this is bbc news. the headlines: large protests are taking place in several cities in israel after prime minister benjamin netanyahu sacked his defence minister yoav galant. the minister was dismissed after he called for scrapping of controversial plans to overhaul the justice system. police have been firing water cannon at protesters. authorities in the us say more bad weather could be on its way after tornadoes tore through mississippi on friday night, killing 26 people. the national weather service says there's a risk of more tornadoes, high winds, and large hail stones. the italian coast guard says a migrant rescue ship, funded by the street artist banksy, has been seized

after it failed to follow instructions to head to sicily. the craft was helping three migrant boats. now on bbc news: it's hardtalk with stephen sackur. welcome to hardtalk, from prague, i'm stephen sackur. vladimir putin hoped that europe's determination to stand with ukraine after russia's invasion would not last. he counted on a winter energy crisis and economic disruption to weaken european resolve. has that happened 7 well, my guest today is the newly elected president of the czech republic, petr pavel. now, he is a former nato general and a staunch ally of ukraine. so, is europe still ready and willing to do whatever it takes to back kyiv?

president petr pavel, welcome to hardtalk. thank you very much. i must start, mr president, by congratulating you on your recent inauguration. but i must admit, it doesn't really make sense that you are sitting here with me as president of the czech republic because, just a few short years ago, you said, "i am a soldier at heart. "i do not intend to transform into the role of a politician." so, what happened? every soldier is used to serve his country, and wherever one sees that his country is in danger, it's like a call —

a call of duty. so, i saw my own country being threatened by populism, and there was a quite serious risk that our future president will be very similar to what is viktor orban for hungary, and i simply didn't want something like that to happen to my country. the ukraine war was also a big factor in the election campaign. mr babis accused you of being — and i use his own word _ a "w a rm onger" he said that your support for ukraine, your belief that ukraine should get more weapons, more financial support from the european union, was actually prolonging the war. a number of czech people still appear to believe he was right. not just czech people. you will find a lot of people thinking the same way in other countries of the region,

as well as in western europe. but what is fair to say that being for peace doesn't mean that you will find yourself in peace. in general, what andrej babis was saying, "i don't want war. "i want peace." who wouldn't want peace? as an ex—military, i was in a number of wars, so i know very well what the wars are about, how much suffering they bring — not only to soldiers, but primarily to the civilians — and i would never draw my own country into the war. but, as the old saying says, if you want peace, get ready for war. and sometimes, when the war breaks out, we simply have to fight. we are lucky in our part of europe that we don't have to fight physically. but one of our partners is under a serious threat. all the foundations of our societies are

under serious threat. so, the least thing that we can do is to support the country that is subject to aggression. there's an irony here, though, isn't there? you say this is about defending europe's values, freedom and democracy. many czech people remember that you were a loyal communist through the 1980s. you served in the military when it was essentially defending the soviet empire. you were, even for a time, in military intelligence, and many czechs wonderjust how real and how deep is your conversion to these values of freedom and democracy? let's first question the word �*loyal�*. in this country, there were more than 1.5 million members of the communist party. not all of them were what you would call loyal. they were members of the communist party simply because they were born to the system, they lived in it.

they had no comparison with the outer world and they simply believed that this is the right way to do. did you at that time, as a man in his 20s wearing the uniform of czechoslovakia, were you an ideological communist? well, i was never an ideological communist. i was convinced that my duty was to serve my country as a soldier. that's what i was trained for — to defend the country against whoever would attack it. and i was always told that my role is to defend, not to attack. and, of course, i didn't take it as a defence of communist party or the general secretary of the communist party. i was always thinking about people i loved, about the places i loved, the way of life, we lived in our personal life.

