this is bbc news. the headlines: the united states has accused russia of worsening a global food crisis by carrying out a missile strike on the ukrainian port of odesa. the us secretary of state antony blinken said moscow had breached friday's landmark agreement to resume grain exports through the black sea. the world health organization has declared the outbreak of monkeypox to be an international public health emergency. the disease has now been found in 75 countries, with most infections concentrated in europe, largely among men who had sex with multiple, male partners. wildfires in north america are threatening thousands of homes as authorities try to combat scorching heat and soaring temperatures. californian emergency

services say a wildfire near yosemite national park is 0% under control. now on bbc news, dateline london with shaun ley. hello and welcome to dateline. bringing together leading commentators from london. this week, british conservative mps completed their colleague coal in the hunt for that new leader and the country's next prime

minister and they also called the economic consensus with which governments of left and right have operated for the last 20 years. and as the world waits for vladimir putin to allow safe passage of brain, why he himself was kept waiting. with me, a cricket commentator and foreign correspondent for pbs radio in the united states and host of a podcast. and steve richardson who began his career as a westminster correspondent as margaret thatcher was ending her is — coincidental. his blog is called rock and roll politics and his most recent book is about the talented politicians who failed to make it to number ten. steve, we believe the question unanswered of which of the current two might be that person in any future addition of the book. what do you make of the choice that tory mps have presented party members with between liz truss and rishi sunak? i party members with between liz truss and rishi sunak?_ truss and rishi sunak? i think it is extraordinary _ truss and rishi sunak? i think it is extraordinary because - truss and rishi sunak? i think it is extraordinary because in l it is extraordinary because in a very erratic way with both

theresa may and borisjohnson you could see attempts, chaotic in johnson's you could see attempts, chaotic injohnson�*s case, distracted injohnson�*s case, distracted in theresa may's case with the brexit, attempt to move on from thatcherism. theresa may talked about the good that the state can do and borisjohnson put the case for high public spending. now you have got a battle with two people claiming the thatcherite mantle in different ways. it is a battle on the right of the tory party. the focus is on tax cuts. when is the debate but not should there be. there is no focus on there be. there is no focus on the role of the state as demands on the state are growing. and, so, it is a return to that sort of 1980s thatcherism that very erratically the tory party have been trying to move away from.

thatcherism is absolutely a product of its time and not the situation that we are in it now but she casts a spell over its membership and these two candidates, and it is a very narrow contest in that respect. you work reporting from london when margaret thatcher was prime minister. as steve rightly says, the circumstances are different but the debate is very much, it seems, over not just taxation and the fact that we have got the largest tax burden since the early 1950s under rishi sunak�*s chancellorship, so that is an obvious grand builders trust to attack him on but she also seems to be attacking logical is the consensus of economic policy which has lasted for 20 years. that is arguably quite a radical position to adopt. yes. radical position to adopt. yes, because britain _ radical position to adopt. yes, because britain had _ radical position to adopt. yes, because britain had moved - because britain had moved somewhat towards the centre in terms of economic policy, and therefore that is something that she is trying to yank out, it would appear, or at least

that might be her attempt. whether that is the sensible thing to do, i don't know. for the simple reason that people seem to think that rishi sunak�*s approach which is of trying to reduce the state debt before lowering taxes seems... he said on friday that any tax rises would probably not be before at least the end of next year. before at least the end of next ear. , ~ , before at least the end of next ear. , . , ., ., �* year. yes. except that he won't cive tax year. yes. except that he won't give tax cuts — year. yes. except that he won't give tax cuts straightaway - give tax cuts straightaway because he needs to recover the money that has been spent, and therefore the government debt has grown exponentially. that said, i think people, although they think that maybe the more responsible, more sensible thing to do, but clearly, the populace line is, "cut taxes now." and that seems to be playing out as of now, reasonably well, with the membership, rank and file of the conservative party. i want

