this is bbc news. the latest headlines: three weeks after the school shooting in texas, there are signs that very limited gun control measures could be adopted by congress. the senate republican leader mitch mcconnell said he hoped both sides would find common ground for a deal addressing mental health and school security. the ride—hailing app uber has announced it's partnered with the un world food programme to help deliver emergency supplies to war—torn cities in ukraine. it's hoped that the customised technology will make it easier to distribute food and water using smaller vehicles and more drivers. the us special representative for korea says the north could conduct a seventh nuclear test at any time, having shown no interest in returning to the negotiating table.

the us and south korea have carried outjoint military exercises over the waters around the korean peninsula. now on bbc news, it's hardtalk. welcome to hardtalk. i'm stephen sackur. taliban rule was re—established in afghanistan almost a year ago. for afghans, it's meant the return of repressive religious authoritarianism and new levels of economic impoverishment. the mullahs seem ready to absorb indefinite isolation to reimpose their orthodoxy. but is that a sustainable strategy? my guest is fawzia koofi, former deputy speaker of the afghan parliament, now a democracy activist in exile. is there any glimmer of light in afghanistan's darkness?

fawzia koofi, welcome to hardtalk. thank you. it's good to be with you. well, it's great to have you in this studio. i'm sure you wish you were speaking to me from kabul, from afghanistan, but you have been in exile since the taliban returned to power. how difficult for you is that separation from your country? extremely difficult. i never actually wished, i never hoped, to leave the country that gave me the identity, a country that

i did not only invest my time, but i invested my blood to make it a better country for everyone. it has been a very difficult decision for me to leave afghanistan. i actually was in kabulfor a few weeks after the taliban takeover with the hope that things will get to a situation where we could live in that country. but it became literally impossible. any regrets about the decision to go into exile? because there are a few — only a few — very prominent activists who chose to stay. i regret for not being there with those women who are protesting on the streets in afghanistan. but being there and only being in the office or at home, not being able to raise the voice of those voiceless does not really mean anything. i was under house arrest for two weeks and i came to this understanding where, you know, i was no longer able to be efficient and be impactful, and that's why i decided to leave. so being in afghanistan

just as an ordinary citizen is not my desire. i wanted to be there and i want to be there to make an impact and to make a change. of course, my inner desire, my innerfeeling tells me that i should be there, but as a politician, i should be there to make a change. now, i can make a change and an impact being outside afghanistan. i want to ask for your feelings about the humanitarian catastrophe your country is facing today. i just want to quote you words recently delivered by a seniorfigure at save the children, the ngo, by athena rayburn, one of their senior figures. she said, "every single day, ourfrontline workers "in afghanistan are treating children who are wasting away "in front of their eyes." does that, for you, have to represent the first priority in what the world does toward afghanistan right now? it should be. regardless of the political situation, the people of afghanistan must

continue to receive the support that they deserve. but, of course, meanwhile, it actually breaks my heart to see, after 20 years of investing in afghanistan, we go back to zero location. we go back to where we have to just focus on humanitarian instead of development of afghanistan, instead of utilising the economic potential resources of afghanistan to benefit not only afghanistan, but to benefit the region and the global community. but now we go back to donating and supporting people. i'm in contact on a daily basis with people who are highly educated, highly qualified — they do not have a job, women and men that are looking after $10 for a man to survive. of course it's heartbreaking, as somebody who actually invested my time travelling to the villages of afghanistan, trying to reduce this disparity between city life and village life. but now, even the cities in afghanistan have become economically so desperate that their life situation is like the village life. but isn't this partly because

the international community, when it saw the taliban take over at the end of last summer, it made a decision to try to isolate the taliban regime? we saw the reserves of the afghan government frozen in the united states. we saw the curtailment of much of the aid assistance at that particular time. some of it, of course, has been restored, but some of it has not. so, there is a sense in which the isolation strategy is one of the causes of the massive humanitarian suffering today. i don't think so. i think the taliban have taken people of afghanistan in hostage. i think it's a very easy narrative that they try to create that by marginalising taliban, the people are facing humanitarian catastrophe. i think the international community, to the large extent, has been engaged with the taliban. there have been many occasions, meetings, etc. the problem is they have not been able to deliver any policy level issue or policy level programme to tackle the poverty. as somebody who is in charge, they have a responsibility, as well.

