day it was the kind of day nice day it was the kind of day where you needed to paddle to get back to your car. those showers have all pretty much faded out of the way in through the rest of the night england and wales are essentially dry, scotland and northern ireland, there is a weak weather front moving in so you might see some spots of rain but nothing significant and by the end of the night temperatures coming up under those cloudy skies in the north—west, ten or ii in the north—west, ten or 11 degrees, may be 12 as we start off the weekend. the weekend, for england and wales they will be plenty of sunshine around. scotland and northern ireland will be plagued by weak weather fronts bringing cloudy weather but it will generally be quite bright, just a little rain at times. so this is the big picture. these weather fronts at times. so this is the big picture. these weatherfronts moving in towards high pressure, so they don't really make it all the way across the uk, that's why they are very weak as well, just moving into that high pressure squishy as them. england and wales will have sunshine pretty much all day, scotland and northern ireland, may be a few spots of rain in the morning but essentially a lot of dry and bright weather, late in the afternoon we will start to see rain approaching by scotland and western counties of

northern ireland but arriving late in the day. temperatures, high teens to low 20s and it will feel warm in the may sunshine and the sunshine is stronger this time of the year so there will be high levels of uv. are out for any level of time might be worth considering suncream. similar on sunday, best of the sunshine in england and wales, scotland and northern ireland cloudy and bright, one or two bits of rain and the temperature is similar, it's going to be quite a one weekend for most of us. nice one, chris, thanks for that. chris fawkes. that's it. more analysis of the main stories on newsnight coming up on bbc two with faisal islam but now the news continues here on bbc one as we join our colleagues across the nations and regions for all of the news where you are. i have a very good night. the economic ascent of china

with significant consequences for production of electric vehicles, batteries and microchips. in this new world, does the uk have a strategy? china calls the g7 a clique as its members look to reverse their reliance on the world's second biggest economy. but are the world's big industrialised democracies just too dependent on beijing's exports? it's going to add way more to annual gdp charges for the world than anywhere in the ex british colonies, so ijust don't get anywhere in the ex british colonies, so i just don't get the scale anywhere in the ex british colonies, so ijust don't get the scale of this sort of popularity thing about

bashing china. meanwhile, after a week of questions about whether the uk has an industrial strategy, and fears over the future of the car industry, the government reveals its long—delayed semiconductor plans. can they compete in the great global silicon war? we speak to a representative of uk chip—makers and the author of chip war. also tonight — the diplomatic return of bashar al—assad — walk—outs from some other arab leaders, but the man responsible for the bloody civil war that killed more than 350,000 syrians is readmitted to the arab league. translation: we have a historic opportunity _ translation: we have a historic opportunity to _ translation: we have a historic opportunity to rearrange - translation: we have a historic opportunity to rearrange our- translation: we have a historic. opportunity to rearrange our affairs with the _ opportunity to rearrange our affairs with the least intervention of the west_ with the least intervention of the west and — with the least intervention of the west and the foreign forces. we're joined by the oscar—nominated documentary maker who experienced the war first hand. good evening. g7 leaders are meeting on the doorstep of china, and under the shadow of two

autocracies, russia and china. the relationship between china and the usa is now fraught. the us and europe are trying to unpick decades of economic reliance on beijing. but long gone are the days when china was simply a workshop for cheap textiles and goods. it has strategically planned its technological rise for the design and export of ever more sophisticated high—tech niches. partly because of security and fears over taiwan, and partly because the effect of the china trade shock on jobs and manufacturing areas in the west, that reliance is being unpicked. there has been a debate within the g7 about whether this should be decoupling from china, or something softer, known as derisking. later in the programme we will assess the government's new strategy on semiconductor chips as the us & eu pour tens of billions into new plants to decrease reliance on east asia. but first, should the ukjoin the us in distancing itself from the beijing behemoth? here's ben with the second part of our series china —

a new cold war. applause. free trade is in our dna, and we want trade with china — as much of it as we can get. from a golden era of economic relations with china... now let's be clear, the so—called golden era is over, along with the naive idea that trade would automatically lead to social and political reform. ..to the era of economic fear and even loathing towards the world's second largest economy. the threat of china cannot be seen primarily as an economic one, because to do so is to fail to recognise that they are trying to undermine our security and our sovereignty.

