that greenland is not for sale, he believes the us will gain control of the territory. this week, donald trump's latest proposal that the us take control of gaza, move its people elsewhere, and turn it into the "riviera of the middle east" has sparked global criticism. but this isn't the first time the president has floated bold territorial ambitions since returning to the white house. from demanding that denmark sell greenland to threatening to reclaim the panama canal, to even suggesting that canada should become america's 51st state — "america first" agenda, with critics calling it

others suggest, it's a calculated negotiation tactic — another way of exerting leverage on the global stage. it all down. we begin with the middle east — and on tuesday president trump shocked the world when he suggested that the us could take over gaza and resettle its palestinian population in the process. the us will take over the gaza strip and we will do a job with it, too. we'll own it. at that press conference, president trump suggested would be permanent. this drew condemnation from the un, in the days after, the president's officials said any displacement would be temporary. donald trump then repeated elements turned over to the us by israel under his plan — and that palestinians would already have been resettled in far safer and more beautiful communities in the region.

that idea — repeating their commitment to a two—state solution. that's the creation of a palestinian state a goal of us foreign policy in the region for decades. for more on this, i spoke to david satterfield, he was most recently the us special envoy for middle east humanitarian issues under president biden. he's also served as a us ambassador to turkey and lebanon. president trump, as you will have heard this week, doubling on his have heard this week, ddubling on his idea the united down on his idea of the united states taking control of gaza. do you see any scenario in which this, realistically, ,j1::’é' happen? no, helen, i do could happen? no, helen, i do not. could happen? no, helen, i do not- the _ could happen? no, helen, i do not. the president _ could happen? no, helen, i do not. the president is _ could happen? no, helen, i do not. the president is quite - not. the president is quite right to draw attention to the literal hell that is literal hellthatis the situation, the humanitarian situation, the physical situation, humanitarian situation, the physicalsituation, in humanitarian situation, the physical situation, in gaza. humanitarian situation, the physicalsituation, in gaza. it is absolute misery. but the majority of the palestinians resident gaza are not going resident in gaza are not going leave voluntarily. whatever

to leave voluntarily. whatever desperate character their existence there may have right now, they are not going to give up now, they are not going to give up what they regard as their home — i would assess, is home — nor, i would assess, is israel, orany home — nor, i would assess, is israel, or any otherforce, israel, or any other force, going israel, or any otherforce, going to — at gunpoint — deport them. the question would come — them. the question wouldcerne — where? even them. the question wouldcorne — where? even if the to where? even if the palestinians to leave — palestinians wishe'd'to leave - we can not which we can assess they do not — where would they go? jordan and egypt have, historically, drawn a bright red line the on their territory absorption on their territory or, indeed, the presence for any period of time on their territory, of additional palestinians. it's a politically destabilising step in jordan, as politically destabilising step injordan, as well as a challenge. in egypt, security challenge. in egypt, it is a major security challenge. let me remind — egypt a years—long, egypt fought a years—long, bitter, and very lethal — for egyptian security forces — war in the sinai to overcome first an al-qaeda then an isis movement whose origins were in gaza — the same movement that sprang hamas. so egypt is not going to do it.

sprang hamas. so egypt is not going to do it— going to do it. ambassador, if is a going to do it. ambassador, if - is a far-fetched _ going to do it. ambassador, if - is a far-fetched scenario, | this is afar—fetched scenario. say the tqis is afar—fetched scenario. say the least — as you are to say the least — as you are suggesting — why is the president making that suggestion on the world stage? have to assume is to i have to assume it is to precipitate a response — a response from the gulf states primarily — saudi arabia, qatar, uae — to get from them something on, "what would you do? if this is not an option — if the departure of palestinians is not possible because they don't wish to palestinians is not possible becal or they don't wish to palestinians is not possible becal or you're on�*t wish to palestinians is not possible becal or you're not wish to palestinians is not possible becal or you're not willing to leave or you're not willing to accept them" — which they're not — "what, then, is your proposal? what assistance are you ready to provide?" that leads us to what has, over the last 18 months, been the last 18'manths. been the of those last 18'n1anths, been the of those states — position of those states — which is that they are prepared to engage in stabilisation measures — boots on the ground — as well as reconstruction, at a considerable cost to them. but only within the framework of an acceptance by israel of what we may in reductionist