to ush the conservative party. i want to push back _ the conservative party. i want to push back about _ the conservative party. i want to push back about this - to push back about this margaret thatcher was the past thing. we are still playing out the drama of her demonstration. if you look at what brexit is, it is a direct product. i was a journalist here in the late 80s and early 90s as well and brexit was — europe was — the issue that split the conservative party apart, and the anti— europeans, and she was theirfigurehead — have never forgiven her. was theirfigurehead — have neverforgiven her. the uk was formed by politicians who thought that people were not being a good thatcherite. we still thought this a bigger sense — i tweeted wouldn't it be simpler to have a seance. we will get the conservative party around... in the spirit of margaret thatcher, you can have a nice discussion, but can we be legislating for the 21st century? i am be legislating for the 21st century? iam not be legislating for the 21st century? i am not sure they really are there.—

really are there. you are riuht. really are there. you are right- they _ really are there. you are right. they are - really are there. you are right. they are not - really are there. you are right. they are not and l really are there. you are i right. they are not and she still casts a spell. the conservative party change with her leadership. it became more ideological. so, you are absolutely right. but you do every now and again see very erratic attempt to move on and address of the demands of now rather than the demands of... but, but... rather than the demands of... but. but. - -_ but, but... she is there absolutely. _ but, but... she is there absolutely. other - but, but... she is there| absolutely. other things but, but... she is there - absolutely. other things have chanced absolutely. other things have changed as — absolutely. other things have changed as well. _ absolutely. other things have changed as well. the - changed as well. the conservative - changed as well. the conservative press . changed as well. the i conservative press has changed as well. the conservative press has become much _ conservative press has become much more hard—line and much less_ much more hard—line and much less interested, frankly, in journalism, and now it is all opinion— journalism, and now it is all opinion all the time because 'ust opinion all the time because just talking about rishi sunak, right? — just talking about rishi sunak, right? i— just talking about rishi sunak, right? i can remember many a time_ right? i can remember many a time where the daily telegraph and the — time where the daily telegraph and the daily mail would be talking _ and the daily mail would be talking about a like rishi sunak. _ talking about a like rishi sunak, you know, putting up taxes — sunak, you know, putting up taxes now_ sunak, you know, putting up taxes now so we could have a bigger— taxes now so we could have a bigger taxcutting budget six months before the next general election — months before the next general election. the conservatives would — election. the conservatives would win, and they could just

roll over— would win, and they could just roll over their mandate. that is sort — roll over their mandate. that is sort of _ roll over their mandate. that is sort of what rishi sunak is proposing, isn't he?- proposing, isn't he? that is aood proposing, isn't he? that is good politics. _ proposing, isn't he? that is good politics, isn't- proposing, isn't he? that is good politics, isn't it? - proposing, isn't he? that is good politics, isn't it? holdj good politics, isn't it? hold on, good politics, isn't it? hold on. though- _ good politics, isn't it? hold on, though. it _ good politics, isn't it? hold on, though. it is _ good politics, isn't it? hold on, though. it is a - good politics, isn't it? hold i on, though. it is a topsy-turvy on, though. it is a topsy—turvy contest. he is the thatcherite. she used to go around saying, "you have got to balance the books. my father owned hisjob in grantham and never spent more than he earned." and that is basically what he is saying. but he is being attacked by those who regard themselves as the committed thatcherite — jacob rees mogg and people like that. as a socialist, even though he is actually being the balance, the books — now, he might be wrong about all of these things but it is the thatcherite view. she, liz truss, is more stuck in that sort of reaganite view. let it rip and we can pay back over

