more news at the top of the hour. now on bbc news, dateline london with shaun ley. hello, and welcome to the programme, which brings together leading uk commentators with the foreign correspondents who write, blog and broadcast to audiences back home from the dateline london. this is our 1937 moment — at least according to general sir patrick sanders, newly appointed head of the british army. his speech this week was a shot across the bows to the politicians attending two national international talking shops —

the nato summit in madrid and, before that, the g7 in the bavarian alps. both promised to support ukraine for as long as it takes. general sanders was arguing for muscular deterrents, the not very disguised message to presidents and prime ministers being, do you want history to remember you as it remembers neville chamberlain, who delayed war by appeasing hitler but did not prevent it? liz truss, the uk's foreign minister, seemed to get the message, declaring, "we are keen to protect the defence of taiwan against beijing." this in a week when china's president xi jinping visited hong kong 25 years after british control came to an end. he was celebrating its rebirth. the uk isjoint guarantor of hong kong's freedoms. well, that went well, didn't it? in the studio with me, suzanne lynch, an irishjournalist now based in brussels for politico. polly toynbee, who has been writing a weekly column for the guardian since 1988 — which means she's seen off six prime ministers so far. and isabel hilton spelt many years as a foreign correspondent before

founding china dialogue, an independent organisation focused on the environmental challenges that country has to face. lovely to have you all in the studio. welcome. you and i were both in the bavarian alps for the g7. we did. we bumped into each other, yeah, with the hundreds ofjournalists that were there gathered for the event, yes. let's start with that, suzanne. and with what the message coming out of that was. yeah. in terms of the atmosphere at the g7, because it did feel, even though it wasn't supposed to be, in the end all about ukraine? it was. i mean, let's cast our mind back a year ago to the last g7 in cornwall — who would have thought that a year on they would be faced with a war on the european continent? so it completely changed the dynamic this time around, there was a very obvious focal point and a very obvious pressing team of these few days. and i think the issues that have emerged from the ukraine war as well the actual situation on the ground dominated everything, from sanctions

to issues of food security, to climate as well and how that's linked into gas and oil position, so i think the leaders were under pressure to come out with results. but i have to say, i don't think there was that much progress made. take food security, for example — there was a lot of talk going into the summit that there would be some way of trying to deal with this issue of the tonnes of grain that are stuck in ukraine and can't get out. we really didn't see any progress on that. also, with sanctions, there was a plan to put a price cap on oil. yes, they agreed that, but the details still very much have to be worked out, so in terms of actual meat on the bones, i think it was quite disappointing. in some ways, the sanders speech was almost the most dramatic — and it wasn't by any leader of any country. it sort of implied a lot of the texts and what we were told, but this was a kind of very, very direct... you could say, soldiers are bound to say, polly, that we want more solders and we need more weapons and there's always a risk of war, but the tone of this

felt quite different? yes, it's a moment of reality, for this country, which lives in a fantasy world in many respects, into how it sees itself across the world, but right across europe. actually, are we going to fight? are they going to fight in ukraine — to the last ukrainian? well, as long as president zelensky wants to or as long as his people want to, but i do think that europe hasn't come to terms with what it's going to cost. we're not spending any more money, the general was saying we haven't even got any more ammunition left to send to them. they need these heavy weapons. we're not providing them. they keep promising to, but it doesn't actually turn up. and i don't think anybody has confronted — certainly in this country and probably not across europe — do you realise what going back to cold war really means in terms of defence spending? it is vast. it either means vast tax raises or it means huge cuts in things people really care about, like health and social

care and education. i don't think anyone... borisjohnson is not a man for unpleasant realities and he's not facing the country with it, nor is he facing up to do it himself. i want to talk a bit about the energy issue in a bit more detail in a moment, but on this question of spending on the military, we had a defence review barely a year ago that envisaged a smaller and smaller standing army of kind of about another 10,000 — i think it takes us to around 70,000 from about 83,000 — but now we're saying actually we're going to spend more of our gdp on defence between now and 2030. in a sense, we clearly have the aspiration, but can we actually generate the troops and equipment to deliver on the pledges we're making? well, i think it's going to be i pretty difficult, as polly said. we have got accustomed to the idea of the peace dividend. _ ever since 1989, we've been cutting back on defence — i actually quite rightly. if we don't need it, - don't spend the money. but according at least _

to the military, we've gone so far that actually building back up not only takes money, it takes time. | you can'tjust conjure up troops, you can'tjust . conjure up technologies. we don't have conscript armies these days... we don't have conscript armies. we're actually very - slow on delivering new military kit, you know? endless delays and cost overruns. we're not very good at that, - so i think it's going to be a fairly hard reality if we're - going to build back up. just on that, i think it's quite interesting about this issue of defence spending now. obviously it's something the us has said for such a long time about the other nato allies, they weren't paying their way enough, but it can be very politically difficult. some countries — italy, for example — their prime minister, draghi, has got a difficult political situation because one of the main parties there is divided over how much they should send to ukraine. so particularly in countries where there's maybe a coalition government — you see that in germany, chancellor schultz has come in for a lot of criticism — but germany has done a u—turn when it comes to defence spending.