the golden era culminated in a state visit for the chinese leader in 2015, and remember the original post—brexit global britain vision. that hoped for more trade with china, more investment from china, and also a new trade deal with the united states. but since then, from china we've had broken promises to hong kong, hostility towards taiwan, internal repression. and from the us we've had what some have called a new cold war with china and a policy of friendshoring industrial supply chains. that leaves the global britain vision looking pretty precarious, to say the least. so is the uk in danger of being stranded between two continents in terms of its economic policy, between china and the us — two continents which seem to be moving inexorably further apart. instrumental: god save the king. remember the term brics,

and the argument that the century would be shaped by the fast—growing economies of brazil, russia, india, south africa and, of course, china? the economist who coined it says it would be folly for the uk to economically disengage from china. are we literally trying to say we will only embrace trade and investment relationships with only countries that want to be exactly like us? which, by the way, what on earth is being like us like any more, anyhow? i mean, it's kind of madness. there's only a limit to how many countries you can go around saying, we don't want your money or we don't want your investment. will you be putting uk farmers out of business, mr morrison? - and those new post—brexit trade deals with the likes of australia and new zealand? are you selling out british farmers, prime minister? which one of you is going to get a better deal? - they just won't compensate arithmetically for disengaging from china.

even with all china's own economic challenges, looking forward, it's going to add way more to annual gdp changes for the world than anywhere in the ex—british colonies, with the possible exception of india. so i just don't get the scale of this sort of popularity thing about bashing china. you know, to me as an economist, it's just kind of bananas. but some analysts argue economics and national security are two sides of the same coin when it comes to china and should not, cannot be separated when it comes to things like chinese involvement in the hinkley point nuclear power station in somerset, or the involvement of a firm like huawei in building the uk's 5g networks,

which became a bone of contention between the us and britain until the uk ultimately bowed to us pressure and ordered its removal. mr president, are you prepared to impose limits on intelligence sharing with britain if they do not put in place some restrictions on huawei? no, because we're going to have i absolutely an agreement on huawei and everything else. so if you have china operating a bit of critical infrastructure, say, a nuclear power plant, you have to... that's a 50—year bet that nothing is going to go wrong politically between you and china or between the united states and china. that's not a bet i would particularly like to make. it is the case, given the new security laws in china, that no chinese company can refuse a request from the government for information. information can be a security risk also. so, frankly, i would, when we're looking at a public sector contract, not always go for the cheapest because it might be the cheapest for the wrong reasons. it might be a trojan horse. it might, if it looks safe now,

it might not be safe in the future. but could the uk chart a third way, refusing to pick sides? emmanuel macron has urged the european union not to be a follower in a us economic cold war on beijing. but can britain, with its ingrained transatlanticism, its special relationship, realistically resist us economic pressure? i think the biden administration expects basically everybody to totally follow their line. some combination of we'll bully you and we're right and therefore you'll fall in line. i think they're going to be mildly disappointed or surprised when it turns out that even the uk, evenjapan, of course, germany and france, even australia are not going to toe the us line. i think if the uk aligns with others and the others in the eu stand up to the us in a clear way, a somewhat coordinated way, it will be better for all and it will be less likely for the us to bully or retaliate.

and could there perhaps be unexpected economic benefits for the uk if it gets this balance right? i think the uk has a lot more to gain from separating itself from the us to a certain degree. stick with the us on national security, but don't go into the excesses of economic warfare. in particular, i think the uk can benefit from continuing to export higher education to get investment for r&d within the uk and to avoid particular military technologies, but still have plenty of room for cultural exports. how are you? good. nice to see you again. yes, very good to see you. very good to see you. some say non—alignment would actually be the only economically sensible course for post—brexit britain to chart. just as india, for instance, remained nonaligned between the us and the soviet union during the original cold war.

