this is bbc news. we'll have all the main headlines as newsday continues at the top of the hour — straight after hardtalk. welcome to hardtalk, i'm stephen sackur. the rupture in relations between most of europe and russia since vladimir putin's invasion of ukraine has left european governments scrambling to end their dependence on moscow's oil and gas. it turns out there was another arena in which europe had become dangerously dependent on russia — space. without russian rockets and other space know—how,

europe's short—term space plans are now in disarray. my guest isjosef aschbacher, director general of the european space agency. is europe destined to be an also—ran in the space race? josef aschbacher, welcome to hardtalk. thank you, thank you for having me. let's start where i started in that introduction — your relationship with russia. it has exposed, has it not, the war with ukraine, the degree to which you've had to sever ties with the

russian space agency? it's exposed a dangerous over reliance on cooperation with moscow? i mean, it is true that with the invasion of russia in ukraine, it was a wake—up call for many of us in the energy sector, in many other parts, that we suddenly have a war in front of our doors and also in space. and in space, what actually happened is exactly the same as in many other domains. the heads of states and heads of government of many european countries were encouraging everyone to embrace russia, to work with russia, get russia into the western sphere, and we did the same in space. we built the space station, we initiated large—scale projects worth billions of euros, or even more in roubles, and we worked together for several decades. and, yes, the war has changed things drastically, and that is actually quite a change, if not to say painful for many of us.

and what you did in practical terms was year—on—year rely on russian rockets, the soyuz rocket programme, to take your astronauts and your equipment up into space. i mean, that was complacency, wasn't it? you can call it complacency. actually, it has served us very well for... not now. not now, but for more than ten years, we had another rocket... we have, actually, three classes of rocket, as we call it. the one that is transporting heavier satellites into space, called the ariane 5 today. then we have the one in the lower segment, which is vega. and then we have the medium segment, which is now soyuz, which was soyuz, i should say, which was serving us well. but, at the time of the invasion of crimea in 2014, we already have made decisions to develop another rocket called ariane 6, which will fly very soon, some time next year, to replace soyuz and also

the ariane 5 rocket. so, actually, the ariane 6 was already developed, and decisions were made in �*iii to foresee that this change is necessary. well, ariane 6 is still in development, but the sad truth is that some of your key programmes and missions for the next year or two have now been jeopardised and may well be entirely ruined because of the withdrawal of cooperation with russia. and i'm thinking in particular of your ambitious plan to send a european rover vehicle to mars. that entire mission may not happen now. today, it's not decided what will happen or will be the future of that mission, this is true, because on february 24th, right afterwards, i called a meeting with my member states to decide what we do. and, as you say, stephen, we had to decide to suspend this cooperation with russia. let me just say that this is hurting us all.

i have a lot of engineers in esa and in industry, and you can imagine what it means. we have... some of the scientists in europe... i'm thinking of people like fernando rull, who's one of the leaders of the project. he's been working on this for years, and suddenly everything he had planned and worked for has been taken away from him. that's correct. i mean, how do you approach him and others on that team and say, "you know what, it's all off"? that is painful, i tell you. and i have a large team of the exomars project manager, the exomars team, there are several people in esa, but also in industry. and it is true, they have been working for... it's their career, so they have worked ten, 15 years on building up this mission. it's ready. in fact, we have done everything we need to do to get on to mars, taking off from baikonur in september this year. and, of course, now we have stopped it... cos there's no plan b in terms of actually getting you to mars.