a lot of people may have thought it was maybe a bit late. but he's been trying to keep a fractious enough traffic light coalition government together. so these decisions and this policy—making can be very, very complex. i think there has to be a measure of respect for germany _ because they have had to do the biggest somersault, - intellectually, emotionally, politically, of any country, i they have been the ones who don't do | defence and now they have to face upi to the fact that the russian bear is back, is a real- threat, it is a real enemy is naturally germany has to step up las well and i think they have done | remarkably well at it. we'll see how long it lasts. the question is, whose nerve lasts longer? - president putin's or. the rest of the west? i was very struck, talking to a middle—aged german woman broadcastjournalist in the week who was saying she knows of no comparable time when people in germany feared about turning

a switch on the wall and they're not being any power there. you worry about rationing and we now start to think actually we are headed for a really uncertain future. they seem to have realised this. i wonder if we've yet realised it in the uk? no. we haven't realised it and i mean, to be fair, germany's dependence| on russian energy is greater. than ours is, but we are facing a perfect storm of brexiti consequences, inflation, cost of living, and that reality, i think. - how long this is going to last, how slow any recovery is going to be, l it hasn't really sunk in. we could use less energy, all of us, if we had to, if we're confronted with that, and maybe it's time that the world actually stopped and thought, we don't need to squander the amount of electricity... absolutely, but the response in this country to that proposition, - you know, the obvious thing to do is to insulate british houses, - which are the leakiest - and least efficient in europe

and all the government response has been on the supply side, _ not the demand side, so talking... instead of putting forward - a programme to insulate houses, they're talking about more oil and gas from the north sea, i which will take 25 years. and takes through 2050. yes, it's very interesting in that, how this is coinciding with ideas about the need to tackle climate change, but i do think really big users of energy ultimately is big industry and big business and there's lots of talk about people in europe, they're prepared to wear an extra sweater or whatever, but really, when it comes down to it, i think the mood now in europe down to it, i think to not sanction russian gas, that is not on the table at the moment, any more sanctions when it comes to russian gas, in particular. it's really about the dependence of industry and business and i think that is happening in the background, that kind of lobbying. and that's really interesting because the one thing they were able to agree on in g7 was they were going to sanction russian gold exports,

which according to one expert i was speaking to on bbc news earlier in the week, is a pretty small beer and it's the same problem on his programme mark roche was talking about a few months ago with diamonds, where you can mix the diamonds up with other diamonds, so you don't know where they come from. you can do it with oil, indeed, there's a good point. so the sanctioning of these things can be very ineffective and they are going for what you might call the low hanging fruit because the oil and gas is just too tough. the price cap proposition. is extreme because the g7, the clue is in the name, that is seven countries, | if you want a global price cap . there are another 188 countries you might have to consult. that's not going to happen tomorrow, even if you were to agree — _ india, china, they're not going to agree, actually| if you look across asia most countries are not opted in to sanctions. i

this might be the crunch moment where _ this might be the crunch moment where a _ this might be the crunch moment where a lot— this might be the crunch moment where a lot has to be done about the climate _ where a lot has to be done about the climate as_ where a lot has to be done about the climate as a — where a lot has to be done about the climate as a necessity. | where a lot has to be done about the climate as a necessity.— climate as a necessity. i was very struck when _ climate as a necessity. i was very struck when i _ climate as a necessity. i was very struck when i looked _ climate as a necessity. i was very struck when i looked at _ climate as a necessity. i was very struck when i looked at the - struck when i looked at the communique which came out at the last day of the g7, we were all trying to keep up with what they were saying at the various translations of the various leaders's speech, but what chancellor schultz signed up to was continued to commit to end public support the macro support for fossil fuel energy sector by the end of 2022, except in limited circumstances, clearly defined by each country. so in other words,", and ijust wonder, in that kind of context, is it surprising you get scepticism? this is what you should do except when it gets a bit too painfulfor