lots of countries will try to benefit from the us—china economic disengagement to a certain extent, and if the uk only sides with one party, i'm not sure it's the smartest thing to do. don't side. and india has always been very smart in never taking any sides. it's fine to push china back on certain economic rules and practices. and look, the chinese are open to negotiations and talking. the uk and the chinese economy are highly complementary. uk needs investment. china has plenty of investment. china looks to uk's innovative power, knowledge economy. it sees the country as as a hub, even though with brexit, but still a very important global hub. no one thinks the golden era of economic relations with china is coming back. the challenge today, to walk a razor�*s edge and make a living

in an economically polarising world. ben chu there. today the government launched its semiconductor strategy, part of this overall strategy of reducing reliance on east asia for the trillions of microchips used in every bit of technology we use. the us and eu have been pouring tens of billions of pounds into massive new chip foundries. the new uk strategy does not follow that, instead focusing on the next generation of chips and in particular high—level design rather than manufacturing. all this comes as the us pressures eu nations such as the netherlands to stop exports of key technology to china. and yet very recently the sale of uk—based arm holdings initially saw some technology transferred to chinese companies. well, just before we came on air i spoke to chrs miller, pretty much the world expert on semiconductors and author of chip war, and i asked him what china was trying to achive in the semiconductor market. well, today china is a relatively

small player when it comes to semiconductors, but the government has been spending tens of billions of dollars each year over the past decade trying to build up its own industry. the challenge for china right now is that every year it spends as much money importing chips as it spends importing oil, and china's leaders think this is a dangerous vulnerability because they're so reliant on geopolitical adversaries, like taiwan, japan and the united states. so technological supremacy in this market is notjust a matter of economics or trade? it's a matter of diplomacy and geopolitics? if you look at the types of equipment that defence ministries around the world are trying to acquire, they're thinking about how do you apply al to defence systems, and that requires access to some of the most advanced semiconductors. and today, those chips can only be produced outside of china, in taiwan or in south korea, and china's many years behind when it comes to manufacturing the chips that are used to train ai systems.

and so we've seen some really quite prohibitive actions really in the past few weeks on this. well, indeed. the us, japan, the netherlands have been ramping up their controls on china's ability both to buy specific types of chips but also china's ability to buy the tools that are used to make chips, and these tools are some of the most precise machines ever made, with hundreds of thousands of components and ultraprecise components involved in that, and so today china can't make any of these machines domestically. it relies almost completely on imports from a very small number of countries, and the g7 wants to keep it that way. and it's one in particular, one dutch company that seems to control a very key bottleneck in this market. one of the tools needed to produce semiconductors is called a lithography tool, and today one company, asml, as you mentioned, has a 100% market share in the manufacturing of the most advanced lithography tools.

and without these tools, you simply can't make an advanced semiconductor. and with the benefit of hindsight, given what we're seeing right now, what you call this global chip war, did it make sense, do you think, for the united kingdom to kind of wave through the sale of arm holdings? i think it's a positive step that the uk has passed the legislation that gives the government more oversight overforeign investment, especially chinese investment, in the uk. certainly you're seeing the uk government use that with regard to a chip—making facility called the newport wafer fab, and this is a trend that you see in other countries as well, in europe and the us and japan, and i think it's going to be important for the uk to keep scrutinising foreign investment transactions to make sure that they suit uk security interests. chris miller, thanks very much forjoining us. thank you for having me. but the semiconductor strategy comes after a week of concern over other high—tech areas of the uk economy, including future production of electric vehicles and their batteries — raising the question