what we may say in reductionist terms is a credible pathway to which is a resolution. i don't see that coming in. is which is a resolution. i don't see that coming in.- see that coming in. is there not a risk. _ see that coming in. is there not a risk, though, - not a risk, though, particularly when it comes to these states, of actually these arab states, of actually inflaming tensions when it comes to the prospect of a lasting peace and ceasefire negotiations, as well as the release of further hostages — not to mention the prospect of release of further hostages — not to mention the pro israel»f normalisation between israel and saudi arabia?— and saudi arabia? certainly with resoect _ and saudi arabia? certainly with respect to _ and saudi arabia? certainly i with respect to normalisation between israel and saudi arabia, the saudis have insisted, on some formulation which embraces, on the part of the government of israel, that pathway a negotiated pathway to a negotiated permanent status resolution. and i don't that as having and i don't see that as having been dropped. that obviously is something which will be discussed. it was a focus of the administration. the previous administration. it's a focus of this administration. i am less concerned about regional reaction than i am the second point you mentioned. the

point yodmentloned. the himself called, president himself has called, as a critical goal, for the -- . 77;ng -... ....-. 7 of banana}; 7 of iaéégdniéfiiiiiy for release of accountability for all hostages in gaza. that should be where the focus lies right now. sustaining the ceasefire from phase 1 to phase 2, and achieving that complete resolution accountability for all hostages. is resolution accountability for all hostages.— resolution accountability for all hostages. is that, then, in because all hostages. is that, then, in - because of- all hostages. is that, then, in - because of the - jeopardy because of the president's comments with regards to this purported plan? israel is negotiating on this issue right now. the united states, at senior levels, is also engaged with qataris, and with the qataris through hamas. so, no — i don't see a reason at this moment to predict failure. but it has to be the focus. �* , , ., failure. but it has to be the focus. �* , ., �* focus. briefly, if you don't - ambassador - - focus. briefly, if you don't - ambassador - do i focus. briefly, if you don't l - ambassador - do you focus. briefly, if you don't - - ambassador - do you think mind, ambassador — do you think these are responsible comments to be making the global to be making on the global stage from the leader of the us? i stage from the leader of the us? ., ., , .,

us? i do not believe that the actual exit — us? i do not believe that the actual exit of _ us? i do not believe that the actual exit of the _ us? i do not believe that the actual exit of the palestinian | actual exit of the palestinian population of gaza is going to popdlation of'gaza'is going to as a voluntary measure 1m turning now to greenland — its parliament has passed a bill which bans foreign contributions to political parties as a preventative measure against president donald trump first raised interest in the danish territory during his first presidential term. his son, donald trumer, visited greenland a month ago — just hours before the president said that us ownership is "an absolute necessity" for international security. denmark's prime minister however, says "greenland belongs to the greenlanders." the territory sits uniquely between a couple of the world's superpowers — the united states and russia. a strategic advantage for its vast land and natural resources . while the us has its own

military base in greenland, presence on the semi—autonomous island. for more on this, i spoke to carla sands — in the first trump administration and vice—chair of the center for energy and environment at the america first policy institute. donald trump has said that he believes that the us will gain control of what do control of greenland. what do make of that? do you you make of that? do you think that's the move? you make of that? do you think that's the - move?- that's the right move? well, what i think— that's the right move? well, what i think is _ that's the right move? well, what i think is that, - that's the right move? well, | what i think is that, although greenland is part of the —= kingdom of denmark, denmark has had every— kingdom of denmark, denmark has had every opportunity to secure greenland. i them to greenland. i pressed them to give — greenland. i pressed them to give more their defence, and give more to their defence, and they— give more to their defence, and they had — give more to their defence, and they had every opportunity to develop — they had every opportunity to develop greenland. but greenland is not developed. no road even between there's. he read e�*sen between masha,” ma'or there's. ne reed ee'en between masha,” ma'or towns in there's. he read eten between - major towns in greenland there's. he read esen between - major towns in greenland — two major towns in greenland — there's— two major towns in greenland — there's zero development. so, denmark's neglected greenland. they don't have the capacity to defend — they don't have the capacity to defend greenland in any way. they— defend greenland in any way. they can't even denmark

