voice-over: this is bbc news. we'll have the headlines and all the main news stories for you at the top of the hour, straight after this programme. welcome to hardtalk from berlin. i'm stephen sackur. vladimir putin's all—out invasion of ukraine delivered the mother of all political shocks to germany's elite. suddenly russian energy supplies could not be relied upon and germany's traditional foreign policy principle, putting business first, not military power, suddenly looked like weakness.

chancellor olaf scholz promised dramatic change. my guest is the state secretary for economic cooperation niels annen. so has germany got a new strategic vision? niels annen, welcome to hardtalk. thank you. pleasure. it is great to be here. let's start with the war in ukraine. i think there is no doubt that putin's invasion of ukraine shocked germany. would it be fair to say it has also destabilised germany? no, i don't think so but it certainly shocked germany because a lot of our economic model was based on the assumption that we would

continue using cheap russian natural gas and it was also based in a kind of historic, i want to say historic experience that although russia was a competitor and an enemy in the cold war, it was always also in economic terms quite a reliable partner. i think that was somehow, you know, is seen as a constant policy, and we did not really realise that it is not the soviet union anymore, it is a brutal dictator and an unpredictable dictator. but what you have just described is a big deal. you have just told me one of your key economic planks was taken away, that reliance on russian energy at the same time one of your geopolitical core assumptions was also put in the trash can? i would put it to you, that given those two elements, germany is still trying to figure out where to go? yeah, but you asked me about

whether it was destabilising for germany and my answer is clearly �*no�*. here in berlin, wejust overcame a very difficult winter. we were able in record time to substitute for russian gas and oil, especially oil, we have been very familiar with german politics, and decision—making, it is quite a complicated business year, we have been able to build a first energy terminal. so, yes, we have the chancellor indicating a fundamental shift... but germany is stable and a prosperous country. it is one thing using words but another delivering actions. you are right, olaf scholz, the chancellor, talked about the turning point in the major dramatic shift in the germany's geopolitical thinking. he talked about it the days after the russian invasion of ukraine. i was there. but here we are, more

than a year later, zeitenwende? if we looked first in terms of military and security policy, lots of talk about massive new investments in the german military but we don't see any sign of it? well, you need to look very carefully what we did. i am hearing that argument a lot from our opposition but in all politeness i have to be very clear. it was not only the zeitenwende he gave. it is a fact that germany is now a leading supporter for ukraine in terms of military aid, in terms of financial aid. germany, and it was a bipartisan vote by the way, took a decision to invest massively in our under invested armed forces, that we have been able to bring together with 100 billion and we took the first concrete decisions. for example, it was not possible for the previous

governments to make decisions about the future and we bought that and we signed contracts. here is what the parliamentary commissioner for the armed forces, dr eva hogl, said just the other day: "not a single euro or cent has yet been spent from this 100 billion euros special investment fund that scholz created to create a new german military". i like eva very much... i'm not talking about whether you like her or not. isn't she telling the truth? if you sign a contract to buy the most sophisticated fighter jet available on the market, you pay the money when you see the fighter jet. so this is a rather theoretical question. and it has to be said also that the 100 billion extra budget is for the next two years. exactly.

so we saw that we need to give a fundamental new way of funding to what the armed forces needs. so the question how much is spent today is not indicating about decisions, hard decisions that germany has made. but we can at least judge intent for example of the defence budget and the budget this year will not get anywhere close to germany's promise to meet the 2% of gdp defence spending commitment that nato expects. in fact, your defence spending right now is pretty much the same as last year. i would dispute the message behind that discussion that we are having a lot here in germany because the way that we choose, that the chancellor made clear in that zeitenwende speech, is undeniably that we will reinvest our armed forces. and we have issues, we have issues with the way that the armed forces,

the very bureaucratic set of institutions, sometimes competing institutions, are able to implement that. there is no doubt that we are going into that direction and there is a burden for what we have to do. we have an armed forces, brave men and women who are great soldiers but have not received the necessary funding for now we're giving away some of most valuable assets to help ukraine to defend itself. so we have to co—ordinate all of that and you will see that within a few years, germany will have the strongest conventional armed forces in europe that is good for europe, that is good for nato, and is good for ukraine. chancellor scholz has been clear, his words have been clear, and he says putin cannot win and you were very candid with me earlier when you said, "my party, and indeed germany,