this is what was main purpose for me as a soldier. yeah, so you — i mean, let's not beat around the bush. you basically were committed to the defence of a deeply repressive, authoritarian system. and now, here you sit in the presidential office advocating more arms, more weaponry for president zelensky and kyiv in theirfight against an authoritarian, repressive regime. that is quite a u—turn, is it not? no, i don't see it that way. i see it as a slow transition because, in the �*80s, i was slowly learning that what the system was teaching us for years is not that correct, that there are things that were either omitted or distorted, or direct lies, and the level of frustration was growing. and it ended up by november 1989, which was not the end

of the world that i lived in — it was rather relief that all this awkward situation ended up peacefully without any bloodshed. well, if we can then fast—forward to today and reflect on the journey, you now seem to be advocating more weapons, whatever it takes to ensure the complete, as you put it, the complete territorial victory of ukrainian forces over every inch of their own soil. how much more do you think the europeans, as well as the americans, can and should give? i am not that idealistic that i would believe this is the best of our potential scenarios. it's the best one i would wish to ukraine because they deserve it.

but reality is quite often different from our wishes and dreams. so, what i am advocating right now is let's give ukraine whatever they need for successful defence and potentially for successful counteroffensive. yeah, i mean, with respect, you say, "i'm not advocating "something that's impossible," but you have said that the goal should be the restoration of ukraine's territorial integrity. it seems pretty clear to me what that means. that's correct, because if we want to protect the principles of sovereignty, territorial integrity, international law, this is the only thing that we have to strive for. just seems to me that as a former nato general, you feel a sense of urgency here because not long ago, you referred to a window of opportunity that is open, you said, for this coming year, 2023. but you suggested that if ukraine doesn't achieve

significant, maybe decisive military victories in 2023, then that window of opportunity and, indeed, the resolve of europeans to keep arming and supporting ukraine, that may dwindle away. is that your concern? exactly. i believe that this year may be decisive for both sides because both russia and ukraine would most probably try to make a really big offensive, getting control over more and more ground. and when we consider how much time and resources does it take to prepare for a large offensive operation, i really don't see any opportunity for a second or third chance this year. next year, it will be more complicated because the support of ukraine will naturally fade out, not only... really? that's an extraordinary thing

to say — "support for ukraine will naturally fade out". i mean, if vladimir putin is listening to us talking or happens to see it on the tv, that is something that he will be thrilled to hear. it only takes an objective view on the reality. when we look at the level of support in a number of countries, it slowly goes down, and it's linked to... is it going down in this country? well, it is, as in any other, because the longer it takes, the lower the support will be. that's because of fatigue of war. it's not only with the fighting countries, it's with all supporting countries because, from the very beginning, the horror of war ignites everyone for support. just a few hundred yards from here, a few weeks ago, there was a rally. thousands — not so many

thousands, but a few thousand — people gathered to demand an end to czech support for ukraine. they demanded an early end to the war. some of them wore z symbols, indicating their sympathies for russia. what's your message to them? first, by supporting ukraine, we are helping ourselves because if we leave it unattended, if we leave it without any support, russia and the rest of the countries now supporting ukraine would do the same, then russia would most probably prevail in ukraine. russia would take it as a confirmation of the right approach to their foreign and security policies. and as we heard openly from their top representatives, russia wouldn't stop with ukraine. see, there are nearby

countries — friends of yours, i was going to say, but clearly the word �*friend' is wrong now — but formerfriends of yours in hungary, for example, a member of the visegrad 4 group, along with you in the czech republic and slovakia, and poland — hungary takes a very different view. viktor 0rban, the prime minister, says that europeans are, in effect, "fanning the flames of this conflict. "they are prolonging this conflict with their anti—russia "stance." and he says, "no way will hungaryjoin the weapons "supply to ukraine. " and they will, in fact, continue their energy cooperation, their economic cooperation with vladimir putin. is it time to reconsider hungary's position inside the european union? well, through the history of the eu and nato, a number of countries went through the periods of, let's

say, democratic deficit. it's not there forever, viktor 0rban will not represent hungary forever, and the situation may change. i strongly believe that hungary belongs both to the eu and nato and we have to work with the current leadership from the position of common interest. a number of areas are without any conflict, but we have a serious disagreement in foreign and security policy. see, just a few years ago, this visegrad 4 group was seen as a rising power bloc within the european union. now, the visegrad 4 group is effectively dead because your position here in prague is so very different from viktor 0rban�*s in hungary. and the eu commission, the eu parliament have for years now been locked in a confrontation with hungary, where they say that hungary