do except when it gets a bit too painful for us.— painful for us. after 20 years aareed painful for us. after 20 years agreed to — painful for us. after 20 years agreed to put _ painful for us. after 20 years agreed to put an _ painful for us. after 20 years agreed to put an end, - painful for us. after 20 years | agreed to put an end, agreed painful for us. after 20 years i agreed to put an end, agreed to painful for us. after 20 years - agreed to put an end, agreed to end inefficient _ agreed to put an end, agreed to end inefficient fossil fuel subsidies. we subsidise fossil fuels. it's insane, — we subsidise fossil fuels. it's insane, and that money could go towards — insane, and that money could go towards supporting the energy transition, advancing renewables and so 0h _ transition, advancing renewables and so 0h to _ transition, advancing renewables and so 0h to be — transition, advancing renewables and so on. to be fair, the european union _ so on. to be fair, the european union has — so on. to be fair, the european union has a _ so on. to be fair, the european union has a very comprehensive climate — union has a very comprehensive climate plan, which it has not resile — climate plan, which it has not resile from. but you do get countries _ resile from. but you do get countries with some particular problem — countries with some particular problem is beginning to wiggle. there _ problem is beginning to wiggle. there was that argument about phasing — there was that argument about phasing out coal rather than phasing out. japan— phasing out coal rather than phasing out. japan making this point again. and japan— out. japan making this point again. and japan isjust having a really and japan is just having a really difficult time. indeed it is. it is a very short rainy season followed by intense heat.— a very short rainy season followed by intense heat. everyone is facing a roblem by intense heat. everyone is facing a problem and _ by intense heat. everyone is facing a problem and call— by intense heat. everyone is facing a problem and call is _ by intense heat. everyone is facing a problem and call is being - by intense heat. everyone is facing l a problem and call is being extended quietly— a problem and call is being extended quietly all— a problem and call is being extended quietly all over the place. even a problem and call is being extended quietly all over the place.— quietly all over the place. even by green ministers _ quietly all over the place. even by green ministers in _

quietly all over the place. even by green ministers in the _ quietly all over the place. even by green ministers in the german . green ministers in the german coalition. . , green ministers in the german coalition. ., , ., , coalition. that is indeed temporary, and i think coalition. that is indeed temporary, and i think you _ coalition. that is indeed temporary, and i think you have _ coalition. that is indeed temporary, and i think you have to _ coalition. that is indeed temporary, and i think you have to keep - coalition. that is indeed temporary, and i think you have to keep the - and i think you have to keep the lights _ and i think you have to keep the lights on — and i think you have to keep the lights on mostly. but not to abandon the longer— lights on mostly. but not to abandon the longer term commitment. that�*s the longer term commitment. that's the longer term commitment. that's the irony of — the longer term commitment. that's the irony of this, _ the longer term commitment. that's the irony of this, in _ the longer term commitment. that's the irony of this, in one _ the longer term commitment. that's the irony of this, in one sense - the longer term commitment. that's the irony of this, in one sense it - the irony of this, in one sense it underlines for everyone what has happened with the russian war in ukraine, how we have to get off fossil fuels, ukraine, how we have to get off fossilfuels, but on ukraine, how we have to get off fossil fuels, but on the other hand it is allowing some countries of the hook. particularly countries in eastern europe you're taking a very strong stance against russia. they can say they need to continue to use their coal plants because their oil and gas is under. it is allowing them to prolong the use of other fossil fuels. them to prolong the use of other fossilfuels. this them to prolong the use of other fossil fuels. this could just be temporary but that depends on how long this war goes on. let’s temporary but that depends on how long this war goes on.— long this war goes on. let's shift our focus to _ long this war goes on. let's shift our focus to china _ long this war goes on. let's shift our focus to china and _ long this war goes on. let's shift our focus to china and the - long this war goes on. let's shift | our focus to china and the middle east, and particularly, the other big thing that happened in the 12 months since last g7, the pull—out from afghanistan. and it is like afghanistan hasn't happened. nobody

talked about it. even at nato or g7, which is a pretty damning admission of quite how dramatic it has been and nobody wants to talk about it. but the other thing was in terms of china. and this investment strategy. i wonder what you made of that? this commitment to provide money, £400 billion, which seemed to be aimed at the road and built problem. it’s the road and built problem. it's eas to the road and built problem. it's easy to do- _ the road and built problem. it's easy to do. yes, it is actually a slightly— easy to do. yes, it is actually a slightly repainted and refurbished version _ slightly repainted and refurbished version of build back better. as if we could forget. _ version of build back better. as if we could forget. it _ version of build back better. as if we could forget. it was _ version of build back better. as if we could forget. it was only - version of build back better. as if we could forget. it was only one | version of build back better. as if. we could forget. it was only one g7 auo. we could forget. it was only one g7 ago- great — we could forget. it was only one g7 ago. great fanfare, _ we could forget. it was only one g7 ago. great fanfare, we _ we could forget. it was only one g7 ago. great fanfare, we are - we could forget. it was only one g7 ago. great fanfare, we are going i we could forget. it was only one g7j ago. great fanfare, we are going to challenge _ ago. great fanfare, we are going to challenge belt and road because chiha's— challenge belt and road because china's predatory lender and we are