for a long time, had a strategic position which said that a warm and very close economic relationship with moscow was a good thing for germany." isn't the truth that inside your own party, the spd, the social democratic party, the restored very significant voices that even now think it is important to maintain an outreach strategy to moscow? well... i do not want to be impolite to what certain members of my party, but i don't see relevance. i see though that the discussion of my party is still ongoing. why haven't you, for example, in your party, expelled gerhard schroder, the man who as chancellor and after being chancellor of germany, was a friend of vladimir putin who ended up on the board of rosneft, one of the biggest russian energy companies, an architect of nord stream 2, bringing russian gas... i expected you to ask that question.

what is the answer? the answer is quite simple. there was an attempt to thrown him out of the party, but the party is a democratic party with an independent party jurisdiction, and the attempt was not successful. isn't there a major lesson from germany's over reliance over decades on russian energy, that over reliance is a risk. and the other area where germany appears to be falling into a trap of over reliance, is over reliance on china trade? china's economic power as a market? for the first part of the question, the answer is yes. and it is interesting. if you look at who were the few, i have to say few

leaders of germany who have been asking for example, a couple of years ago, to take government money, public money, to subsidise the building of an lng terminal, to give us an option to become more independent and open up the market, the german gas market. that was former mayor was 0laf scholz and he repeated that... this is an important part. that was rejected not only by the majority of the political class but also the german business community. but 0laf scholz is also the chancellor who went to china late last year with a whole team of business people who expressed his deep desire to see an ever deeper trade relationship with china, which of course is germany's absolutely most important trading relationship and he went

there, having just sign off on a chinese company buying 25% of the operator of the port of hamburg, against the advice... i have to correct you, as politicians we also advise not to criticise but your question, ithink, deserves some reframing because, first and foremost, the business community, and i am a social democrat, from the left of the political spectrum but i have to defend some of the business leaders because the association of businesses in germany reversed the china strategy but it does not mean they could completely ignore china. the second part of the question, the 25%, it is not the port of hamburg. it is one of the terminals, one of many terminals, and it is the smallest terminal. and you know what? and you know what a senior foreign official said of that?

she said a disproportionate increase of china's influence over infrastructure. and the deal is not signed yet. so you think it is a mistake? no, i think you need to get the question right and it is selling part of the terminal and that is something that all of our european neighbours are doing, and framing that as selling off anything strategic to china is a bit overblown and you have not been... and you have not been... it is coming from an official from the ministry, not a journalist. and talking about what the chancellor did in china, he talked about what is happening in ukraine and made sure that president xi renounced what president putin was scandalously doing, threatening the use of nuclear weapons. happy to have a discussion but we have to bring it together. but the bottom line is there are big splits over china policy in germany.

the foreign minister, ms baerbock, who comes from the green party in the coalition, she says: "we can no longer allow ourselves to become existentially dependent on a country that does not share our values". she says that at the very same time as all of these companies from basf, to volkswagen, to aldi, are still pouring new investment money into china. so who is right and who is wrong here? what you quoted, what the foreign minister said is the german government's position, so i do not see any contradiction. you don't see any contradiction? no, i do not see any contradiction. when 0laf scholz said, "decoupling germany's economy from china's is the wrong answer"? yeah, that is a german government position and i'm sure that the foreign minister

shares that view, so we all agree that we need to do more to diversify our economies but we also agree that decoupling is not a short—term option for the german politics and not for the german businesses. i just wonder if you think germany runs the risk of not getting it quickly enough in terms of the need to distance itself economically from china? last point on this, the head of german domestic intelligence, just last month, said in the bundestag, that china poses more of a threat to german stability then russia. "russia is a storm, china represents climate change". do you agree? yes, i agree and i think you will see that the german government that is part of our coalition treaty and agreement will present a national security strategy and after that is done, we will present the china strategy.

it seems that you have three options, to see china as a partner, a competitor or as the phrase goes, a systemic rival. for you, which is it? you mentioned the three pillars of the strategy which by the way, you are using the official language that the european union is using in its strategic framework, which germany is supporting. the question is will the strategic rivalry be the dominating part of that relationship? that is not for us to decide but we need to prepare for that and that is what we are doing. you imply in that context, it is very much a european decision, so i'm interested to see what you made of the french president, emmanuel macron, going to china and making a point while he was there of saying that europe must reduce its dependency on the united states. he said, "is it in our interest to accelerate a crisis on taiwan?" "no," he said.