is violating fundamental european values when it comes to all sorts of things — from corruption to the independence of the judiciary, to the treatment of minorities. there is, hanging over hungary, the possibility of severe eu punishments and, theoretically, the possibility of expulsion. well, i am fully behind the restriction that the eu put on hungary with regard to funding a number of projects because this funding is based on sharing common values and principles and if a country doesn't follow these common principles, then how could they be entitled to get money from a common budget? i support it but, at the same time, when i look at the v4, i don't have any exaggerated ambition.

i believe that v4 is a good forum for consultation on issues where we can agree. we don't have to push it necessarily into the domain of a full integration of foreign and security policy and if we don't have these exaggerated ambitions, then the look at the v4 is quite acceptable. let's bring this conversation back to vladimir putin and the threat that you believe he poses to european security and european values. back in 2014, there were two big explosions at czech republic arms depots. since then, the czechs and other western intelligence agencies have firmly pointed the finger of blame at russian military intelligence. today, do you believe that russian intelligence is still working covertly to destabilise and undermine the czech republic?

i do — and notjust czech republic. russian intelligence, both civilian and military, are very active in a number of countries. if the russians were really good at something, it was espionage, one of the areas. and russian intelligence is very active all around the world, wherever they have their interest, and quite obviously in the countries of the eu and nato. we're sitting in your temporary accommodation as president of the czech republic. prague castle, which is where your office is supposed to be, has been off limits to you for a number of weeks because apparently, there is a realfear that the russians have electronic surveillance equipment that they've managed to place inside that building, and it's being electronically cleansed. is that true?

i wouldn't go that far but i think one should always be cautious. and with regard to some people who were very close to president milos zeman — one of them being very close to russia — i believe that it's quite natural, that — it's good to have concerns. that's why i would rather use a preventive check, technical check before i move in with my team. all right, so just to go back to an earlier part of our conversation, when you were talking about what you see as the dangers of the populist nationalist trend in the czech republic — are you saying that mr babis — who, of course, was prime ministerfor a long time and challenged you for the presidency — and mr zeman, who was president —

both of whom in different ways were described as czech populists — are you saying that they, in essence, at the very least turned a blind eye to russian covert activity in this country? i wouldn't say both, because andrej babis in his role of prime minister actually took concrete steps to cut russian influence in the czech republic. but milos zeman at that time was, by his views, more on russian side than on the side of our western allies. he ignored a number of warnings. he ignored the reports not only from our intelligence services, but also from our partners. he was putting doubts on the investigation results, suggesting that there are potentially more options

of this event. so it was quite clear that president zeman at that time was more on the side of president putin. we've talked a lot about russia. let's talk briefly about china and taiwan. you made a very conscious decision in the days after you became president of the czech republic, you had a phone call with the president of taiwan. in fact, i think it's right to say you're europe's first elected head of state to speak direct to the taiwanese president. why did you do that? well, first, there was a request from the taiwanese side to have such a phone call. i take it as a matter of courtesy to accept congratulations... with respect, that taiwanese request will have been made to plenty of other european

heads of state in the past, and it's been rebuffed. why did you say yes? i was very cautious to consult this phone call with our government because obviously, the government and foreign ministry are guarantors of ourforeign policy. the phone call and the arguments made within the phone call were fully consistent with our policy of one china and there is no contradiction in having a phone call. well, it has been deeply criticised by officials in beijing — and you knew it would be — but you said this to the financial times — you said, "let us be clear. "china and its current regime — not compatible with western "democracies in their strategic goals and their principles." your message to fellow western leaders seems to be, "we need to get real. "china is a fundamental threat to us and we need to begin "the process of cutting our ties to china."

is that your message? no, no. the first part is correct, second not. let's be aware what china is about. china and chinese long—term strategic interests and their values are not compatible with ours. their interest is in global dominance. their interest is to rewrite international order, adjust the norms of international trade to fit more to china's interests. there is nothing wrong on having good contacts with china, doing business with china, but we should always be aware that china is not on our side. china has its own interests and we shouldn't give china a chance to dictate the rules.