as to whether the uk really has an industrial strategy. today's plan identifies £1 billion of government funding over a decade, mainly for research and not so much for manufacturing. this stands in contrast to massive plans involving many billions and many tens of billions for vast new chip foundries in the us and eu. is this the right strategy? i'm joined now by chris meadows, director of cs connected, an association which represents the cluster of compound semiconductor companies in south wales. thank you forjoining us. i billion over ten years, what does it bite you in this market? it over ten years, what does it bite you in this market?— you in this market? it has been compared _ you in this market? it has been compared to — you in this market? it has been compared to the _ you in this market? it has been compared to the vast _ you in this market? it has been compared to the vast amounts| you in this market? it has been i compared to the vast amounts put you in this market? it has been - compared to the vast amounts put in by the us, $52 billion, and 43 billion euros in europe but in some ways they are fighting over what chris referred to as a silicon chip industry, which is eat microprocessors or memory chips and this really started off in silicon

valley and was lost by the us over the last three decades and to europe and it migrated mainly to taiwan and korea. what we specialising in the uk we are very strong and is the design of the architecture used to put the chips together and also when factoring the equipment and the tools that accompany the sort of products that asm l produced as well as the lithography, you must deposit different materials and etch different materials and etch different materials and we are very strong at that and in particular we have a great strength in compound semiconductors which are a more complex form of what we have seen with both traditional silicon chips and these are used in next—generation products, you currently have them in your handsets in mobile phones and they try the internet and broadband communication but in future they will be more

important for electric vehicles, achieving net—zero and so it gives us a tradable commodity that we can work alongside the big silicon producers with so as long as we are smart in the way that the funds over the ten years are invested, the leverage effect can be quite phenomenal. i think there is an opportunity, it is at the low end of expectations but there is an opportunity to build upon the strength of the uk has. the opportunity to build upon the strength of the uk has. the low end of expectations. _ strength of the uk has. the low end of expectations. the _ strength of the uk has. the low end of expectations. the comparison - strength of the uk has. the low end of expectations. the comparison is l of expectations. the comparison is not exactly like for like of the 50 billion and 43 billion euros with i billion and 43 billion euros with i billion but nonetheless that could have been more generous if they really wanted to turbo—charge this industry? i really wanted to turbo-charge this indust ? ~ . ., industry? ithink it could. in essence. — industry? ithink it could. in essence, the _ industry? ithink it could. in essence, the key _ industry? ithink it could. in essence, the key messagel industry? i think it could. in| essence, the key message is industry? i think it could. in - essence, the key message is that the uk government and in particular the endorsement by the prime minister announcing the funding and the support shows that there is an

important role for semiconductors in an industrial strategy and it is actually more about the leverage effect in the supply chain that can be created from investment in the semiconductor industry and in the us the association estimates that for every job the association estimates that for everyjob in semiconductors, 5.7 are created in the downward supply chain. in the uk from our semiconductor manufacturing that we have based around south wales and the west of england, we do not generate that manyjobs because most of what we produce is exported. there is an opportunity to reassure some of those chains and automotive manufacturer, health care technologies and so on. briefly, are they making — technologies and so on. briefly, are they making a _ technologies and so on. briefly, are they making a strategy _ technologies and so on. briefly, are they making a strategy out - technologies and so on. briefly, are they making a strategy out of - technologies and so on. briefly, are they making a strategy out of what | they making a strategy out of what is already reality? a lot of these investments and big spending by the chip companies was stitched up two years ago so we are not competing in the bigger market where there is lots of state spending, but we were

not invited to that market? ida. lots of state spending, but we were not invited to that market?- not invited to that market? no, we had an opportunity _ not invited to that market? no, we had an opportunity in _ not invited to that market? no, we had an opportunity in the _ not invited to that market? no, we had an opportunity in the 70s - not invited to that market? no, we had an opportunity in the 70s and i had an opportunity in the 70s and 80s and we had silicon blend formed and there was a lot of uk talent that has been dispersed around the world during the period but we effectively lost that and i think america and europe plus that as well, in the book chris refers to the us going from 37% global share tojust i3% over two or the us going from 37% global share to just i3% over two or three decades and in europe it went from 22 tojust 7% decades and in europe it went from 22 to just 7% and so they are the biggest losers in terms of the industry in semiconductors that they had, but no longer have. i guess there is more to gain. although we were influential worldwide, we were not one of the bigger players. we must leave it there. thank you.