"the worst thing would be to think that europeans become "followers on this topic and take our cue from "the united states agenda, or indeed a chinese overreaction." do you think macron got it right when he went to china? i was a little bit afraid that you would ask me that. i think the crisis of ukraine is applying a lesson to us. there is right now no strategic autonomy. europe is crucially important for ukraine, but without the united states's military capacity, and financial capacity, you would not be able to sustain that support for ukraine. so do we need to invest in our own capacities in the long run? certainly, yes, but to imply that there is strategic autonomy around the corner, i think that's an illusion, and that's may be one of the reasons why

chancellor scholz is working so closely with president biden. that is a real difference between berlin and paris, and that surely means the european union is hamstrung when it comes to projecting a coherent, unified stand on the world stage? i am maybe a little more optimistic than you, because as i mentioned, we are very, i mean, the european union is a very unique organisation, with independent countries, with their own policy tradition. but let us look at the substance, and i am much more optimistic also when it comes to the german—french cooperation on that. and then let's get to germany and the united states. do you think there is danger that the united states is exploiting countries like germany right now? if one looks at their inflation reduction act, for example, and the way in which they are pouring hundreds of billions of dollars into green policies in the united states,

which, as it happens, will allow them to favour homegrown car manufacturers, for example, as they develop their electronic vehicle sector at the expense, probably, of european car manufacturers? yes, well, i think within the inflation reduction act, there are elements that are of concern for us. and we see that in certain segments of the german industry, companies are looking at american offers, and maybe even to invest in the united states. so that's a reason why, together with the european commission, we are developing also countermeasures. you mean, there's going to be a new era of protectionism across the atlantic? that is why i hoped that i could finish my sentence,

because it's only one part of the inflation reduction act. if we look at that in a whole, we should be maybe happy that finally, i might say, the united states are stepping up their engagement in investing in green infrastructure, in green energy, and finally keeping up with the commitments that they signed. so it's a mixed balance and i think there is more to win to work together, but the united states, they know, that if they are introducing certain policies, europe, as a market, as a common market, is a formidable actor on the global stage, and we made that very clear. before we end, i want to address something very much in your domain as state secretary in this particular ministry, concerned with the economic assistance and development around the world. would you accept that the geopolitical rivalries that we see today and that we have discussed,

in terms of reaction and fallout from the ukrainian invasion by russia, those geopolitical rivalries and tensions are making economic assistance and the working of the world bank and the imf as multilateral institutions more and more difficult? yes, i would agree. that's one of the reasons why the german government and officials together with secretary yellen the finance minister from the us proposed reforms on the world bank make that institution more efficient. we see that we have increased demands, on almost all levels — fighting poverty, the health crisis is not overcome, and we have mentioned, i think, in our conversations, the climate crisis. so we are in a situation

that is quite dramatic, where we need more international cooperation, what is happening is the contrary. so there are global political tensions, ukraine, china and another are making it much more difficult. but here is what the economist magazine says — "right now, "china is trying to build an alternative global order "and america is turning inward. "and it is china that appears to be, in a sense, "making the weather when it comes to attracting "emerging economies to its model." so, maybe german soft power isn't working? well, there is a clear challenge. the chinese are trying to compete, also building their own institutions, the brics bank, the new development bank, other development instruments, that they are trying to compete with the traditional western bretton woods, institutions. we have also reasons to be confident that our system delivers. yes, it's true, with