they can't even defend denmark in they can't even defend denmark - in fact, _ they can't even defend denmark in fact, their gdp per itself. in fact, their gdp per capita — itself. in fact, their gdp per capita and their population is much — capita and their population is much like the state of colorado in the _ much like the state of colorado in the us _ much like the state of colorado in the us. and if you asked colorado, _ in the us. and if you asked colorado, "can you defend greenland and develop it?" colorado _ greenland and develop it?" colorado would be unable to. that's — colorado would be unable to. that's how i, and i think many in the — that's how i, and i think many in the states — i don't in the united states — i don't speak— in the united states — i don't speak for— in the united states — i don't speak for the trump administration or for afpi, 552.15. my —— z 2 is my personal opinion — 7- denmark is z denmark is incapable near?” if. of that denmark is incapable of defending greenland. but that denmark is incapable of defending greenland.- that denmark is incapable of defending greenland. but if you want to talk— defending greenland. but if you want to talk about _ defending greenland. but if you want to talk about defence - defending greenland. but if you want to talk about defence in i want to talk about defence in all of this and international stability, there is the fact european countries that european countries have already had to hold informal talks on options if the us president moves to seize greenland — a greenland — including a of having to send nato prospect of having to send nato troops there. i mean, the united states is a nato member. these kind of comments aren't these kind of comments creating instability within their own defensive alliance to which the united states is also a member? and they're to a member? and they're having to face russia? — face russia? well, that's a lot ou're face russia? well, that's a lot you're asking _ face russia? well, that's a lot you're asking me _ face russia? well, that's a lot you're asking me to _ face russia? well, that's a lot you're asking me to unpack, l face russia? well, that's a lot l you're asking me to unpack, but i'll say this. greenland's not

part of the eu, and greenland has no defence. there's, you know, like 30 guys llii, in greenland. in aisreeniianci. that’s in greenland. that’s it. up in greenland. that's it. they have a couple of dog sleds and there's an old navy cutter and'there’s'a n old navy cutter from denmark. but, as a there from denmark. but, as a matter of fact, it's going to take much more resources than denmark has. they say they're putting us$2 billion towards greenland defence, but it's over multiple years. it's absolutely, you know, preposterous that denmark could defend and as a defend greenland. and as a matter of fact, china has tried to move into greenland and pull them into belt and road them into their belt and road which is a death initiative, which is a death trap — a death trap of diplomacy and there are diplomacy — and there are russian subs all over the place, and that's open—source. the region has become much more lively. when got to denmark liyely. when i got to denmark 2017, i tried to raise the in 2017, i tried to raise the issue and get assets for the region, and there was no but as a matter of appetite. but as a matter of fact, seeing that giant giuk

gap �* fact, seeing that giant giuk gap — and that's the seas around greenland that's also premier stated just several weeks greenland — that's also around greenland — that's also unsecure. 50 around greenland — that's also unsecure. 50 around greenland - that's also unsecure— unsecure. so there are the around greenland - that's also unsecure— unsecure. so there are the questions _ unsecure. so there are the questions of _ unsecure. so there are the questions of defence, - unsecure. so there are the. questions of defence, which unsecure. so there are the - questions of defence, which you questions _ unsecure. so there are the questions of _ unsecure. so there are the questions of defence, - unsecure. so there are the. questions of defence, which unsecure. so there are the - questions of defence, which you are raising. but there's also unsecure. so there are the - qut raising. fdefence, which you unsecure. so there are the - qut raising. but �*ence, which you unsecure. so there are the - qut raising. but there's ihich you unsecure. so there are the - qut raising. but there's also you are raising. but there's also question of what people in the question of what people in the question of what people in greenland — as opposed to greenland as opposed to donald trump or the united qzeegqand — as opposed to trump �* the qzeegqand — as opposed to trump �*the united donald trump or the united states — want. and a poll states — want. and a poll 85% of greenlanders indicates 85% of greenlanders indicates 85% of greenlanders do not want their island to do not want their island to become part of the united become part of the united states. so, how can you speak states. so, how can you speak to what people want in to what people want in greenland?— greenland?— to what people want in greenland? ~ , ., , to what people want in greenland? ~ , ., , greenland? well, greenlanders have told me _ told me what they want. greenland? well, greenlanders have told me what _ have told me what they want. what want is success in greenland? well, greenlanders have told me what they - greenland? well, greenlanders have told me what they want. l have told me what they want. what they want is success in what they want is success in their mining, they want their mining, they want successful they want successful tourism, they want successful tourism, they want their children to speak english their children to speak english as their second language, not as their second language, not chinese. are what chinese. these are what as their second language, not chinese. want. nhat as their second language, not chinese. want. they want greenlanders want. they want opportunity and good—paying 777777 7777 777 and good—paying opportunity and good—paying jobs. they don't have what jobs. they don't have what they're looking for today. but, they're looking for today. but, in a kind of with in a kind of association with in a kind of association with the united states — whatever the united states — whatever that deal ends up being, that deal ends up being, between president trump and the _7 president trump and the between president trump and the greenlanders — greenland will greenlanders — greenland will be secure. greenland, the be secure. greenland, the