let's end, if i may, where we began — talking about notjust the czech republic and its political future, but the future of this particular region. in the presidential election campaign, you said, "populism "is the problem of our time and that is what i intend "to address." well, here you are, sitting in the presidential palace. the truth is, populism in eastern europe is not going away. we see it in hungary, we see it in poland. we also see that in this country, mr babis, whom we've talked about, remains a powerful political force and some polls show that his party is actually the most popular party in the czech republic today. how do you intend to win your battle against populism here? let me remind you that this

populism is notjust a problem for this part of europe. we saw a huge wave of populism in the united states just a couple of years ago. we saw it in the uk before brexit, a number of a number of countries, as well, so populism is a threat to democracies in general. the only way how to go out of this trap is a slow and very patient process of telling people the truth, building the arguments on measurable effects, and slowly getting back the confidence of people that was lost over time. it's always much easier to give thousands of promises without delivering, it's much more complicated to restore the confidence shattered by populists over a number of years, but it may prove to be successful from time to time.

we'll come back and we'll see. but for now, president petr pavel, i thank you very much for being on hardtalk. thank you for me being your guest. hello there. the second half of the weekend marked a change to our weather. we saw cold arctic air spreading southwards slowly during sunday, and the cold air will be with us to start the new week. so, monday — cold, dry and bright for most of us. however, it's very short—lived because from tuesday onwards, it turns wetter and windy

again and much milder, thanks to atlantic low pressure systems. but this area of high pressure is what's to bring us a fine day for monday. but we are in this cold air mass, as you can see here from the blue colour, so a cold frosty start for many. still some wintry showers affecting northern and eastern coasts, so a risk of ice here early on. any mist and fog will fade away, it stays sunny into the afternoon — just the chance of the odd light shower here and there but most places should stay dry. and after that cold start, temperatures reaching a high and after that cold start, temperatures reaching highs of around 7—10 — we could be up to 11 in the south—west as cloudy and breeze starts to pick up here. as we move through monday night, we start to see this frontal system working its way into western areas, so temperatures will pick up across western areas. where the rain bumps into the cold air, it's likely to turn into snow over high ground. it's going to be another chilly night across eastern scotland and eastern england. tuesday, we're very much dominated by low pressure once again, and these weather fronts bringing outbreaks of rain. you can see the white colours there, indicating a bit of transient snow on the

leading edge of that rain band as it spreads northwards. generally, it's going to be a cloudy, breezy day with outbreaks of rain here and there. a few drier interludes at times. and the temperatures will be lifting — up to 12 in the west, still quite cool across more eastern areas. it's not until we get into wednesday where we really start to usher in some very mild air indeed around this area of low pressure. you can see the yellow and even orange colours starting to push northwards and eastwards, so a very mild start to the day on wednesday. lots of cloud around, limited brightness, outbreaks of rain spilling up from the south and west, moving northwards. some of it will be quite heavy at times. look at these temperatures — we're up to the mid teens for many of us, certainly for england and wales and northern ireland. double figures across scotland, too. stays unsettled for thursday and friday. sunshine and showers for thursday. friday, we could see a potent, deep area of low pressure spread across the country to bring a risk of gales. it does look like, i think, on friday, the risk of gales will be around southern

and western coasts. certainly, across england and wales, it will be windy. both days unsettled but both days very mild.

this is bbc news with the latest headlines for viewers in the uk and around the world. i'm samantha simmonds. protestors take to the streets in tel aviv and outside the home of prime minister benjamin netanyahu injerusalem after he fires his defence minister for condemning his controversial legal reforms. this sacking of israel's defence minister, who spoke out against the legislation, feels to many people here like a turning point. the us government promises more help is on the way for mississippi after a tornado killed 26 people. a new leader of the scottish national party will be announced later, succeeding nicola sturgeon who resigned last month.

germany at a stand—still as the biggest transport strike in decades hits the country.