many decades. that is where they are, but that is not really how the party season. which is curious.— really how the party season. which is curious. rishi sunak definitely _ which is curious. rishi sunak definitely declared _ which is curious. rishi sunak definitely declared himself. which is curious. rishi sunak| definitely declared himself to be a thatcherite economist, if you like. be a thatcherite economist, if ou like. . be a thatcherite economist, if you like.- whereas, - you like. yeah. whereas, officially. _ you like. yeah. whereas, officially, liz _ you like. yeah. whereas, officially, liz trust - you like. yeah. whereas, officially, liz trust has . you like. yeah. whereas, i officially, liz trust has not, but — officially, liz trust has not, but when _ officially, liz trust has not, but when she has played the ponder— but when she has played the popular line is saying, "i am going — popular line is saying, "i am going to _ popular line is saying, "i am going to cut taxes now." the other— going to cut taxes now." the other thing is about her ideological inconsistency over a long — ideological inconsistency over a long period of time. she moved _ a long period of time. she moved from the liberal democratic's the building if you like... democratic's the building if you like- - -_ you like... socially liberal. correct- — you like. .. socially liberal. correct. of— you like... socially liberal. correct. of the _ you like... socially liberal. | correct. of the conservative party — correct. of the conservative party. now, her latest position seems— party. now, her latest position seems to— party. now, her latest position seems to be rather to the right _ seems to be rather to the right. so, she has moved quite a lot, _ right. so, she has moved quite a lot, and _ right. so, she has moved quite a lot, and therefore appears to be a lot, and therefore appears to he a _ a lot, and therefore appears to he a little _ a lot, and therefore appears to be a little flaky in her position.— be a little flaky in her position. be a little flaky in her osition. , �* ., ., position. isn't the sort of a bit like, — position. isn't the sort of a bit like, though, _

position. isn't the sort of a bit like, though, what - position. isn't the sort of a - bit like, though, what happens in the primaries in the us? you attack to the activist, you went with the activist and then you slowly move towards a slightly broader position which allows you to bring in more voters. . , ., ., �* voters. except that you don't have to bring _ voters. except that you don't have to bring in _ voters. except that you don't have to bring in more - voters. except that you don't have to bring in more voters| voters. except that you don't i have to bring in more voters in this particular context. it is one of the smallerjoys of living in a 1—party state. i mean, if you can't get it right the first time — david cameron ort then at theresa may, all then borisjohnson — i mean, cameron and johnson are big enough personalities for the job, and theresa may... 1—party... i job, and theresa may... 1-|oarty- - -_ job, and theresa may... 1-party. .. job, and theresa may... 1--a 4' ., 4' ., 1-party... i know, i know. it 'ust 1-party... i know, i know. it just feels— 1-party... i know, i know. it just feels like _ 1-party... i know, i know. it just feels like it. _ 1-party... i know, i know. it just feels like it. the - 1-party... i know, i know. it just feels like it. the bbc. 1-party... i know, i know. it just feels like it. the bbc - | 1-party... i know, i know. it| just feels like it. the bbc - i just feels like it. the bbc — i don't know... just feels like it. the bbc - i don't know. . ._ just feels like it. the bbc - i don't know... this is the third conservative _ don't know... this is the third conservative prime _ don't know... this is the third conservative prime minister i don't know... this is the third | conservative prime minister to be selected alone by the party membership. and the rest of the electorate is excluded at this juncture _ electorate is excluded at this “uncture. , , electorate is excluded at this 'uncture., , .,, electorate is excluded at this 'uncture., , ., .,, juncture. just as it was when tony imair— juncture. just as it was when tony blair was _ juncture. just as it was when tony blair was replaced - juncture. just as it was when tony blair was replaced by l tony blair was replaced by gordon brown. it is the nature of the system... but

gordon brown. it is the nature of the system. . ._ of the system... but this has now happened _ of the system... but this has now happened because... in| of the system... but this has | now happened because... in a uuite now happened because... in a quite compressed _ now happened because... in a quite compressed a _ now happened because... i�*i —. quite compressed a space. i mean, we learn, right, was of the story of blair and brown and after the third electoral victory maybe blair regretted having made that packed that he wanted it. but this is something entirely different. i have to say, sean, it feels frankly wrong that you can, in seven years, so compress and get — lose control of your own party — much less run a country. it party - much less run a country-— country. it is very interesting, - country. it is very| interesting, sean, country. it is very - interesting, sean, that you mentioned the last time this happened under a labour government. gordon brown almost insisted there were no other candidates and it looked very odd. it wasjust him. you can see now why he did it. it is really dangerous when, for a governing party, when the door is opened on what happens behind the scenes and we have had moments of, in public tv debates, wet rishi sunak and liz truss are arguing over