�* stated just several premier stated just several premier stated just several weeks ago weeks ago from the podium, they're going independent.

nation, about economic prospect parity. he's putting the united states first. it's not america last, it's in last, it's america first, in his administration. and i think that the opportunity that greenlanders will find — it's going to be very exciting. so i goinglto be very exciting. se ! it's going to be very exciting. se ! it's to be written how think—it's'to'be'written how up think—it's'to'be'written how up playing out, but this ends up playing out, but i'm excited to watch it play out. this is an exciting time for the people of greenland who want that greenlandic dream, and the people of the united states, as trump has states, as president trump has taken the helm. repeatedly voiced his desire to retake control of the panama canal, which is key to global trade. china was operating the waterway and panama had "broken" a promise to remain neutral — allegations that the president of panama, jose raul mulino strongly rejects. on wednesday, the us state department claimed a fee to transit through the panama canal.

this sparked a strong rebuttal from panama's president — who accused the us of spreading "lies and falsehoods". but this was delayed — reportedly due to changes in the president's schedule. our central america correspondent will grant sent this update from mexico city. donald trump hasn't abandoned his claim that the panama canal should return to us control and it was a us control and that it was a mistake by washington under jimmy �*to sign an jimmy carter to sign an agreement that put it back in panamanian control 1999. panamanian control in 1999. that, of course, going to that, of course, is going to continue to keep the two on this issue, countries apart on this issue, because the pan —— panamanian government, the panamanian jose a. iiili; ii 7 jose mulino, is president, jose mulino, is completely convinced that this is panamanian territory, it is sovereign territory, and it is not be meddled with. let's not to be meddled with. let's

talk about some of the positives that have come out of this week of washington's this week. ef washingten'se—r ~ ~~~— . at diplomacy this week. sf washingten'se—r ~ ~~~— . at diplomacy this attempts at diplomacy on this issue. first, secretary of state marco rubio's first stats marco edbio's first trip was to jgtegrgational trip was to his trip around the 77 began 77 began there, and he held region began there, and he held talks with president mulino on this issue. thereafter, this issue. shortly thereafter, mr mulino panamanian mr mulino said that panamanian involvement in a chinese called the belt and initiative called the belt and road initiative — is road initiative — which is about global infrastructure flows, globalflows about global infrastructure flows, global flows of trade — would and to an end. that is something that the white house, donald 7 donald trump, 7 donald trump, will 7 donald trump, will have 7 under donald trump, will have wanted to hear. those are all positive steps, i think, in terms of bilateral terms of that bilateral relationship. the less positive are. of course. that that steps are, of course, that that claim still continues — that mr trump continues to suggest that gets preferential china gets preferential treatment, that china, in a sense, runs the — something the panamanian government robustly denies.

there's a sort of irony at the heart of this all as well — and thatis heart of this all as well — and that is the fact that panama represents one of washington's biggest allies in the region, and there must be people there and'ther’e'mdst'be people there their heads and'there'mdst'be people there their heads as to scratching their heads as to how this situation could have come about. these possibly have come about. these are allies that stretch back decades. the issue of the panamanian canal has brought together 77 together for 77 together for many, 77 together for many, m7a ny them together for many, many years. has supported years. panama has supported donald trump's efforts on by trying to close migration by trying to close the entrance to the darien gap through which people move 7 south america up through south america up towards central america and onto the united states. they're essentially doing everything that mr trump would want essentially doing everything that mr tru yet would want i essentially doing everything that mr tru yet nowi want i essentially doing everything that mr tru yet now there is apparen7t77 7777 7 apparen7t claim apparent claim over this apparent claim over ownership and management of the this apparent claim over ownersi canal. management of the this apparent claim over ownersi canal. itanagement of the this apparent claim over ownersi canal. it feels, nent of the this apparent claim over ownersi canal. it feels, in nt of the panama canal. it feels, in essence, like one of those things that will get organised, things—that will—getrorganised. donald trump is that beheld tramp is ... . trying to that benald tramp is ... . trying to push essentially trying to push panama to the negotiating