the public space we occupy comes with a responsibility. but what stance do you take, for example, when the un, early this year, launched an international appealfor $4.4 billion of new emergency assistance to afghanistan, and so far, the pledges, i think, amount to half of that or even less — what stance do you take, as a very prominent afghan voice outside the country now, a fierce critic of the taliban regime — do you want the international community to step up with that $4 billion and more immediately or not? stephen, i have been in afghanistan all my life. i have experienced even worse situation during the time the taliban were in power. the people of afghanistan deserve the support, regardless of who is in power. the organisations, community—based organisations, the civil society, the nongovernmental organisations, the community establishment, local councils must be supported in a way that they take the aid to the people on the ground

without supporting the taliban. but i, in the meantime, know that the taliban actually also benefit this support. so my position is that we need to reach out to the people. the un is doing its part. of course, there are problems about the neutrality of aid distribution, corruption, etc. that has always been a problem with countries in conflict and the humanitarian aid. we must reach out to the people. but meanwhile, my point is that we also need to make the taliban — hold them accountable for not delivering. what they have done since they have taken power is only issuing back—to—back decrees to minimise and basically make women of afghanistan invisible, as if the only problem in afghanistan is women's liberty, and only if they eliminate women from the public life, they will protect islam. why not deliver something on corruption, which is happening right now? taliban claim that they will fight corruption...has failed. they have not been able to bring security. one has to say that the issue of corruption predates the taliban.

in fact, you could argue the two decades of democratic rule in afghanistan were tainted, severely tainted, by endemic corruption from the very top, which ran through those two decades, two decades when you became a very prominent voice, not least deputy speaker of the parliament. so, you know from the inside, corruption is notjust a problem of the taliban. and i was a critic, a vocal critic of that corruption and misdeeds of the previous governments throughout my political career in afghanistan. there was more money, there was more corruption. there is less money, but there is corruption there, as well. i mean, the taliban have also tried to learn how to use and how to misuse this public property and public money. the point is that taliban have not delivered in terms of security, as well. i mean, one of the mights that they have claimed was their ability to securing the country. but we know that since they took over, only during the month of april,

hundreds of people were killed by the isis attacks. so they have failed on delivering the government. and my experience also in negotiation with them, they are not updated in terms of the governing. they don't know how to govern. just one point of detail on international policy toward your country, and then i want to dig deep into the politics. but the united states took a very interesting decision. joe biden decided to unfreeze billions of dollars of reserves of the afghan government, which had been frozen when the taliban took over. but he took the unilateral decision, along with the congress, to allocate half of those reserves, pretty much, to compensation for victims of 9/11 inside the united states. as an afghan woman, does that strike you as right and proper? i don't really understand the logic of this decision. i think if there is one nation who is the victim of any kind of attack and conflict

in the last four decades, it's the afghan nation. we paid the highest price before 9/11. we were claiming and shouting that we are the victim of military extremism in the region. the world was, "it's a civil war in afghanistan, "let the afghans decide about their future," until the september 11 attack happened. after the september 11 attack, we were in the forefront of protecting the common principles of democracy. we lost many lives. opportunities were taken away from us being an ally to international community in our common cause for democracy. now, to compensate the money that actually could be a widow's money, an orphan�*s money who lost their breadwinners in this war, it doesn't make any sense. and, honestly, a lot of decisions that were made recently, in the last two or three years, internationally does not make much sense to me and to many people in afghanistan. now, i am very mindful that you were a young student in afghanistan when the taliban

took over for the first time. you know what taliban rule was like for women then. i'm just interested to get your assessment, how it compares with taliban rule that we've seen in the last few months. in recent weeks, we've seen them issue new edicts forcing women to wear the full burqa, including the face veil, in public, including tv newsreaders. we've seen them put new restrictions on women's ability to, for example, go to parks, to travel widely without a male escort. are these restrictions, which seem to you to be going back to the bad old days, or is there any modification of what the taliban 2.0 is doing? we have created a narrative. the taliban have now become 2.0 and they have become modern or at least moderate in their views. they said quite explicitly... those months ago, they said, "you know what? "we are for freedom "as long as it's in