i'm not saying there's no plan b. if i'm not telling you the plan b, it's because we don't have a decision yet. well, if there is to be a plan b, it's either new levels of cooperation with nasa, and, of course, back in 2011, 2012, you had a huge fallout with nasa over the mars mission because they decided to go their own way. so you're either going to have to rebuild a mars relationship with nasa, or somehow you're going to have to convince people like, i don't know, elon musk and jeff bezos, to work with you to do something dramatic that they've never done before. so, what is plan b? i'm not putting it on the table because a decision has to be made by my member states. but we are preparing a proposal, together with nasa, by the way, who has helped us analysing the issues that need to be done. there are a number of technology developments that need to be done, just to recall... the mission has four main components. of course, the launch with the rocket —

this was meant to be a russian portion. then the transfer vehicle to come towards mars. then the lander that brings the rover down to the surface, and the rover itself, which is the hard piece, to drill into the mars surface and do all the science. so, there are four big elements. and out of those four, two, roughly, are dropping out — the rocket — the launch by russia, and the lander in particular. plus, in the other parts, there is some russian technology. of course, all this stops now. i've done the series analysis, what needs to be done? what are the options? what can be done in europe, and what cannot be done in europe so easily that means it needs to be developed newly, that means from scratch, in order to do it? and, yes, yes — let me just finish — yes, i'm working with nasa to see whether they could be a partner on this mission. but i do not want to pre—empt this decision because this has yet to be made, but certainly, nasa has been extremely helpful and i really would like this to be mentioned. what is the difference between cutting and severing all ties with russia

on the exomars rover project and continuing to cooperate with russia when it comes to the international space station? as we speak to each other today, there is an esa italian astronaut on the international space station working alongside two russian astronauts, delivered to the space station by a russian rocket. you know, you're saying that's fine and we'll go on doing it. in fact, i believe you're saying we want to continue that cooperation all the way through to 2030, despite what putin's doing in ukraine. so how come you can continue to do that and have to abandon the mars mission? let me say we have not only abandoned the mars mission but also other cooperations with russia. another example is luna 25, 26 and 27, where we had hardware cooperation with russia. and we have abandoned that. we have stopped that cooperation as well. so, does it sit comfortably with you... you've abandoned all this stuff, and does it sit comfortably with you that a european astronaut and your agency's still working closely with the russians

on the international space station? the only exception is really the iss, and there, we have no choice. this is very clear because this is a station that depends on the russian contribution as much as it depends on the western contribution that is made up by the united states, byjapan, by canada and by esa, with my member states. and you cannot abandon or you cannot separate the station because you need russia to lift the station into higher orbit. you need the western part to deliver the power to the station, and many other segments that are necessary to run the station. you cannotjust break up and run away and abandon this. are you frightened ? are you frightened of russian threats? dmitry rogozin, the boss of the russian space agency, has said quite clearly, "if you block cooperation with us, who's going to save the international space station from an uncontrolled de orbit?

it could fall into the us or into europe", he said. that was a threatening message, and you were a little bit intimidated, were you? that was a very threatening message. but let me just say that russia benefits as much as europe on staying on the station and running it. but the point is, the russians hold the cards, don't they? no. when it comes to the space station? no — the russians hold the cards as much as the europeans and the americans and the western partners, too. both are needed, and it is not correct to say that the russians are the ones calling the shots. not at all. how did it come to this, mraschbacher? i'm not really talking now about the russian relationship, but how did it come that europe is such a second division player when it comes to space? think of the size of the european economy, the size of the european population. look at the size of the european space footprint compared with the united states, compared with russia, and today, increasingly, compared with china, too. what went wrong? i like what you say,

because this is exactly the message i have put when i became director general of esa into a document called agenda 2025, which should be a wake—up call to our politicians and to say, look, this is happening. we are in a second space race today, the first one obviously being the one in the �*60s. now we are in a second space race with china on one side, really building up extremely fast its capacity and its strength, and it's very impressive what they do. the us continuing to be a very strong space power. and the commercial sector suddenly being a new player, which we didn't have until very recently. and this is happening, with or without esa, with or without europe. but the gap is getting wider, not narrower. you haven't been in charge for that long, but during your tenure, what we see is massive investment in the us in space, not so much from nasa, although their budget dwarfs yours, but coming from venture capital, coming from elon musk

