuclear arsenal. ongoing to increase their nucleararsenal. dprk ongoing to increase their nuclear arsenal. dprk is a case where a potential issue went wrong in the sense that it proliferated. there were efforts, until2006, proliferated. there were efforts, until 2006, which failed. this is why i'm so concerned about iran and other cases. in the case of the dprk, they didn't have nuclear weapons. diplomacy failed. now, they are a nuclear—weapon—possessor state. that being said, we are preparing to go back as soon as there is a political agreement at the level of the six party

talks as there used to be — this is a process that involved a number of countries in the region. 0r, bilaterally with the united states, if that is the united states, if that is the case. we are honing our skills and preparing our inspectors to go back as soon as there is an agreement. fiiq as there is an agreement. 0k. desite as there is an agreement. 0k. despite all _ as there is an agreement. 0k. despite all this _ as there is an agreement. 0k. despite all this firing - as there is an agreement. 0k. despite all this firing and testing and so on, were you heartened in any way by the comments made by kimjong—un's sister, a very powerful force in north korea, making conciliatory statements about south korea, saying that the korean war has ended, south korean war has ended, south korea said, and there was perhaps talk that... it korea said, and there was perhaps talk that. .. it was a iood perhaps talk that. .. it was a good sign- _ perhaps talk that. .. it was a good sign- it _ perhaps talk that. .. it was a good sign. it was _ perhaps talk that. .. it was a good sign. it was a - perhaps talk that. .. it was a good sign. it was a good - perhaps talk that. .. it was a l good sign. it was a good sign. it's an indication that there is a recognition at some point, at some level, that the objective of denuclearising the korean peninsula is still important, and it may be important, and it may be important even for them. so there is some space for diplomacy there, which is going — again — to have to be underpinned by the iaea and its

inspectors. mi underpinned by the iaea and its inspectors-_ inspectors. all right. good. and of course, _ inspectors. all right. good. and of course, i _ inspectors. all right. good. and of course, i was - inspectors. all right. good. i and of course, i was referring to the fact that the korean war in the �*50s wasn't formally ended — there was just an armistice, and now there's talk about that changing.— about that changing. indeed. yes. about that changing. indeed. yes- you _ about that changing. indeed. yes. you said _ about that changing. indeed. yes. you said the _ about that changing. indeed. yes. you said the idea - about that changing. indeed. yes. you said the idea is - about that changing. indeed. yes. you said the idea is to l yes. you said the idea is to stop countries _ yes. you said the idea is to stop countries that - yes. you said the idea is to stop countries that don't i yes. you said the idea is to i stop countries that don't have nuclear weapons proliferating. what do you make, then, about the fact that australia — through this aukus deal with the united states and the united kingdom — is going to acquire nuclear submarines? that's a proliferation of the technology. i mean, of course australia's not going to be interested in developing nuclear weapons, interested in developing nuclearweapons, it interested in developing nuclear weapons, it says. interested in developing nuclearweapons, it says. but nevertheless, you must be worried about the expansion of this? i worried about the expansion of this? ~ �* , ., , this? i think it's a very important _ this? i think it's a very important matter- this? i think it's a very important matter that| this? i think it's a very i important matter that we this? i think it's a very - important matter that we have now on the political agenda internationally. why? because, as you rightly say, this doesn't mean that australia — which has an impeccable nonproliferation credential — is going to have nuclear weapons all of a sudden. but it's getting sensitive technology and, from my perspective, what is important

is the fact that, when you have a nuclear—propelled submarine, you are entitled — you can exclude some material from you are entitled — you can exclude some materialfrom our inspections. which is obvious, because this is a military vessel that goes out in the seas for months, and this is one of the characteristics of nuclear submarines that can go for two months or even more without coming back to port. so it is a technically very tricky question, and it will be the first time that a country that does not have nuclear weapons has a nuclear sub. does not have nuclear weapons has a nuclearsub. in does not have nuclear weapons has a nuclear sub. in other words, a country that is taking material away from the inspectors for some time. and we are talking about very highly enriched uranium. what this means is that we — with australia, with the united

states, and with the united kingdom — we have to enter into a very complex technical negotiation to see to it that, as a result of this, there is no weakening of the nuclear non—froliferation regime. gill non-froliferation regime. all ri . ht non-froliferation regime. all riiht -- non—froliferation regime. all right —— nonproliferation regime. all right. you've commented on that. there have been comments about double standards that you're more concerned about iran, for instance, not being allowed to develop nuclear power for civilian purposes. talking about nuclear power for civilian purposes, your agency's a huge advocate of nuclear energy as a source of power in the world.— nuclear energy as a source of power in the world. yes. so why do ou power in the world. yes. so why do you think _ power in the world. yes. so why do you think you're _ power in the world. jazz so why do you think you're right and your critics — who don't like nuclear power — are wrong? well, nuclear energy has been traditionally, as you know, one of those things that elicits emotions. there are historical reasons, sociological reasons — whatever. the reality is that, at the moment, with red alert

for humanity as the last report of the experts on climate change have said, for this group and others who are not necessarily nuclear lobbyists, they all recognise, in all their projections, that without nuclear energy, it would be simply impossible to get to a de—carbonised economy by 2030 and 2050, especially in countries like china, like india, orthe countries like china, like india, or the united states, or france, or many others that have been able to use clean energy like nuclear energy to de—carbonise, not to make the problem worse. we are planning - i problem worse. we are planning — i am planning — to come to glasgow in november. as you know, there's going to be this big meeting of all nations working on climate change. the so—called cop26. there, we are going to be reaffirming this idea that nuclear has a place at the table, of course. shill at the table, of course. all riiht. at the table, of course. all right. so. _ at the table, of course. all right. so, you _ at the table, of course. all right. so, you said that there's a lot of emotion