accordance with sharia law." they have been doing so. they have been saying generic statements and negotiation with us in the rooms. they have been saying that they will allow women to go to school, to go to work, to become active member of political community in their society, to become up to prime minister. i'm quoting this because there's one of this negotiation member of taliban who is now the minister of minor industry. and he, in one of the engagements that i was there, he looked at me and he said, "women can become up to prime minister." and to remind people, you were in the room, you were one of the afghan government negotiators in 2020 trying to thrash out some sort of power—sharing compromise deal with the taliban before the us—led nato forces decided to unilaterally withdraw from the country. ijust wonder, given what you're telling me about what they said at the time, were you naive? did you get the taliban wrong,

given the way they are today? i had hoped that taliban have come to this understanding that afghan society has changed, that afghan society in the last 20 years has transformed. let's not forget that in 1996, they took over from an already broken system. they took overfrom a government which was in war. there was chaos all over and people initially welcomed taliban takeover in 1996. now, in 2021, they took over from a system which was functioning. there was problems with corruption, there was power centric in the hands of few people in the presidential palace. but there was a functioning system — media, a very vibrant media, there was a civil society, there was a parliament with all the problems that exist in any democracy. they took over from a government that was functioning, and the people's expectations are very high. they must be able to deliver. i think we have not been naive. we have tried to tell taliban that they need to adapt because people of afghanistan have changed.

they have not been honest to what they have said. but you said... sorry to interrupt, but, you know, this is fascinating and it also raises so many questions. you say the taliban need to adapt because afghan society has changed, but the taliban doesn't appear to believe that. they've closed down the parliament, they've wound up the electoral commission, they've wound up the independent human rights organisations. this is what they have done. and yet, to be honest, afghanistan's people are not taking to the streets. there isn't an uprising of any sort. and of course it's too dangerous for people to take to the streets, but the fact is the taliban are succeeding in imposing a very repressive form of 2.0 rule, aren't they? well, i must say that people of afghanistan have been oppressed for the last four decades by weapons and guns. they have come to this understanding that the only way to respond to taliban is only military response. they have come to believe less and less every day that, you know, civilian activism

will have any impact. but there's no space any more for... because there is no space. because there is, first of all, no space. and secondly, those who actually get to the streets, and women being in the forefront of that in the last eight, nine months, they have been oppressed and repressed to the extent that they are disappeared, that they are killed, that there is no accountability. but my hope is still that taliban will not be sustainable the way they do, because, as i said before, remember in 1996, there was nobody, one single woman did not get to the street to protest what taliban did. now, through whatever means, the resistance continue, including in the streets of kabul. and one form of resistance, which i believe you were involved in in the late �*90s, was secret schooling, educating girls even though it was actually outlawed by... people will find their way. is it happening today?

i mean, you're not in the country, but i know you are in contact with plenty of people who are. we saw the, frankly, deeply depressing scenes of young girls being turned away from secondary schools just weeks ago when they thought the schools were going to open and then they were informed they couldn't go to school because the taliban weren't happy with the uniform rules and they sent all of the secondary school girls home. is secret schooling happening across afghanistan today for girls? it does, it does. in some of it, actually, i'm also engaged. i still continue to support girls�* education and accelerate education for girls. but it's not a solution. what taliban does in terms of the banning girls from going to school, first of all, i don't really understand the logic, because they allow girls up to grade 6, which is like 11, 12 years old, and then they allow girls in the university. they don't allow in—between, which i don't understand. they're using this as a leverage — "it's not islamic."