transparent— china's predatory lender and we are transparent and all of that. but then— transparent and all of that. but then nothing happened. so we are refurbishing it again, this policy, with a _ refurbishing it again, this policy, with a little more in it. and refurbishing it again, this policy, with a little more in it.— with a little more in it. and with some of those _ with a little more in it. and with some of those beneficiary - with a little more in it. and with - some of those beneficiary countries invited to put the case to the g7 members at the summit. argentina, india, etc. members at the summit. argentina, lndia. etc- but— members at the summit. argentina, india, etc. but none _ members at the summit. argentina, india, etc. but none of— members at the summit. argentina, india, etc. but none of it _ members at the summit. argentina, india, etc. but none of it will - members at the summit. argentina, india, etc. but none of it will mean i india, etc. but none of it will mean anything _ india, etc. but none of it will mean anything unless it is delivered. and the problem about delivery is that chinese _ the problem about delivery is that chinese state owned enterprise can take a _ chinese state owned enterprise can take a trig _ chinese state owned enterprise can take a big risk in country x because it has— take a big risk in country x because it has the _ take a big risk in country x because it has the state bank behind it, it has access— it has the state bank behind it, it has access to capital regardless of risk, _ has access to capital regardless of risk, and — has access to capital regardless of risk, and if— has access to capital regardless of risk, and if the state owned enterprise goes belly up, so actually— enterprise goes belly up, so actually it is the state that is taking — actually it is the state that is taking the risk. 0ur actually it is the state that is taking the risk. our system doesn't allow— taking the risk. our system doesn't allow that — taking the risk. our system doesn't allow that. you want private companies to go in, it is looking around — companies to go in, it is looking around but _ companies to go in, it is looking around but who is the guarantor? it is looking _ around but who is the guarantor? it is looking around for a multilateral. and putting those deals— multilateral. and putting those deals together requires focus and consistency, which these big

promises so far haven't had. bluntly, _ promises so far haven't had. bluntly, do you think that this is a good investment? in other words, is it going to get the influence that we seem to hope we will get and prevent china further extending its influence in latin america and africa and the caribbean? the big roblem africa and the caribbean? the big problem is. _ africa and the caribbean? the big problem is. is _ africa and the caribbean? the big problem is, is it _ africa and the caribbean? the big problem is, is it too _ africa and the caribbean? the big problem is, is it too late? - africa and the caribbean? the big problem is, is it too late? the - problem is, is it too late? the chinese have been going into these countries for some time. the eu and the western partners, they have a lot more checks and balances, more of a long—term investment. some african leaders made the point, how long are we supposed to wait? when somebody is offering the money straight up, they don't see the advantage of waiting for the european money. and linking back to what you said there, about afghanistan, a lot of leaders in africa are saying, we know there is a huge war in ukraine, that we have conflicts all over our continent all the time and why isn't there the same level of interest? brute the time and why isn't there the same level of interest?- the time and why isn't there the

same level of interest? we will talk about food towards _ same level of interest? we will talk about food towards the _ same level of interest? we will talk about food towards the end - same level of interest? we will talk about food towards the end of - same level of interest? we will talk about food towards the end of the l about food towards the end of the programme. let's talk a bit about china in the light of the hong kong anniversary. xijinping's interesting interpretation of recent history. isabel, remind us about how we got to the stage. the history of this, it wasn't british, we had it under a long lease.— this, it wasn't british, we had it under a long lease. opium war, 1842, we aet under a long lease. opium war, 1842, we get hong — under a long lease. opium war, 1842, we get hong kong _ under a long lease. opium war, 1842, we get hong kong island. _ under a long lease. opium war, 1842, we get hong kong island. one - under a long lease. opium war, 1842, we get hong kong island. one of- under a long lease. opium war, 1842, we get hong kong island. one of the. we get hong kong island. one of the most shameful _ we get hong kong island. one of the most shameful events _ we get hong kong island. one of the most shameful events in _ we get hong kong island. one of the most shameful events in british - most shameful events in british history — most shameful events in british history l— most shameful events in british histo . ., ., ., history. i would not argue with that. but hong _ history. i would not argue with that. but hong kong _ history. i would not argue with that. but hong kong island - history. i would not argue with that. but hong kong island is. that. but hong kong island is unsustainable on its own. we then later— unsustainable on its own. we then later acquired kowloon, and in 1898 we acquired 100 year lease on the new territories. that was coming to an endm _ new territories. that was coming to an end... ., , .,~ an end... the new territories taken kowloon, an end... the new territories taken kowloon. hong _ an end... the new territories taken kowloon, hong kong _ an end... the new territories taken kowloon, hong kong island... - an end... the new territories taken kowloon, hong kong island... justl kowloon, hong kong island... just the mainland _ kowloon, hong kong island... just the mainland part of it. but from that mainland part, comes of the water, _ that mainland part, comes of the water, the — that mainland part, comes of the water, the energy. you can't survive on hohg _