and jeff bezos and a whole host of others, who see in space massive potential, both, of course, for exploration, but, actually, also for profit. and they are pouring money in. and on the side of china, the state is absolutely committed to matching the us because of the geopolitical rivalry. europe doesn't seem to have anywhere to go in this. but what does this show? this shows that space is a domain where investments are worth making by the private sector. they are not doing it for fun. of course they have fun, i hope, at least, but they are also doing it for profit. but the private sector in europe isn't listening. yes, they do. and we are taking steps in order to increase the private funding also in europe. let me just say that in the last couple of months since i'm dg of esa, i've signed a number of agreements with venture capital companies to make sure that access to funding also in europe is easier and is guaranteed because i think there are three... if we talk about commercialisation, there

are three things that are needed, and i have gone with my most critical managers of esa to silicon valley and see these companies, visit them for ten days, and really identify what are the key ingredients in order to succeed for those companies, elon musk�*s spacex being one of them. it needs talented people — clever people who are driven with an idea, and theyjust want to do it. it needs access to money. and you need to be fast. they call it fast forward... fail fast, fast forward. in europe, we have plenty of talent and plenty of excellent people with brilliant ideas who want to do it. some of them go to the us because there's not enough opportunities here, but we have certainly not a shortage of talent. access to money is a problem and silicon valley, of course, giving about 60% of all the funds worldwide to companies. there we have to improve, and i'm working on it. i have signed an agreement injanuary this year with european investment fund and, as i said, with venture capital companies. speed — speed is something that is inherent in our culture. we are not as fast...

no, absolutely not! but you are hamstrung by the fact the european space agency is a group — i believe i'm right in saying — of 22 nations... 22 nations, yeah. ..dominated by the european union nations — i think 19 of your members are eu nations — and i think your biggest funder is the european commission. so, one of your big problems is that another key player in the agency is the united kingdom. well, it's brexited. it's no longer in the eu. that means it's semi—detached from some of the programmes that are part of your remit. you've got this massive bureaucratic problem. nasa and the us doesn't have to deal with that, china certainly doesn't have to deal with that, and you're never going to overcome that, are you? if you think that everything is gold that glitters on the other side of the ocean, then you're wrong, i'm sorry to say, because nasa also has its own bureaucracy and timing. it's not so much that the us has no problems, it'sjust that their problems aren't on the scale of yours when it comes to bureaucracy. china has its own set of issues. but in europe, yes, you are right, we have to speed up and we have to streamline decision making and we have to be faster.

i fully agree with you. this is one of — i have identified five priorities which i want to change. number one — we have to work closer together in europe among the partners. there's a huge, i would say, diversity of different partners. number two — commercialisation. exactly what happens in the us with spacex and with other partners, we have to develop a strong commercial sector. number three — safety and security. i don't need to explain this in the current situation. number four — programme challenges. and numberfive — the transformation of esa in europe, and that means speed and decision mechanisms. and there are 60 individual actions which i've identified on which we are working. of course, some of it takes a bit of time. yes, absolutely agreed. yes, i want it faster. but, yes, i'm tackling the problem. just one quick thought on the commercialisation and the power of individuals like elon musk. you have been quoted in the recent past as saying you are worried that such is the scale of spacex's involvement now, particularly in putting satellites

into low—earth orbit and elon musk dominating that marketplace, that you believe he is, in a sense, being allowed to make the rules in space. do you believe that there's now a lack of control and regulation, which means these privateers are doing things which aren't in the long—term interest of us — human beings? yes, i mean, that is certainly the case. there is a very strong development in space. elon musk, what you — the quote you make comes from the financial times, where i made an interview a couple of months ago. yes, absolutely. today, we have about 11,500 active satellites in space, in low earth orbit. half of them belong to elon musk. yeah, and he's got plans for thousands more. but i'm not saying that's bad. i'm saying he has an interest and all of us have an interest to regulate and make sure that this is not becoming a problem. and, yes, there is an urgency to deal with it. this is a regulatory