let's be clear — what taliban do, you don't find it in any muslim country. they are using that as a leverage for the world so that when tomorrow they announce schools to be open or reopened for girls, the world recognise them. so they're using women and girls�* rights, unfortunately, as a leverage for them for their recognition, which i think the problem is girls are not allowed to go to school. but that is not the only problem, right? so tomorrow, if taliban allow girls to go to school doesn't mean that the situation is rosy. we need to hold taliban accountable to most of what they do, not only in terms of girls�* education. they are unfortunately taking afghanistan back at least decades in terms of stopping our girls from going to school. but that is not the only problem. you say you�*re doing what you can from outside. there are some extraordinarily brave women inside the country still delivering the same sort of message. i�*m thinking, for example, of mahbouba seraj, who is, as i understand it, to this very day still active inside afghanistan on women�*s rights. but it�*s dangerous, isn�*t it? and you know it�*s dangerous, because there were at least two serious attempts on your life, including one occasion when you were shot in the arm, when your car was attacked by forces. we don�*t know whom, but we believe it may have been

associated with the taliban. do you think that people like mahbouba seraj are in daily and grave danger today? for me, those who are in danger are those who are actually protesting and risking their lives on the streets of afghanistan, because there are, like, 16, 17 million women living in afghanistan. so being in afghanistan itself, of course, it requires a lot of courage, requires a lot of moral courage to be in that country and to live and to work. but for me, those who actually protest on the streets on a daily basis, you know, asking for basic things, asking for your rights to work, access to food and rights to education. this is very basic, this is very basic. and also to see that afghanistan has now, with all the problems and multidimensional problems that afghanistan has, and it can create an insecurity to the rest of the world, that it�*s abandoned and it�*s kind of being erased

from the world�*s priority and even from the media is also heartbreaking, because on one hand, you have a country which the conflict is totally different. the conflict in afghanistan and the conflict in ukraine are two different conflict. but to see that the world is only able to handle one conflict at a time and kind of forget about afghanistan and ignore what�*s happening in afghanistan, especially when it comes to discrimination against women... there is a gender apartheid, and you and i know that there is a gender apartheid. now, the taliban try to demonstrate that, you know, there is some level of stability and they are the one who can oppress and dismantle daesh or the isis—k, which, from my perspective, it�*s wrong, because you cannot dismantle one military group with another one. the only way to dismantle all of this is to support and empower the people of afghanistan. and you hail the bravery of the women who are still on the streets today inside afghanistan. do you...?

and this is a difficult question, but do you sometimes fear theirjudgement of you because you are no longer there? i mean, not so long ago, you spoke very honestly to the associated press, saying that, "they are angry that i am not with them "at these difficult times." do you feel... ? this is not what they had expected me. they had expected me to be with them during these ups and downs of their life, and i had hoped to be with them during these difficult times. for me, i think the best moment of my life would be, even if not making a big impact, to be with women in the streets of kabul, protesting for what they want. the thing is, it�*s a very complex situation, right? we don�*t want to give legitimacy to the taliban for what they do. we need to be able to use the leverage inside and outside the country for a political dialogue that will lead to a government that is acceptable by all and restoring some sort of people�*s empowerment to election and restoring democracy, restoring constitutional order. this is what we try to do.

at this stage, we are trying as politicians and civil society and women groups here in the uk, but also in the rest of the world, to come together again, because we were scattered, and establish an alternative, i would say, to taliban, to pursue a political dialogue... doesn�*t that have to be a dialogue with the taliban itself? and it is an active discussion now in the corridors of power in many countries. i mean, china, russia, pakistan already have accredited taliban diplomats to represent afghanistan in their capitals — without full diplomatic relations, but they have given them some recognition. and turkey, for example, is talking about a process by which there would be a beginning of a dialogue with the taliban. is that your message to the international community, that they should consider that now? or are you saying, "no, the isolation must continue of the taliban"? i think the international community must support us

for a political, meaningful political dialogue that will lead to a government that is acceptable, legitimate in the minds and eyes of people of afghanistan first, before the international recognition. so i think now taliban are using this vacuum of western presence in afghanistan to lean towards china, russia. i know that there is a lot of chinese contractors in afghanistan. there is like the taliban diplomat in russia. they are enjoying this vacuum. i know that in the middle of all the chaos in central asia, i would say taliban are benefiting the most. but it is not going to be sustainable if we leave it like that. i know that there should be a dialogue between the taliban and the political community of afghanistan, but the political community of afghanistan was scattered all over the world. sorry to interrupt. we�*re short of time. do you ever talk to any taliban figures that you used to negotiate with in 2020? do you have any line of communication with them today? i do. i do when there are problems, when there are women being arrested, when there