fundamental tax policy in a way that breaks the spell about cabinet unity, and it is very hard on set the spell is broken. hard on set the spell is broken-— hard on set the spell is broken. ., , . ~ broken. to put the genie back in the bottle. _ broken. to put the genie back in the bottle. there _ broken. to put the genie back in the bottle. there will- broken. to put the genie back in the bottle. there will be . in the bottle. there will be many consequences - in the bottle. there will be i many consequences arising. in the bottle. there will be - many consequences arising. in many consequences arising. in terms many consequences arising. terms of many consequences arising. in terms of stability, it is revolving _ terms of stability, it is revolving door - terms of stability, it is revolving door prime i terms of stability, it is - revolving door prime ministers. this_ revolving door prime ministers. this is— revolving door prime ministers. this is not— revolving door prime ministers. this is not really— revolving door prime ministers. this is not really the _ revolving door prime ministers. this is not really the history- this is not really the history of the — this is not really the history of the conservative - this is not really the history of the conservative party, i this is not really the history. of the conservative party, and what — of the conservative party, and what he — of the conservative party, and what he referred _ of the conservative party, and what he referred to _ of the conservative party, and what he referred to quite - what he referred to quite rightly _ what he referred to quite rightly is _ what he referred to quite rightly is that _ what he referred to quite rightly is that gordon - what he referred to quite - rightly is that gordon brown's turner— rightly is that gordon brown's turner came _ rightly is that gordon brown's turner came after— rightly is that gordon brown's turner came aftera _ rightly is that gordon brown's turner came after a decade. i rightly is that gordon brown's . turner came after a decade. so, it was— turner came after a decade. so, it was not— turner came after a decade. so, it was not really— turner came after a decade. so, it was not really immediate. - turner came after a decade. so, it was not really immediate. it. it was not really immediate. it was not — it was not really immediate. it was not something _ it was not really immediate. it was not something which - was not something which happened _ was not something which happened in— was not something which happened in quick- was not something which - happened in quick succession. let's — happened in quick succession. let's talk— happened in quick succession. let's talk about _ happened in quick succession. let's talk about what - happened in quick succession. let's talk about what these i happened in quick succession. i let's talk about what these two may or may not mean bought the rest of the world in so far as britain matters in the rest of the world. just on this question at liz truss's position on the economics, there will be a lot of places around the world — and i suspect the united states would be one of them — where her critique of the way the global economy has operated over the last 20 years will resonate, nor leased over the impact of

globalisation. a lot of people have been failed by the process of globalisation. could she actually be quite a useful figure internationally in that regard? that figure internationally in that re . ard? �* ., regard? at the moment in the us, i regard? at the moment in the us, i don't — regard? at the moment in the us, | don't think _ regard? at the moment in the us, i don't think anyone - us, i don't think anyone is paying attention to that. one of the things and i know we will come over to this later in the programme is at the pivot towards china and wondering how towards china and wondering how to play china and anticipate the next 20—30 years really does preoccupy everybody in washington so far as i can tell. plus, there is our own internal problems. i mean, this past week, the january six committee, has wrapped up with some hearings. people arejust having to deal with the fact that the us is both looking out towards china but internally the politics of such a mess. the society is such a mess. i honestly don't think that put any british prime minister, evenif any british prime minister, even if borisjohnson says, "hold america close."

even if boris johnson says, "hold america close." which he does. "hold america close." which he does- l'm _ "hold america close." which he does- m a _ "hold america close." which he does. i'm a mac— "hold america close." which he does. i'm a mac that _ "hold america close." which he does. i'm a mac that messages| does. i'm a mac that messages out there and i think it is a reminder that maybe he was saying no matter what is happening domestically in america don't lose sight of it. i don't think whoever emerges from this is going to... fin from this is going to... on that at least, _ from this is going to... on that at least, on _ from this is going to... on that at least, on the from this is going to... (m that at least, on the china question, liz truss has talked the talk. she says that the british will be there supporting taiwan. british will be there su--ortin~ taiwan. . . supporting taiwan. she has a compulsive — supporting taiwan. she has a compulsive streak _ supporting taiwan. she has a compulsive streak which - supporting taiwan. she has a compulsive streak which is i supporting taiwan. she has a compulsive streak which is a | compulsive streak which is a bit dangerous. if you remember at the _ bit dangerous. if you remember at the russian invasion of ukraine, _ at the russian invasion of ukraine, she gave an interview where she _ ukraine, she gave an interview where she said, "if ordinary people want to go out there and fight, _ people want to go out there and fight, that is fine," is what she — fight, that is fine," is what she is— fight, that is fine," is what she is concerned. she was spoken— she is concerned. she was spoken to by the defence secretary within minutes and likewise _ secretary within minutes and likewise the alarming prospect that, _ likewise the alarming prospect that, you — likewise the alarming prospect that, you know, britain could -et that, you know, britain could get involved in some sort of a military— get involved in some sort of a military operation against china _ military operation against china i_ military operation against china. i mean, this is kind ofm — china. i mean, this is kind ofm you _ china. i mean, this is kind of... you know, she was interviewed the other day about