wrapped up in this discussion about nuclear energy. are people being emotional when they say that nuclear waste being buried far beneath the earth is going to be toxic for thousands of years? greenpeace usa say this is not desirable and that there is no safe, reliable solution for dealing with the radioactive waste produced by nuclear plants. that's not people being emotional. that's very —— a very legitimate concern, isn't it? , , very legitimate concern, isn't it? , ., , it? of course, every opinion is legitimate _ it? of course, every opinion is legitimate and _ it? of course, every opinion is legitimate and has _ it? of course, every opinion is legitimate and has to - it? of course, every opinion is legitimate and has to be - it? of course, every opinion is| legitimate and has to be taken very seriously. but i would say that, if the affirmation is that, if the affirmation is that nuclear or high—level waste stored in this way in deep geological repositories is toxic, it's not emotional — it's simply wrong. toxic, it's not emotional - it's simply wrong. greenpeace in the united _ it's simply wrong. greenpeace in the united states _ it's simply wrong. greenpeace in the united states says, - in the united states says, "every in the united states says, " every waste in the united states says, "every waste dump in the us leaks radiation into the environment, and nuclear plants themselves are running out of ways to store highly radioactive waste on site."

it's simply incorrect. well... the whole — it's simply incorrect. well... the whole amount _ it's simply incorrect. well... the whole amount of- it's simply incorrect. well... | the whole amount of nuclear waste in the united states would fit in a stadium. as i say, there is a combination, an unhappy combination, i must say, of emotion or ideology — yes, ideology — and scientific incorrectness or inaccuracy. the technology exists. it's available. and it's been used to keep nuclear waste safely stored without having any material effect to the environment.- environment. other disadvantages - - environment. 0ther| disadvantages - very environment. other _ disadvantages - very expensive disadvantages — very expensive to build, and also they take a long time to build properly, and you need highly efficient technically trained staff to manage them, otherwise you get leaks like the one we saw in fukushima and so on. so you've got a huge pr problem, haven't you, with nuclear? i got a huge pr problem, haven't you, with nuclear?— you, with nuclear? i would airee you, with nuclear? i would agree with _ you, with nuclear? i would agree with the _ you, with nuclear? i would agree with the last - you, with nuclear? i would agree with the last part i you, with nuclear? i would agree with the last part of| agree with the last part of what you said. there is a pr problem for nuclear energy. i would not agree with what you

said before. the issue of costs — we might need several editions of hardtalk to discuss it. it's not exactly like that. but i would say that now, nuclear energy is moving into small— and medium—sized reactors which are, of course, much easier to fabricate and to deploy. here, iwant much easier to fabricate and to deploy. here, i want to be clear because we don't have any commercial interest in this. it is obvious nuclear energy is a commercial option for those who may wish to use it.— may wish to use it. rafael grossi, director— may wish to use it. rafael grossi, director of - may wish to use it. rafael grossi, director of the - grossi, director of the international atomic energy agency, thank you very much indeed for coming on hardtalk. a pleasure. thank you very much.

hello, there. for most of this september, temperatures have been a lot warmer than you might normally expect to see. temperatures over the weekend, for example, reached 23 degrees in north scotland's kinloss, but a cold front�*s since moved through, and that's really dumped the temperatures — in kinloss, to a high of 13 degrees on monday. there were plenty of showers following our cold front through. that was one of the showerclouds working across the skies. lurking to our west, this is what's coming next. this is a developing low, developing fronts that are going to spread more persistent rain in. if you are heading outside wales and parts of south—west england, northern ireland and western scotland, that is where you will see showers over the

next few hours. across many central and eastern areas, dry weather with clear spells. not a bad start. mostly bright and dry. across wales and western areas of england, that cloud — this rain will move its way in, moving east and north. the rain will reach a southern and eastern scotland. northwest scotla nd eastern scotland. northwest scotland and northern ireland will brighter, a day of sunshine. the top temperatures between 1a and 17. fairly gusty wind. the weather system clears out of the way as we get into wednesday. what follows is a ridge of high pressure. for many of us, it will be dry with increasing sunshine, but they will be across these north—western areas, western scotland, the north of northern ireland, and into north—west england into areas like merseyside, cheshire, and temperature is about 13—16. wednesday promises to be the cooler day of the week, but good sunshine. not too much on

offer on thursday, because an active weather system is coming in, bringing heavier outbreaks of rain, and wind towards the north—west as we go on through the day. you may see some gales developing and places. temperature is about 1k developing and places. temperature is about 1a to maybe 17 in the south—west of england. more unsettled weather on friday. general outbreaks and quite windy. an improvement over the weekend, back to a mixture of sunshine.

welcome to newsday. reporting live from singapore, i'm karishma vaswani. the headlines... american r&b singer r kelly is found guilty of trafficking and sexually abusing underage girls, boys and women. the proscutor welcomed the verdict. a predator who used his inner circle to ensnare under age girls and young men and women for decades. girls and young men and women for decades-— for decades. japan says north korea has _ for decades. japan says north korea has launched _ for decades. japan says north korea has launched another. korea has launched another missile towards its waters. we will be live in the region for the latest. also on the programme...