water, the energy. you can't survive on hong kong island without the back-up — on hong kong island without the back—up from the mainland. without that lease, _ back—up from the mainland. without that lease, it was clear that hong kong _ that lease, it was clear that hong kong island was going to have to go back to _ kong island was going to have to go back to china. began to negotiate. thatcher— back to china. began to negotiate. thatcher signed the joint declaration in 1985, as i remember. which _ declaration in 1985, as i remember. which was — declaration in 1985, as i remember. which was the one country, two systems— which was the one country, two systems a — which was the one country, two systems a principle which problem that for— systems a principle which problem that for 50 years hong kong would stay pretty much internally as it was _ stay pretty much internally as it was. . , stay pretty much internally as it was. ., , ., ., z: was. that is due to run out in 2047. indeed. was. that is due to run out in 2047. lndeed- and — was. that is due to run out in 2047. indeed. and the _ was. that is due to run out in 2047. indeed. and the details _ was. that is due to run out in 2047. indeed. and the details of- was. that is due to run out in 2047. indeed. and the details of that - was. that is due to run out in 2047. | indeed. and the details of that were further— indeed. and the details of that were further negotiated in what is called the basic— further negotiated in what is called the basic law, which is the hong kong _ the basic law, which is the hong kong mini — the basic law, which is the hong kong mini constitution, and that guaranteed rule of law, separation of powers. — guaranteed rule of law, separation of powers, the liberties that hong kong _ of powers, the liberties that hong kong had, — of powers, the liberties that hong kong had, with the promise that there _ kong had, with the promise that there would be a widening of the franchise — there would be a widening of the franchise and they would have a chance — franchise and they would have a chance to — franchise and they would have a chance to elect the executive council _ chance to elect the executive council. that was fine for the first ten, _ council. that was fine for the first ten, 15 _ council. that was fine for the first ten, 15 years, although it was being nibbled _ ten, 15 years, although it was being nibbled at~ — ten, 15 years, although it was being nibbled at. the trouble began when the chinese started to reform the school _ the chinese started to reform the school curriculum, which provokes

students _ school curriculum, which provokes students led byjoshua wong, then 14, to _ students led byjoshua wong, then 14, to protest. and from then on, it was a _ 14, to protest. and from then on, it was a escalating series of attempts by china _ was a escalating series of attempts by china to — was a escalating series of attempts by china to impose controls and progressive resistance from hong kong _ progressive resistance from hong kong. which ended up in the final year really— kong. which ended up in the final year really quite violent confrontation. after a year of very violent _ confrontation. after a year of very violent confrontation, which was a response — violent confrontation, which was a response to carrie lam, the then chief— response to carrie lam, the then chief executive trying to impose an extradition — chief executive trying to impose an extradition law which would mean people _ extradition law which would mean people from hong kong could be trialled _ people from hong kong could be trialled in china, a big problem, after— trialled in china, a big problem, after a — trialled in china, a big problem, after a year of those very fierce confrontations there were some district — confrontations there were some district elections, the lower level elections. — district elections, the lower level elections, and the opposition won 90%~ _ elections, and the opposition won 90%~ so — elections, and the opposition won 90%. so carrie lam's position, that she was— 90%. so carrie lam's position, that she was defending the people of hong kon- she was defending the people of hong kong against these nasty opposition figures, _ kong against these nasty opposition figures, was completely destroyed, and that— figures, was completely destroyed, and that is— figures, was completely destroyed, and that is when the national security— and that is when the national security law comes in and that locks up security law comes in and that locks up the _ security law comes in and that locks up the opposition, postpones the legend _ up the opposition, postpones the legend elections. and now we have

hohg _ legend elections. and now we have hong kong, which has lost its liberty— hong kong, which has lost its liberty and will be reduced to being another— liberty and will be reduced to being another city in china. did liberty and will be reduced to being another city in china.— another city in china. did you have another city in china. did you have any expectation. _ another city in china. did you have any expectation, really, _ another city in china. did you have any expectation, really, that - another city in china. did you have| any expectation, really, that these freedoms — any expectation, really, that these freedoms would _ any expectation, really, that these freedoms would last? _ any expectation, really, that these freedoms would last? it _ any expectation, really, that these freedoms would last? it always - freedoms would last? it always seemed — freedoms would last? it always seemed unrealistic, _ freedoms would last? it always seemed unrealistic, and - freedoms would last? it always seemed unrealistic, and we - freedoms would last? it alwaysj seemed unrealistic, and we left freedoms would last? it always - seemed unrealistic, and we left not really— seemed unrealistic, and we left not really very— seemed unrealistic, and we left not really very honourably, _ seemed unrealistic, and we left not really very honourably, kind - seemed unrealistic, and we left not really very honourably, kind of- really very honourably, kind of knowing — really very honourably, kind of knowing that _ really very honourably, kind of knowing that they _ really very honourably, kind of knowing that they had - really very honourably, kind of knowing that they had it. - really very honourably, kind of knowing that they had it. opinions vafied, knowing that they had it. opinions varied, to knowing that they had it. opinions varied. to be _ knowing that they had it. opinions varied, to be honest. _ knowing that they had it. opinions varied, to be honest. at _ knowing that they had it. opinions varied, to be honest. at the - varied, to be honest. at the beginning, i was relatively pessimistic. but for ten years i thought— pessimistic. but for ten years i thought i— pessimistic. but for ten years i thought i had been wrong. i thought china _ thought i had been wrong. i thought china needs hong kong because it was the goose _ china needs hong kong because it was the goose that laid the golden egg. it the goose that laid the golden egg. it wasn't _ the goose that laid the golden egg. it wasn't actually doing any harm. hohg _ it wasn't actually doing any harm. hong kong was not damaging china. you get _ hong kong was not damaging china. you get to— hong kong was not damaging china. you get to the point of 2012, xi jinping — you get to the point of 2012, xi jinping comes in, and the party is seriously— jinping comes in, and the party is seriously anxious about its own survival — seriously anxious about its own survival. and there is a list of things— survival. and there is a list of things that the party regards as a threat _ things that the party regards as a threat to— things that the party regards as a threat to its continued survival, they— threat to its continued survival, they include rule of law, freedom of