russia — interviewed the other day about russia and whether she would consider— russia and whether she would consider some sort of deeper military— consider some sort of deeper military operation against russia, _ military operation against russia, and she said no without hesitation, _ russia, and she said no without hesitation, continue with the current— hesitation, continue with the current policy. but she is impulsive, and that is potentially quite dangerous in the current unstable situation. we know — the current unstable situation. we know about rishi sunak's we know about rishi sunak�*s family connections to india, and obviously for the diaspora he is an interesting figure, but what could he mean? what might he mean to the rest of the world? is he likely to take a more, perhaps a more collaborative approach? let me to say that _ collaborative approach? let me to say that liz _ collaborative approach? let me to say that liz truss's _ collaborative approach? let me to say that liz truss's record i to say that liz truss's record as a — to say that liz truss's record as a minister has been quite unremarkable, but that said, as far as _ unremarkable, but that said, as far as india _ unremarkable, but that said, as faras india is unremarkable, but that said, as far as india is concerned, i think— far as india is concerned, i think there is great excitement about— think there is great excitement about this leadership contest. it is about this leadership contest. it is all— about this leadership contest. it is all about media in india. it is all about media in india. it is— it is all about media in india. it is on— it is all about media in india. it is ona— it is all about media in india. it is on a television. it is a newspapers. it is playing out

in a — newspapers. it is playing out in a very— newspapers. it is playing out in a very big way. of course, people — in a very big way. of course, people are _ in a very big way. of course, people are a little too exuberant and they did not quite — exuberant and they did not quite understand the 2—stage process, _ quite understand the 2—stage process, and therefore, rishi sunak— process, and therefore, rishi sunak taking the lead... they assumed _ sunak taking the lead... they assumed that _ sunak taking the lead... they assumed that was _ sunak taking the lead... they assumed that was it. - sunak taking the lead... they assumed that was it. it - sunak taking the lead... they i assumed that was it. it created enormous _ assumed that was it. it created enormous excitement. - assumed that was it. it created enormous excitement. but - assumed that was it. it created | enormous excitement. but then suddenly— enormous excitement. but then suddenly reality has gone, and isaw— suddenly reality has gone, and i saw a — suddenly reality has gone, and i saw a piece by one of the wire — i saw a piece by one of the wire services. either way, what i wire services. either way, what i have — wire services. either way, what i have been_ wire services. either way, what i have been writing from you has been _ i have been writing from you has been a minority view because _ has been a minority view because i have been trying to explain — because i have been trying to explain this for the last two weeks _ explain this for the last two weeks that this is a 2—stage process, _ weeks that this is a 2—stage process, but nobody listens, who — process, but nobody listens, who cares? and now i found that one of— who cares? and now i found that one of the — who cares? and now i found that one of the wire services has said — one of the wire services has said that _ one of the wire services has said that the prospect does not look— said that the prospect does not look very— said that the prospect does not look very good when it comes to the membership stage of the balloting. so, that i think has created — balloting. so, that i think has created a _ balloting. so, that i think has created a bit of a pause, but there — created a bit of a pause, but there is— created a bit of a pause, but there is still a bit of