issue as much as one of practical arrangements between the key partners. and, yes, when it comes to space debris and orbit manoeuvres, as we call it, because a collision might occur, yes, we work very well with spacex, and there is no issue whatsoever, because we have to. isn't the ultimate truth that what we see today in this, as you call it, second phase of the space race, is a much greater focus than ever before on militarisation of space? donald trump, of course, back, i think, in 2019, created the us space force. the russians have shown their capacity to find ways of shooting down satellites. the chinese are involved in that, too. and it seems they are intent on projecting military power in space. does europe have a plan for projecting military power in space? europe, as you would know very well, is not seeing the military strength in the same way as it is done

in the us or in china or in russia or in some other countries, because of the history, and this is something that is certainly going back to the second world war and what happened afterwards, but... so, if you want to be a vital player in the next phase of space development, you're entirely trusting that the other key players won't be aggressive, use the projection of military power in the space domain, are you? what i'm doing — 0k, we have to distinguish a bit what is the situation today after the invasion of ukraine and what it was until three months ago. ah, so you've had to do a major rethink? and, yes, we are launching a debate. it is happening across europe and, certainly, also within the space community and the european space agency, that we are discussing with the member states, what does this mean? do we need to change, yes or no? and there are, of course, decisions to be made. it's very interesting what you're saying. let me just quote you.

i'm sure you've probably seen this quote, but if you haven't, it might be interesting. again, mr rogozin, the head of the russian space agency, said not so long ago, "slowly but surely, we are heading for the militarisation of space, and roscosmos," he said — the russian agency — "has no illusions about this. everyone is working on it." it seems everyone except europe. are wejust naive in europe? i wouldn't say that we are naive in europe. europe has, in some countries, a very strong capability. i take france as an example, i take the uk as an example, germany, italy, spain and a few others. and they have a strong capability in — also in some of the assets that relate or to some of the aspects that relate to space in terms of technology that is required. but this is a mind—set. are you telling me that the mind—set in europe is going to have to shift? what we don't have is a european capability and i think this is a discussion

that is needed. do we want to rely, country by country, on this excellent capability, by the way, or do we want something more of a european structure and a european response? and there today, we have very little to offer — this is absolutely true — with a few exceptions, i should say. so, russia could shoot down european satellites. there's no way that any european force could shoot down russian satellites. i wouldn't say that. individually, this might be possible. but why would russia do that? why did russia invade ukraine? that's a good question. but by shooting down a satellite, you are creating a whole mess out there that means a lot of debris and a lot of particles that fly around and endanger all the satellites, including the russians�* and... surely, what we have learned as a human species is that in the end, human beings sometimes take decisions which appear to run counter to the wider interest. they do it for all sorts of reasons. i'm just trying to explore why the european space agency consistently has waved the peace flag and said, "you know what? we're only about peaceful exploration. we're not interested

in going in the direction other space superpowers are going in, talking of militarisation." that's just not tenable, is it? if everybody else is going in a certain direction, you can't ignore it. as i said before, that is exactly the point. until the invasion of ukraine, esa was certainly working only on the — i would say mostly, not only, but mostly on peaceful use of space. now, a debate is happening. of course, i don't know what is the outcome of this. i am the director general of esa. i can raise the questions to my member states. the decision has to be made by the member states. you think a reset and a rethink is overdue? i think that we have to reflect — we have to see space as an integral part of a security system in europe. europe's security is under threat, as we all know, and it does not only need tanks on the street and tanks in the battlefield, space is an integral part, from communication,

earth observation and many other domains — navigation being one of them. and i think this is something that has to be seen in a holistic context. and, yes, this debate is needed. very interesting. final point — europe's never actually, of course, put men into space flight. the americans have done it, the chinese have done it, many countries have done it, but europe hasn't done it. do you think that's the wrong focus? because it's very expensive and if one talks about getting men — human beings, i should say — back on the moon and then to mars, vast, vast expense and time frames which are already stretching to 20110, 2050 before it's conceivable it could happen. the alternative is to say, "you know that? we're not going to do that any more — it's too expensive. we need to focus our resources on safeguarding our own planet, which is fragile and under urgent threat right now, not least from climate change." do you think that needs to be the focus going forward? 0k, today, the majority of the funding, the biggest programme in esa, in my