they include rule of law, freedom of the press, _ they include rule of law, freedom of the press, all of the things that hohg _ the press, all of the things that hong kong had, and that is when you begin— hong kong had, and that is when you begin to _ hong kong had, and that is when you begin to see... is it hong kong had, and that is when you begin to see- - -_ begin to see... is it at that point that we start _ begin to see... is it at that point that we start to _ begin to see... is it at that point that we start to worry _ begin to see... is it at that point that we start to worry about - begin to see... is it at that point - that we start to worry about taiwan? well, taiwan suddenly starts to worry— well, taiwan suddenly starts to worry about taiwan, because it was good _ worry about taiwan, because it was good to— worry about taiwan, because it was good to be — worry about taiwan, because it was good to be another version of one country. _ good to be another version of one country, two systems. as it was in tibet. _ country, two systems. as it was in tibet, actually. the initial agreement in tibet about internal autonomy, all of the things that you see in— autonomy, all of the things that you see in hohg — autonomy, all of the things that you see in hong kong, and that didn't last _ see in hong kong, and that didn't last so _ see in hong kong, and that didn't last so of— see in hong kong, and that didn't last. so of course taiwan than it thinks _ last. so of course taiwan than it thinks there is going to be no satisfactory resolution for them. and so, — satisfactory resolution for them. and so, yes, that began a hostile situation — and so, yes, that began a hostile situation. , , and so, yes, that began a hostile situation. g , ., , situation. under xijinping, it has all happened _ situation. under xijinping, it has all happened in — situation. under xijinping, it has all happened in the _ situation. under xijinping, it has all happened in the last - situation. under xijinping, it has all happened in the last ten - situation. under xijinping, it hasj all happened in the last ten years or so. and that is why this concern about taiwan in particular.- about taiwan in particular. which raises... perhaps _ about taiwan in particular. which raises... perhaps liz _ about taiwan in particular. which raises... perhaps liz truss - about taiwan in particular. which| raises... perhaps liz truss should talk tough about taiwan being supported...

talk tough about taiwan being supported- - -_ talk tough about taiwan being suuorted... ., �*, ., ., supported... no, it's not admirable. it's supported... no, it's not admirable. it's pathetic- — supported... no, it's not admirable. it's pathetic. little _ supported... no, it's not admirable. it's pathetic. little england - it's pathetic. little england strutting _ it's pathetic. little england strutting about _ it's pathetic. little england strutting about saying... i it's pathetic. little england i strutting about saying... she it's pathetic. little england - strutting about saying... she was saying _ strutting about saying... she was saying in— strutting about saying... she was saying in the _ strutting about saying... she was saying in the times _ strutting about saying... she was saying in the times today, - strutting about saying... she was saying in the times today, the i strutting about saying... she was| saying in the times today, the uk will not _ saying in the times today, the uk will not rest — saying in the times today, the uk will not rest until— saying in the times today, the uk will not rest until hong _ saying in the times today, the uk will not rest until hong kong - saying in the times today, the uk will not rest until hong kong getsj will not rest until hong kong gets back its— will not rest until hong kong gets back its freedoms. _ will not rest until hong kong gets back its freedoms.— will not rest until hong kong gets back its freedoms. nonsense. but that is the question _ back its freedoms. nonsense. but that is the question i _ back its freedoms. nonsense. but that is the question i raise. - that is the question i raise. whether, in a sense, you can sabre rattle but you have got to have something... is hong kong unfortunately an example of us not being able to follow through on our promises? and therefore, why would taiwan take our promises seriously? we were the signatory of an international treaty and we were meant _ international treaty and we were meant to— international treaty and we were meant to guarantee hong kong. the united _ meant to guarantee hong kong. the united states plays that role in taiwan — united states plays that role in taiwan. actually, it is worse. liz truss— taiwan. actually, it is worse. liz truss talking about supplying arms to taiwan — truss talking about supplying arms to taiwan, guess who we have actually — to taiwan, guess who we have actually supplied arms to? we have supplied _ actually supplied arms to? we have supplied the chinese navy with radar equipment— supplied the chinese navy with radar equipment despite there being an embargo — equipment despite there being an embargo. a equipment despite there being an