excitement, residual excitement. it has not gone away — excitement. it has not gone awa . , ., ., away. one thing we should all be getting _ away. one thing we should all be getting excited _ away. one thing we should all be getting excited about, - be getting excited about, arguably, is the deal that was agreed on a friday between — not directly between ukraine and russia — but between ukraine and turkey and russia and turkey and the un to at least allow grain exports to happen again. i mean, this is hugely significant if it happens. what do you make of it? , ., , ., happens. what do you make of it? , ., ., ., it? this was in the works for cuite a it? this was in the works for quite a while _ it? this was in the works for quite a while and _ it? this was in the works for quite a while and i - it? this was in the works for quite a while and i think- it? this was in the works for| quite a while and i think that the process, as we will learn more about because they will be a lot of diplomatic reporting, is that it shows how complicated and fragmented this part of the world — the caspian sea — the caspian world of russia and around — they have been helping to basically destroy syria in support of basher al—assad for more than a decade now. and turkey, which

bordered syria and borders iran is almost like our representative and it is incredibly obligated. this was confirmed when vladimir putin went to take barnett last week. fine. what else was discussed? well, can it turkey have an incursion into northern syria to protect its interests in that part of the country which is at the hands of the kurds and maybe throw some bombs into iraqi kurdistan? eight, nine people were killed at a desert this week when the thatcherite bonded. what leveraged as the united states have in any of this? none because geography is destiny. these are neighbours and they work together and they can be — they can be utilised to come up with a deal like this, brokered with the un. brute

this, brokered with the un. we talked aboutjoe biden's this, brokered with the un. we talked about joe biden's visit talked aboutjoe biden's visit to the middle east and the nervousness in washington about relations between iran — the influence of iran in the region, rather — and why that would be a reason for, perhaps, holding his nose and doing his fist with the crown prince there, notwithstanding what he said before about him and about saudi arabia. at that is the real politics. again, turkey is a part of nato so arguably it is a part of the military operation in defence of ukraine against russia. does that make washington nervous?— washington nervous? turkey... you have _ washington nervous? turkey... you have to _ washington nervous? turkey... you have to be _ washington nervous? turkey... you have to be careful- washington nervous? turkey... you have to be careful how - washington nervous? turkey... you have to be careful how you| you have to be careful how you speak about it. he is indispensable and he is infuriating, to washington, london and of the nato partnership and if you go back to 2003 when the us wanted to

invade a rock, one from the north and one from the south to turkey and everyone said no you can't do it. it has been like this now for almost 20 years, but he is kind of indispensable and thing is — i will come back to... i will finish in a second and just come back to that point i was making earlier about what americans are thinking about anyway. yes, he is going to fist bump and bs and what about the murder of jamaal khashoggi? well, it was called humanitarian intervention for a reason because in italy 15 years when america was the sole superpower you could think about humanitarian human rights stuff. it is not the world we live in now.— stuff. it is not the world we live in now. this leveraging of iran's influence _ live in now. this leveraging of iran's influence is _ iran's influence is interesting. we saw it to take pressure off europe with a number of migrants coming to

turkey and taking action against that but it extracted a price. presumably, it will extract a political price from this deal?— extract a political price from this deal? , ., , , ., this deal? presumably. ithink what is most _ this deal? presumably. ithink what is most interesting, - this deal? presumably. ithink what is most interesting, i - what is most interesting, i mean, while we were waiting to come on i don't know if you heard it, there was an interesting interview with one of the agents of the deal and i think it was somebody from nato, and she was making the point — look, russia benefits can —— benefit considerably for this deal. he said, "we need the grain, basically." the world needs the grain or there will be appalling famine. so, you can see how this leverage plays out in lots of different ways as this — what seems to be, anyway, for now — the war of attrition in ukraine. and i wonder whether it will extend at some point to energy. how long can the german economy