programmes, is on earth observation. and earth observation, as you say, is looking at our planet, investigating climate change, sustainability, biodiversity and these aspects. so, europe is never going to bother with talking of manned mission to mars? wait, wait — and this is fundamental, and i think this goes very well in line with the policies of the heads of states, heads of government of all european countries. everyone has declared climate change to be the biggest threat of everyone, of mankind, of the whole planet, and that's why europe has played a major role in pioneering this aspect, including in space. and that's what we do today — wait. but now comes human exploration, and you're absolutely right — today, and i like your challenge because i'm challenging my decision—makers with exactly the same question. i like that a lot. because today, europe is spending 7% of the budget nasa is spending on exploration. and you're absolutely right — today, europe's astronauts are not flying with a european rocket but with an american

rocket today and, in the past, also with a russian rocket. and i'm asking my member states, my politicians, is this right or should this change? in a word, do you think it will change, yes or no? it will... i will... i've been mandated by the ministers, and including president macron — who has written me a letter — to put a group of high—level experts in place to ask exactly this question. these are not space people — these are people from society. journalists, economists... it's not exactly a decisive answer, but i guess it's the answer i'm going to get. i'm coming back with options to the member states in november next year. 0k, josef aschbacher, i'm sorry to interrupt, but we have to end there. thank you so much for being on hardtalk. thank you.

hello there. we're expecting a short style of rather hot weather across much of the uk, but not all of it over the next few days or so — the heat and the humidity will be gradually building northwards. and that's because there's a heat wave across the iberian peninsula at the moment — temperatures in parts of spain have surpassed a0 celsius. that heat will be pushing northwards into france, and eventually into southern areas of the uk, so england and wales, by the time we get to friday when that heat is likely to peak. and that means that temperatures in london and in birmingham could get over 30 celsius on friday. but further north and west across much of northern ireland and scotland, they'll stick in the low 20s in celsius. at the moment, we do still have this area of low pressure giving us swathes of cloud, some outbreaks of rain — most of it quite light and patchy — across much of western scotland, northern ireland. this will help to keep the temperatures mild here overnight tonight, but underneath the clear skies,

temperatures will drop back into single figures, mid—single figures locally, perhaps, across england and wales. so a locally chilly start to the day here. but here, of course, we'll see lots of sunshine throughout the day on tuesday, some fair weather cloud building through the afternoon. further north and west with still all of this cloud around, some outbreaks of rain for western areas of scotland. eastern areas of scotland, though, should see some sunny spells emerge at times. temperatures peaking in the southeast of england at around 25 celsius. the pollen levels, of course, in all of that sunshine will be very high — a lot lower underneath the cloud and the rain towards the northwest. and that's where the cloud and the outbreaks of rain will tend to stay as we head through tuesday night. we'll start to see some warmer nights as we head through the rest of the week. temperatures across the board into wednesday morning should stay in double figures for the most part. still got some outbreaks of rain up towards the northern isles as we head through the day on wednesday, lots of cloud here. again, cloudiertowards the northwest across england and wales, temperatures will start to rise into the high 20s in celsius —

so 26—27 celsius, much of london cooler the further north you go. and let's take a look at what happens for the rest of the week — so our high pressurejust gradually moves eastwards, and the cold front will sink southwards, introducing that cooler—feeling air. but if we take a look at the temperatures, you can see that across northern ireland, 19—20 celsius — whereas across cambridge, 31 celsius by friday.

welcome to newsday, reporting live from singapore. i'm arunoday mukharji. the headlines: explosion fierce fighting in the battle for severodonetsk, as ukraine's grip on the strategic eastern city seems to weaken. we have a special report. this is a deliberate pack, bomb, shell, burn, and leave nothing but scorched earth —— deliberate tactic. the uk government publishes plans to override part of the brexit agreement involving trade rules for northern ireland and insists it's not breaking international law. donald trump's former attorney general testifies that his boss became detached from reality as he made false claims of voterfraud.