embaruo. �* , ., , embargo. a very fine military socks from china- — embargo. a very fine military socks from china- |— embargo. a very fine military socks from china. i went _ embargo. a very fine military socks from china. i went to _ embargo. a very fine military socks from china. i went to visit - embargo. a very fine military socks from china. i went to visit the - from china. i went to visit the factory a few years ago and i was given two pairs, which i declared. it's notjust liz truss. joe biden, the president of the united states, during his trip to japan the president of the united states, during his trip tojapan in the president of the united states, during his trip to japan in may, also suggested that the us would go in militarily if needed. and the white house then went to clarify. the analogy is, and came out of the nato summit, for the first time china was mentioned as a challenge in their... ., ., ., in their... even hong kong made it into the gt — in their... even hong kong made it into the g7 communique. - in their... even hong kong made it into the g7 communique. the - in their... even hong kong made it. into the g7 communique. the analogy eve one into the g7 communique. the analogy everyone was — into the g7 communique. the analogy everyone was talking _ into the g7 communique. the analogy everyone was talking about _ into the g7 communique. the analogy everyone was talking about there, - into the g7 communique. the analogy everyone was talking about there, is l everyone was talking about there, is china going to be the next russia, could there be an invasion their way there was with russia. it could there be an invasion their way there was with russia.— there was with russia. it makes it more sense _ there was with russia. it makes it more sense for— there was with russia. it makes it more sense for china _ there was with russia. it makes it more sense for china to _ there was with russia. it makes it more sense for china to say - there was with russia. it makes it more sense for china to say it. . there was with russia. it makes it| more sense for china to say it. the chinese _ more sense for china to say it. the chinese cannot— more sense for china to say it. the chinese cannot be _ more sense for china to say it. the chinese cannot be certain - more sense for china to say it. the chinese cannot be certain what - more sense for china to say it. the chinese cannot be certain what the americans— chinese cannot be certain what the americans might _ chinese cannot be certain what the americans might do. _ chinese cannot be certain what the americans might do. who - chinese cannot be certain what the americans might do. who knows . chinese cannot be certain what the . americans might do. who knows who will be _ americans might do. who knows who will be the _ americans might do. who knows who will be the next _ americans might do. who knows who will be the next american _ americans might do. who knows who will be the next american president, i will be the next american president, what kind _ will be the next american president, what kind of— will be the next american president, what kind of lunatic— will be the next american president, what kind of lunatic it _

will be the next american president, what kind of lunatic it might - will be the next american president, what kind of lunatic it might be, - will be the next american president, what kind of lunatic it might be, or. what kind of lunatic it might be, or not? _ what kind of lunatic it might be, or not? they— what kind of lunatic it might be, or not? they can't— what kind of lunatic it might be, or not? they can't predict _ what kind of lunatic it might be, or not? they can't predict how- what kind of lunatic it might be, or not? they can't predict how the i not? they can't predict how the americans— not? they can't predict how the americans would _ not? they can't predict how the americans would behave - not? they can't predict how the americans would behave if - not? they can't predict how the americans would behave if they not? they can't predict how the - americans would behave if they did invade _ americans would behave if they did invade taiwan _ americans would behave if they did invade taiwan. so— americans would behave if they did invade taiwan. so that _ americans would behave if they did invade taiwan. so that makes - americans would behave if they did | invade taiwan. so that makes some sense _ invade taiwan. so that makes some sense to— invade taiwan. so that makes some sense to have _ invade taiwan. so that makes some sense. to have liz— invade taiwan. so that makes some sense. to have liz truss— invade taiwan. so that makes some sense. to have liz truss strutting . sense. to have liz truss strutting aboutm — sense. to have liz truss strutting about... ., ., , , about... there are many ways the chinese can _ about. .. there are many ways the chinese can recover— about... there are many ways the chinese can recover taiwan, - about... there are many ways the chinese can recover taiwan, and i about... there are many ways the i chinese can recover taiwan, and the most _ chinese can recover taiwan, and the most uncertain is actually to lodge an armed — most uncertain is actually to lodge an armed invasion. were they to do that, _ an armed invasion. were they to do that, however, you should look to japan _ that, however, you should look to japan where the american bases in japan _ japan where the american bases in japan would have to be taken out and japan _ japan would have to be taken out and japan is _ japan would have to be taken out and japan is rather conscious of this and is _ japan is rather conscious of this and is now— japan is rather conscious of this and is now getting over its dislike of being _ and is now getting over its dislike of being a — and is now getting over its dislike of being a nuclear power. the new japanese--- _ of being a nuclear power. the new japanese... not _ of being a nuclear power. the new japanese... not a _ of being a nuclear power. the new japanese... not a member- of being a nuclear power. the new japanese... not a member of- of being a nuclear power. the new. japanese... not a member of nato. clearly had some influence on that committee. if clearly had some influence on that committee-— committee. if there were to be an assault on — committee. if there were to be an assault on taiwan _ committee. if there were to be an assault on taiwan by _ committee. if there were to be an assault on taiwan by china, - committee. if there were to be an assault on taiwan by china, japan| committee. if there were to be an i assault on taiwan by china, japan is absolutely— assault on taiwan by china, japan is absolutely in the firing line. when biden— absolutely in the firing line. when biden visited japan, the chinese and russians— biden visited japan, the chinese and russians didn't fly over of the sea ofjapan, — russians didn't fly over of the sea ofjapan, just to say, hey, guys, we are here _ ofjapan, 'ust to say, hey, guys, we are here. . v ofjapan, 'ust to say, hey, guys, we are here. ., �*, ., ., are here. that's the other fear, this chinese _