are men being arrested for no reasons, extrajudicial killings, extrajudicial harassment, i talk to them, i contact them. there are many of them, actually, who tell me that they are not happy with the situation, who told me that they were not happy with the decision on banning girls from school. my point is now, through this programme, why they are not for the sake of afghanistan, for the sake of future of afghanistan, coming up and making it loud that what they do, what some of the taliban leadership do in terms of their approach on not delivering an inclusive government, their approach on girls�* education, on women�*s political participation, they need to become more loud. that�*s the hope, because i know their own daughters go to school, their own wives in different countries enjoy liberty and enjoy some level of freedom that women of afghanistan today do not. and talking of daughters, your own two daughters,

i think i�*m right in saying, are now outside afghanistan. and you�*ve talked about your heartbreak that the afghanistan that you suffered for so much yourself and fought for has now, it seems, been lost. is your heart completely broken or is there a part of you that believes things can recover? i still believe. i still believe and strive that we will make afghanistan a country where not only my daughters but every daughter of afghanistan will have a space to use the potential that they have. and we are striving for that, not only hoping, but we are doing everything... every minute of my life being outside the country is used for that afghanistan. fawzia koofi, i thank you very much for making time tojoin us here. thank you. thank you very much. hello. umbrellas at the ready —

we�*ll be dodging the downpours during wednesday. there�*s rain sweeping north and east overnight. a lot of that clears away for wednesday. that lingers in scotland, whereas elsewhere, you may get to see some sunshine. the showers will be heavy, possibly thundery with hail in places. this area of low pressure is pumping that rain north and east through the night and into the morning. it will be a very mild start in the morning. still some rain across eastern parts of england and into southern scotland. it�*ll be heavy in places. the eastern england rain will soon clear away, but in scotland, very slowly, the rain pushes northwards — not reaching the very far north. elsewhere, you get sunny spells and showers, some heavy, some thundery, a chance of hail. some of the beefiest ones in the afternoon could be across parts of southern scotland, into the far north of england, but with the showers dying away from wales and the south—west into the later stages of the afternoon, a cooler day, certainly so in scotland. a windier one along the coast of wales and southern england, and for the afternoon in northern ireland, increasing cloud, some outbreaks of rain becoming more widespread. mayjust push across parts of north wales and northwest england overnight and into thursday morning.

still some patchy, light rain and drizzle at this stage in scotland, though many places on thursday starting dry, not as mild. an area of low pressure, ex—tropical storm alex, moves to the northwest thursday, friday and into saturday. doesn�*t hit the uk, but we�*re close enough across north—western areas for it to become very windy for a time, especially friday—saturday. though on thursday, winds will start to pick up in the west and from that weather system, we�*ll see cloud and outbreaks of rain through southern and western parts of england, wales and into northern ireland. northern and eastern scotland, down the eastern side of england, a few showers, but also warm, sunny spells around. turning very windy, particularly across the western isles on friday, some gusts 40—50 mph, blustery across scotland and northern ireland, where we�*ll see most of the showers. breezy for england and wales, chance of a shower, many places staying dry but rather grey and drizzly perhaps first thing on friday towards the south—east. temperatures — high teens and into the low 20s. that area of low pressure keeping things very windy on saturday in scotland and northern ireland and just easing away northwards on sunday, so the winds will begin to ease at this stage. there may still be a few lingering showers around. actually, by sunday, it looks as if many places will turn a bit cooler, whereas throughout the weekend, the warmest and the sunniest weather�*s going to be across south—east england.

that�*s your forecast.

this is bbc news with the latest headlines for viewers in the uk and around the world. i�*m samantha simmonds. poltical pressure after two mass shootings in america, signs that limited gun control measures could be adopted by congress. were hoping to actually get an outcome that will make a difference. areas of mental health, school safety and things that are related, the incidents that recurred in texas. can both sides rise above? can both sides see beyond the political problem at hand and admit that we have a life preservation problem on our hands?

i promise you that every tear i cried _