survive, even in this current sort of juncture survive, even in this current sort ofjuncture of not knowing where its energy supplies are going to come from? and i think thatis going to come from? and i think that is interesting that from those sort of hard lines everyone was taking the beginning, including turkey, it is now, "hold on, we need the grain." i think that signals a shift, really. i grain.�* i think that signals a shift, really.— shift, really. i see this as very good _ shift, really. i see this as very good news - shift, really. i see this as very good news on - shift, really. i see this as| very good news on paper. shift, really. i see this as i very good news on paper. it remains — very good news on paper. it remains to be seen whether it is good — remains to be seen whether it is good news in a practice, and that— is good news in a practice, and that said. _ is good news in a practice, and that said. i_ is good news in a practice, and that said, i think the role of the united nations also should not be — the united nations also should not be underestimated in brokering this deal. obviously, turkey. — brokering this deal. obviously, turkey, which has a sort of blow — turkey, which has a sort of blow hot. _ turkey, which has a sort of blow hot, blue—collar relationship with russia, has played — relationship with russia, has played a _ relationship with russia, has played a constructive role. at the end — played a constructive role. at the end of it, the two guarantors, if you like, are the — guarantors, if you like, are the united nations are turkey because — the united nations are turkey because there is no direct deal. _ because there is no direct deal. no _ because there is no direct deal, no direct agreement between russia and ukraine. so, you have — between russia and ukraine. so, you have got turkey and the

united — you have got turkey and the united nations... it you have got turkey and the united nations...— you have got turkey and the united nations... it is not in any way _ united nations... it is not in any way a — united nations... it is not in any way a preparation - united nations... it is not in any way a preparation for i united nations... it is not in any way a preparation for a l any way a preparation for a peace deal, is it?— any way a preparation for a peace deal, is it? well, this is a small— peace deal, is it? well, this is a small beginning - peace deal, is it? well, this is a small beginning and - peace deal, is it? well, this| is a small beginning and one has to— is a small beginning and one has to go— is a small beginning and one has to go a long way before anything concrete can happen, but at — anything concrete can happen, but at the _ anything concrete can happen, but at the end of the day, it means— but at the end of the day, it means that the russian blockade of ukrainian ports will be suspended as far as grain exports _ suspended as far as grain exports are concerned, but then the boats— exports are concerned, but then the boats will be monitored by turkey— the boats will be monitored by turkey to _ the boats will be monitored by turkey to ensure that just food and nothing else is coming out _ and nothing else is coming out... ., ., , and nothing else is coming out. . ._ and i and nothing else is coming| out. . ._ and no out... no weapons. and no weapons — out... no weapons. and no weapons are _ out... no weapons. and no weapons are going - out... no weapons. and no weapons are going in. - out... no weapons. and no weapons are going in. and | out... no weapons. and no - weapons are going in. and that seems — weapons are going in. and that seems to— weapons are going in. and that seems to be the deal for the moment _ seems to be the deal for the moment. as i said, the proof of the pudding would be in the actual— the pudding would be in the actual practice of the deal. michael, do you think in part this may have come about because some of those countries that had not objected to russia's actions in ukraine and maintained friendly relations with russia was starting to be hurt by the grain shortage? you think in some ways russia may have come under some pressure?

you are talking about places like egypt with the price of bread is exponentially higher by the day. i don't know. i think this is — it is an interesting question. i think that there is a kind of return to playing both sides in the middle east and north africa, and going down into sub—saharan africa. the kind of thing that we saw during the cold war. except there is nobody who is one client or another. it is not quite as organised yet. so, you can't be on russia's team ought be on america's team. clearly, the is to play both sides against each other. that is what people _ sides against each other. that is what people are _ sides against each other. trust is what people are doing and there is a third player to come back to china which has for the last few years with its belt road initiative, helping africa

and providing loans which chinese companies were going to build on all of this fluidity was there. i think that i am going to give mr gutierrez, the head of the un, some credit for being a genuine humanitarian... because it is allowed —— a lousyjob, being an attorney general, isn't it? it lousy job, being an attorney general, isn't it?— general, isn't it? it is an in terms of— general, isn't it? it is an in terms of the _ general, isn't it? it is an in terms of the crisis - general, isn't it? it is an in terms of the crisis dealing | general, isn't it? it is an in. terms of the crisis dealing in the war, but this is a win if it holds because it does allow all of this foodstuff — and it is not sweet. i mean, the soy — the sunflower oil. i mean, i have been in ukraine. it is sunflowers forever, and the sunflower, all of this is necessary for cooking in places like africa. so, yeah, but again, the proof is in the pudding because the awkwardness of, "yes, it has to be guided out past the mayans," that