are here. that's the other fear, this chinese - _ are here. that's the other fear, this chinese - russia _ are here. that's the other fear, this chinese - russia alliance. l this chinese — russia alliance. china has been trying to tread a line there. at the un, it protects russia all the time. jens stoltenberg said this explicit right in madrid. an alliance that was set “p in madrid. an alliance that was set up as a bulwark against russia has found its mojo against because it is faced with a russian war, but yet it is now talking about china on the other side of the world. that has huge ramifications. i mean, whether thatis huge ramifications. i mean, whether that is just huge ramifications. i mean, whether that isjust a huge ramifications. i mean, whether that is just a warning. at that sense that people feel appeasement, people took their eye off the ball with russia, now the same is happening in china.— with russia, now the same is happening in china. they didn't euuate happening in china. they didn't equate them- _ happening in china. they didn't equate them. the _ happening in china. they didn't equate them. the threat - happening in china. they didn't equate them. the threat they l happening in china. they didn't i equate them. the threat they said china _ equate them. the threat they said china post— equate them. the threat they said china post was the functioning of the global system. gnlgt china post was the functioning of the global system.— the global system. only last messages — the global system. only last messages was _ the global system. only last messages was the _ the global system. only last messages was the for - the global system. only last - messages was the for resilience, democracies, and boy do we need them now. suzanne lynch, isabel hilton, thank you very much. the excuse

this. that's it for dateline london for this week. we are back the same time next week. hello. there'll be some decent sunny spells out there for a fair few of us at times this weekend, but always be on the lookout for the skies darkening, showers will never be too far away from the forecast throughout this weekend and there will be a cool breeze to go with it. temperatures down a little bit where we normally expect for this stage injuly. the bulk of today's rain is linked to this weather system here. it's linking across scotland at the moment in the far north and north west. this is where we'll continue to see the more persistent rain. this one here drifting through the midlands in the direction of east anglia and south east, producing showery bursts of rain, eventually reaching the south east

into the evening but the bulk of the day remains dry. but where we started with cloud and rain through northern ireland, southern scotland, northern england, wales and including the north and west midlands, things will turn dry and brighter with more sunshine around through the afternoon. still one or two showers, a bit of a keen breeze coming in from the south west and then those cloudier moments that will make it feel a touch on the cool side, 16 to 19 degrees — below par. but we could still get around 20—21, east anglia, south east. by this evening there will be a few showers pushing through, not everyone will see them, though and into the night many will become dry again. further outbreaks of rain in the far north of scotland and then a few showers developing in the west later on in the night. temperatures as we start your sunday morning, very similar to what they were this morning, around nine to 12 celsius. so into sunday we go, a dry and bright start for the vast majority, always a bit cloudy across some of these western districts. a few showers around here as we start the day. those showers, as a westerly wind kicks in, will track their way eastwards and so through the afternoon, it's eastern areas

most prone to some showers, the odd heavy one across eastern parts of northern england, especially. and that means fewer showers in the west, a brighter end to the day with a lot more sunshine around. now, because there's big gaps between the showers, some of you will stay completely dry throughout and it will feel a touch warmer than today. temperatures up a degree or so for most parts of the country. then, as we go into the rest of next week, we're going to see high pressure gradually and slowly build in from the west, but around the top end of it will start to bring a lot of cloud in off the atlantic. that high pressure not fully with us until we head in towards next weekend. so it does mean an outlook across northern half of the uk, plenty cloud around, some drizzle around coasts and hills. there'll be a few brighter breaks here and there, which will lift the temperatures every now and again. whereas the further south and east you are, this is where we'll see the best of the sunshine, lightest of the winds as we go through the week and it's here where temperatures by the end of the week could be into the mid—20s.

good afternoon. there are warnings of further disruption for air travellers this summer, with more flights set to be cancelled in the coming weeks at heathrow, the uk's busiest airport. the cuts are expected as the airlines change their schedules ahead of the busy school holiday period. it comes as manchester airport's new boss has warned that peak—time queues will continue over the summer. our business reporter noor nanji has more we have already seen big queues at

airports this summer. now,