the belt and road initiative, china has been able to, especially in africa, but also central asia and other parts of the globe to leave its footprint, and if you talk to the countries that accepted chinese influence, there is a lot of disappointment, they see they are getting into a new debt trap, and so we need to be more efficient, we need to be aware that we need to mobilise resources, not only government standing because not that alone will not do the trick, we need to include the private sector. but we also, i think... we should not copy the chinese system because then we would repeat the mistakes that the chinese have been doing, for example, in countries in africa, but also in other parts of the world. just a few hundred metres from where we sit is one of the big remaining chunks of the berlin wall. it came down in 1989 and it was seen then

as a symbol, i guess, of the triumph of a western idea of liberal democracy and liberal economic management. isn't the truth today that you in germany have to face, just as others in the west have to face, that western assumptions of the triumph of that model were misplaced? well, i think you're mentioning a very important point here. if you follow the german debate, for example, president lula da silva's statements on ukraine, which i don't share, but the german public sometimes seems rather surprised to hear a dissenting voice from the global south. things are changing out there. we still have a lot of influence and respect for what germany is doing in terms of developing cooperation and policies, but we need to listen, we need to be engaged

in a honest dialogue otherwise we will not be able to make our argument. the times where everybody was looking north to the rich western countries, looking to imitate our economic and political model, these days are probably over, but that doesn't mean that we cannot build alliances, but you need to be there. and that's why we used our g7 presidency to invite the south african president, the president from senegal, the indian prime minister and others, and that dialogue is so crucial, and that's why maybe development cooperation maybe is more important than ever in these crazy days. niels annen, we have to end there, but i thank you very much indeed forjoining me on hardtalk. thank you. my pleasure. thank you.

hello there. some sunshine as well. it is all changed for the end of the week because of low pressure starts to take over, comes much milder and there will be some rain at times. some places could be quite wet on thursday, particularly in the south. two fronts of the uk. milder error starting two make its way in. still cold air looms across the northern half of scotland. the rain across scotland is likely to be the most, but there will be some snow over the mountains. this weather front will bring some very wet weather to parts of england and wales, heavy and thundering through the afternoon. travel to lifting a little bit in the south despite the rain. close to the mid— teams further north still stays quite cold.

thursday night, much milder across other areas unless cold across other areas unless cold across scotland as well with very few places seeing any frost. but perhaps the very far north of the highlands. low pressure clears away from england and for friday. this weather front weakens and continues to bring some rain. slow improvement from england and wales. should see some sunshine in northern ireland, wales, southern england. it will feel very mild indeed, around 17 or 18 degrees at best, even milder through the central belt of scotland. the bank holiday weekend looks very mild, quite warm in fact for places for many of us but there will be further scattered showers around. a very slack pressure chart for saturday, very little wind around to move the atmosphere so it will be quite static weather throughout saturday. we are into that milder air mass as you can see.

there will be some sunshine on saturday, the best of it crossed england and wales. we could see a scattering of showers which could be quite heavy, may be and we could be close to 20 celsius in the warmest spots towards the south. northern scotland still has some cold air. sunday looks like we will see more weak weather fronts across the uk, so that means a little bit more unsettled, more cloud around generally given some sunshine, some showers and heavy thunder to produce longer spells of rain. sunday see the most showers around. temperatures still in the mild side but a few degrees down on saturday's values. bank holiday monday, if showers around, was towards the south and east of the uk. they could be heavy with light winds around. variable cloud in the north of the uk with the best of the sunshine towards the south. those temperatures close to the seasonal or a touch

below around the low to mid teens. as we move beyond, and after the bank holiday monday and tuesday onwards, it looks like much of next week will be dominated by stronger areas of high pressure, and the centre will start to shift towards the near continent and that will bring us initially east and southeasterly winds. it looks like once we move away from monday, the area of high pressure builds next week it could turn drier and even sunnierfor many of could turn drier and even sunnier for many of us and feel quite mild at times, just unsettled by the end of next week. that is a long way off now.

live from london, this is bbc news. in sudan — outbreaks of violence threaten the 72 hour truce, with the un renewing calls for both sides to abide by the ceasefire. djibouti on the horn of africa becomes a hub for foreign nationals trying to flee the fighting in sudan as governments try to repatriate their citizens. the us and south korea agree a landmark deal to counter the north korean nuclear threat. and could california be about to to experience a new gold rush after the recent floods and storms unveil new seams of the precious metal.