ukraine has led to protect itself or a invade baden and as to be escorted every step of the way. there is the potential forflashpoints... the way. there is the potential for flashpoints. . ._ for flashpoints. .. mistakes, accidents. _ for flashpoints. .. mistakes, accidents. the _ for flashpoints. .. mistakes, accidents. the last - for flashpoints. .. mistakes, accidents. the last point. for flashpoints. .. mistakes, accidents. the last point - l for flashpoints. .. mistakes, accidents. the last point - i accidents. the last point — i asked the question we are in danger of not answering. why did erdogan keep britain waiting for almost a minute in his heavily choreographed public event. it is quite humiliating. —— vladimir putin. this is a part of the hot and cold — this is a part of the hot and cold relationship and he realises that vladimir putin needs— realises that vladimir putin needs this meeting. he needs to be seen — needs this meeting. he needs to be seen in — needs this meeting. he needs to be seen in this international arena — be seen in this international arena with the iranian leader and — arena with the iranian leader and so — arena with the iranian leader and so on _ arena with the iranian leader and so on. so, yes, i know he isa— and so on. so, yes, i know he isa very— and so on. so, yes, i know he is a very shrewd player. i am not _ is a very shrewd player. i am not very— is a very shrewd player. i am not very sure whether he is great — not very sure whether he is great for _ not very sure whether he is great for the world, but he is very— great for the world, but he is very much— great for the world, but he is very much there.— very much there. steve, michael. _ very much there. steve, michael, thank - very much there. steve, michael, thank you - very much there. steve, michael, thank you for i very much there. steve, i michael, thank you for your company. more from a dateline at same time next week. have a good weekend. goodbye.

hello. with low pressure nearby, sunday's weather will bring many of the same weather contrast across the uk that we started the weekend with. for many northern and western areas, it was quite blustery. there was some rain at times, whereas in south—east england and east anglia, it stayed stubbornly dry. it will be again during sunday. it will feel hotter in the sunshine. here is the area of low pressure, as it begins to move across us. closest to that, some of the heaviest downpours. we ended saturday with some flooded rain in parts of northern ireland, for example. this is how things are to begin with, and quite a warm, humid start to the day. quite misty, there will be some hill fog around. and we'll see some thicker clouds through wales, the midlands, and towards yorkshire, with some rain particularly into wales, slowly easing later in the day. elsewhere, a few sunny spells,

some patchy rain or showers, then another dose of heavy, possibly thundery rain moving into northern ireland during the afternoon and spreading towards scotland as the day comes to an end. as for temperatures, for many areas, it will be a touch warmer — eastern scotland, for example. but hotter in the sunshine towards the south—east. east anglia could reach 31 celsius. overnight into monday, we'll keep some heavy rain moving across scotland, perhaps with some rumbles of thunder. it will begin to turn largely dry as we go into monday morning. there'll still be a few showers around, though, and it will still be rather humid out there and quite warm as monday begins. a few sunny spells here and there on monday, but often a good deal of cloud around, and there'll be areas of showers moving from north to south on a freshening westerly northwesterly wind. some gales are quite possible into the northern isles, for example. now, for many it will be turning cooler on monday, still into the mid 20s and east anglia and south—east england.

low pressure moving away going into tuesday. it's about high pressure beginning to nudge its way in. there'll be a fair amount of cloud with this area of high pressure. and there will still be a few showers to be had, particularly towards northern and eastern areas, though most places will stay dry on tuesday. rather overcast at times, and temperatures are at or even a bit below normal for the time of year with that north—westerly breeze. now, from wednesday onwards, a couple of fine days, wednesday, thursday. friday brings a chance of rain again into scotland and northern ireland. by then, south—eastern parts are still dry and turning warmer again.

hello and welcome to bbc news — i'm gareth barlow. a landmark agreement to allow the export of grain, from the ukrainian port of odesa has come under threat, after the city was hit by a missile strike, less than 2a hours after the deal was signed. russia had promised not to attack the port — or any ships carrying grain out of it. but president zelensky said the strike showed that moscow would always find ways to avoid delivering on its agreements. the kremilin has, so far, not directly responded to news of the attack. james waterhouse sent this report from odesa.

in a war littered with broken promises and especially