bashar al—assad has returned to the regional diplomatic fold. injeddah, the saudi crown prince gave him a warm hug at the arab league summit he had been bared from for 12 years. qatar's emir walked out. assad had to listen to volodymyr zelensky describing russias bombardment of ukraine, with some of the same methods that helped assad do the same to some of his own cities. the foreign office said it was uncomfortable with the decision, but it marks the normalisation of his relations with most of the gulf. here is mark to explain more. mark, what's the significance of today? very big day for basher al—assad, his chance to say that he saw off all of the people who tried to overthrow him and a very big moment anyway and the sad story of the arab spring also but i think particularly for him, this sense that he got rid of the american attempts to overthrow him and we got effectively a declaration of victory. translation: due to the hegemony of the west, which is devoid - of ethics and friends, we have an historic opportunity to rearrange our affairs with the least intervention of the west and the foreign forces in order to have our place in this

new world, effectively. his host, from saudi arabia, was one of those trying to overthrow him. why have the saudis changed position and invited him there for the first time in more than a decade? a sense of american power ebbing away and the saudis wanting to cut deals, brokered by china, normalisation with iran, basher al—assad is a ramp as my client, it makes sense to get the lines open and get more commerce going again and start thinking about rebuilding syria? 50 going again and start thinking about rebuilding syria?— rebuilding syria? so what lesson should people — rebuilding syria? so what lesson should people draw _ rebuilding syria? so what lesson should people draw from - rebuilding syria? so what lesson should people draw from this? l rebuilding syria? so what lesson j should people draw from this? it rebuilding syria? so what lesson i should people draw from this? it is a re should people draw from this? it is a pretty heavy _ should people draw from this? it is a pretty heavy one. bashar al—assad's machine, christian, some others who backed him, using desperate methods, brutality on such an enormous scale dousing their

people with chemical weapons, barrel bombs, levelling cities, all of this in his view he can say worked, it succeeded and from the us and the wider western perspective, another example along with what we sow in afghanistan recently of proxies, friends, doing western business, being defeated and of the west being good at summit declaration is, at hashtags but ultimately leaving its people, its allies to the mercy of their enemies.— people, its allies to the mercy of their enemies. joining me now is waad al—kateab, journalst and film—maker. waad co—directed the award—winning documentary for sama. she documented her whole life over five years in aleppo, showing the impact of the syrian civil war on civilians. thank you forjoining us. what is your response to seeing these scenes of asad? i your response to seeing these scenes of asad? .., ., ., , _

your response to seeing these scenes ofasad? ., ., , of asad? i cannot really say it was ok and we — of asad? i cannot really say it was ok and we watched _ of asad? i cannot really say it was ok and we watched this _ of asad? i cannot really say it was ok and we watched this and - of asad? i cannot really say it was ok and we watched this and we i of asad? i cannot really say it was i 0k and we watched this and we have ok and we watched this and we have not even been shocked again and again. just watching him walking with leaders from the area and in front of president zelensky and saying everything he wants to say, and it seems like it is fine. fine with all the leaders sitting at the meeting, fine with so many other countries around the world, and just really shameful for everyone who is ok with that, for the world. yes, just really no... ok with that, for the world. yes, just really no. . .— ok with that, for the world. yes, just really no... give us a sense of what is going _ just really no... give us a sense of what is going on — just really no... give us a sense of what is going on in _ just really no... give us a sense of what is going on in aleppo - just really no... give us a sense of what is going on in aleppo right i what is going on in aleppo right now. ~ , , what is going on in aleppo right now. , ., now. aleppo is under the al-assad reaime now. aleppo is under the al-assad regime and — now. aleppo is under the al-assad regime and like _ now. aleppo is under the al-assad regime and like most _