panamatee the negotiating far, been panamato the negotiating far, been pretty table. so far, he's been pretty successful in that regard, but they are still a long way from it. for more on this i spoke tojohn feeley, former us ambassador to panama. many people, i were surprised when the president brought up the topic of the panama canal when he came back into office, and there was even the suggestion — or not ruling — military force to take it out — military force to take it back. what do you think that mr trump is looking to achieve here? ~ . . trump is looking to achieve here? ~ , , here? mr trump is looking to achieve a _ here? mr trump is looking to achieve a 2-step _ here? mr trump is looking to achieve a 2-step goal. - here? mr trump is looking to achieve a 2-step goal. no. i here? mr trump is looking to achieve a 2-step goal. no. 1| here? mr trump is looking to | achieve a 2-step goal. no. 1 - has alwa s disliked the he has always disliked the panama canal. go back and panama canal. you go back and you look in history — in the 19805 you look in history — in the 1980s and �*90s, he railed against it. hejust 1980s and �*90s, he railed against it. he just doesn't believe you away something believe you give away something for nothing, and he doesn't believe that a strategic alliance with a friendly country is worth anything. on the other he is very the other hand, he is very concerned — as was i when i was ambassador in panama — with

chinese commercial expansion. and the reasons are very manifest. it's a dual—use activity — they use it for espionage, they use it for theft of intellectual property. so he wants that, but then —— other thing about there's this other thing about there's this other thing about the united states may be having to pay. and i think those are his two goals. and i think that his two goals. and ! think. that .. -.-.-. ~ .- . ~ . has made enough his two goals. and ! think. that .. -.-.-. .. .- . .. . has made enough noise his two goals. and ! think. that .. -.-.-. ~ .- . ~ . has made enough noise that he has made enough noise that the panamanians are paying the two sides are attention and the two sides are and today, there was talking. and today, there was no presidential call, but i don't think that signifies that is �*flfifif ffi'fib that §ififiifie§ that 7 7 7 7 is all sort of off this is all sort of coming off the rails, by any stretch of the rails, by any stretch of the imagination. l the rails, by any stretch of the imagination.— the rails, by any stretch of the imagination. i mean, you are implying _ the imagination. i mean, you are implying here _ the imagination. i mean, you are implying here that - the imagination. i mean, you are implying here that this i the imagination. i mean, you are implying here that this is | are implying here that this is are implying here that this is a negotiating tactic to extract concessions. do you think it could go further than in if 7 if the 7 if the us 7 7of the us taking 7 7ef the us taking back terms of the us taking back control and ownership of the panama canal? do you think that's the right thing to do? laughs 0h, laughs oh, no...! nothing of the sort. donald trump's not going to invade panama. he doesn't have the votes for it, first.

he campaigned on a remember,“he campaigned on a that rememberihe campaigned on a that said remember,“he campaigned on a that said he rememberihe campaigned on a that said he was remember,“he campaigned on a that said he was going platform that said he was going to not commit america's blood and treasure to another foreign so i think you can take war. so i think you can take that off the table. he, of course, loves to lead the military —— the military military —— leave the military action on the table. donald trump's the kind of guy who thrives in chaos, and he loves fit“??? in efiéfib see he lies? cause eff”??? i7n a??? area hi in??? cause it. effieee i7n eheee eee he lettee cause it. i effieee ifi. eheee eee he lettee cause it. i think eefi�*n�*ee ie eeeee eee ee lettee cause it. i think that to cause it. i think that he and, moreover, his advisers — 7 they really want is to what they really want is to begin to push back in panama, and more broadly against latin america, against chinese commercial expansion. so there are two ports — one on either end of canal — and end of the canal — and the concessions are held by a chinese company. i think donald trump wants to see those two pulled from concessions pulled from hutchinson's — the company. and on that, i he's actually on that, i think he's actually pushing on an open door, because the panamanian president ordered, several weeks ago now, a full—scale investigation of the contract of two renewal of those two