now. aleppo is under the al-assad regime and like most of _ now. aleppo is under the al-assad regime and like most of syria, - now. aleppo is under the al-assad regime and like most of syria, it i regime and like most of syria, it lives under fear regime and like most of syria, it lives underfear and a regime and like most of syria, it lives under fear and a lot of risk. the economy is really bad. al—assad, this single day, they are arresting people, activists and even normal people, activists and even normal people who can do anything from their perspective, so many people until now, half of the population are being spaced out and people who live there under this fear in these circumstances, every single day. i'd exist notjust circumstances, every single day. i'd exist not just the circumstances, every single day. i'd exist notjust the sort of diplomatic reality of the region, of the fact that he is still in damascus and the saudis want to normalise relations? it is, yes, of course this is reality. we have to face it again. but again, it is

shameful. what example these countries and these leaders are trying to make for their own people, for the world. they are watching today. it isjust for the world. they are watching today. it is just very shameful and very bad is an example. i really do not have even a clear vision. i think all of us today watching this and i think at some point today i was really feeling maybe that i was shocked by the barrel bombs that hit the hospital where we lived less i am shocked today, to see basher al—assad taking his place, saying that he wants to say. al-assad taking his place, saying that he wants to say.— that he wants to say. here, the foreian that he wants to say. here, the foreign office _ that he wants to say. here, the foreign office response - that he wants to say. here, the foreign office response was - that he wants to say. here, the | foreign office response was that that he wants to say. here, the i foreign office response was that it wasn't comfortable with syria's

readmission to the arab league but it was a matter for the arab league. what do you make of that? thea;r it was a matter for the arab league. what do you make of that? they have been uncomfortable, _ what do you make of that? they have been uncomfortable, we _ what do you make of that? they have been uncomfortable, we have - what do you make of that? they have been uncomfortable, we have been i been uncomfortable, we have been bombed and killed, they are not comfortable today when also normalisation is happening. and i feel like everyone who is silent, actions need to be done, we are done with words. we have seen that words did not work when russia and al—assad were bombing as and we have seen the same words with ukraine being bombed by the same perpetrators today and nothing has been changed. we need actions. action is the only thing that could really change this reality. some have argued that _ really change this reality. some have argued that the _ really change this reality. some l have argued that the earthquake really change this reality. some have argued that the earthquake in the region may have changed perspective a little. is there much and that? i perspective a little. is there much and that? ., ., ~' perspective a little. is there much and that? ., ., ~ ., ., .,

and that? i do not think at all that an hinu and that? i do not think at all that anything more _ and that? i do not think at all that anything more than _ and that? i do not think at all that anything more than just _ and that? i do not think at all that anything more than just letting i anything more than just letting al—assad find his way out... i feel that people see this as an excuse but it is not the reality. the region was mostly affected by the earthquake, the north and west of syria, and also i think that the un, so many other international bodies, unfortunately, find a way back to normalise and have a normal relationship with al—assad because of the earthquake. irate relationship with al-assad because of the earthquake.— of the earthquake. we must leave that there- _ of the earthquake. we must leave that there. thank _ of the earthquake. we must leave that there. thank you _ of the earthquake. we must leave that there. thank you for - of the earthquake. we must leave that there. thank you forjoining l that there. thank you forjoining us. waad al—kateab, thank you. so let's take a look at some of the front pages. the ft first. banks show shadow credit alarm. and also quite an extraordinary people of what we have been talking about volodymyr zelensky i made the arab league

summit, where he made an intervention there that we have been talking about. onto the daily telegraph, the uk talking of economic decline, an article from the chancellor talking about negative direction of risk and talking up the economic opportunities but history about household bills about to fall as putin's energy war fails. a household bills about to fall as putin's energy warfails. a big development for economics. the guardian, patience paid £550 per hourfor guardian, patience paid £550 per hour for private guardian, patience paid £550 per hourfor private gps. guardian, patience paid £550 per hour for private gps. other times, ai is a clear and present danger to education. let's leave that that's all from us tonight. but before we go, we learned this morning of the death aged only 59 of one half of the most iconic guitar duos of the 1980s. so we leave you with the smiths' bass player andy rourke along withjohnny marr, who created the legendary guitar section of how soon is now, back in 1985.