concessions. so i think that one will be in train, and perhaps that's the way that the chinese will be moved out of the canal. they're not patrolling it, they don't the canal. they're not patrolling it, they not't the canal. they're not patrolling it, they not a soldier there = some oil single soldieret—here — some of things that are said are the things that'are said are silly. there's that, and i just silly. there's that, and i think also the fact of think there's also the fact of the fees, which marco rubio raised the other day when he came back. and, you know —jose mulino has had a pretty good visit marco rubio, and he �*said 7 �*said he 7 77 is; 77 77he7had7 77 77 77 is; 77 "not; 77 �*said he had a very himself said that he had a very good, businesslike call with secretary of defense hegseth. i think that this is sort of in the — i'm speculating, obviously — but i think this is sort of in the right channels to be able to resolve. ok. and to be able to resolve. 0k. and there certainly _ to be able to resolve. 0k. and there certainly isn't _ to be able to resolve. ok. situc there certainly isn't going to be an invasion. [to there certainly isn't going to be an invasion.— be an invasion. do you think this is the — be an invasion. do you think this is the right _ be an invasion. do you think this is the right way - be an invasion. do you think this is the right way to - this is the right way to conduct business? you yourself, said 7 said in, 77sai7d7i7n,7l7e7ft77777 77sai7d7i7n,7l7e7ft7th7e77 said in, left the trump7 7 i said in, left the trump saying you felt administration saying you felt no longer able to serve, under donald trump's term. do

donald trump's first term. do think the president has an you think the president has an even more ambitious foreign policy approach this time around, and do you think it's appropriate? l around, and do you think it's appropriate?— around, and do you think it's appropriate? i don't think it's appropriate _ appropriate? i don't think it's appropriate at _ appropriate? i don't think it's appropriate at all. _ appropriate? i don't think it's appropriate at all. i _ appropriate? i don't think it's appropriate at all. i ended i appropriate? i don't think it's appropriate at all. i ended a l appropriate at all. i ended a career that i loved because i wouldn't serve it in the first administration. i think now administration- lthink. now back and he's sort of he's back and he's sort of supercharged and he's got a whole bunch of people around him who very clearly in him who very clearly believe in this kind of bully pulpit foreign policy by threat, fgreign policy by threat. policy by foreign policy by intimidation. i think it's terrible, frankly. i think it's terrible, frankly. i think, i think it's terrible, frankly. ithink, if i think it's terrible, frankly. i think, if anything, if it were countries, i think were other countries, i think it'd push straight into it'd push them straight into the arms of the chinese. in a sense, donald trump's very lucky that panama's a very pro—american country, pro—american country. and mulino himself — even e the raised it his inau-ural his inaugural speech — no mistake about it - we relationship with china. have a relationship with china. but our primary security have a relationship with china. but our is imary security have a relationship with china. but our is the ry security have a relationship with china. but our is the united �*ity have a relationship with china. but our is the united states, partner is the united states, as it has been since 1977 when the treaties were signed, and

then in 1999 when the canal was turned over. a turned over. it's a relationship that works." and if i were to speculate, i would say that rubio hegseth and say that rubio and hegseth and maybe mike the national security have kind of security advisor, have kind of gotten to the president and said, "look, tone it down a little here. i understand you have to say this and play to your crowd, but we can work this one out." on foreign policy is facing quite the pushback from world british prime minister sir keir starmer said with un secretary—general antonio guterres cautioning president trump's comments accusing china of controlling the panama canal. based in hong kong,

which was appointed by the panamanian government. to withdraw from its infastu rctu re project called and nato, france and germany have rallied behind denmark in president trump's pursuit of greenland. both the greenland and the danish prime minister say the arctic island is not for sale. for more analysis, i spoke to elise labott, edward amaro — press fellow at the council on foreign relations — and host of cosmo—politics on substack. president trump — when we look at this and we look at his rise through the election — i mean, he came back to the white house he came back. to the white house . . .. .. things like, "no boots saying things like, "no boots on the ground," "we're not getting involved in foreign wars," and then you've got his critics right now accusing him something akin to a return of something akin to a return to 19th—century imperialism. qogl9til—century imperialism. do you see fitting how do you see this fitting into his broaderforeign policy approach? into his broader foreign policy approach?— approach? well, i mean, first of all, ithink— approach? well, i mean, first of all, i think it's _ approach? well, i mean, first of all, i think it's true - approach? well, i mean, first of all, i think it's true he's i of all, i think it's true he's iugghng of all, i think it's true he's juggling many constituencies, jugglingn�*nany constitdencies. we were hearing — not right? we were hearing — not only does he have this kind of

maga crowd, but also now maga crowd, but he's also now trying to lean into more of the conservative republican crowd 77 77t7he77 7 7777777 77 the neopo7ns the neopons as well. i and the neopons as well. i think when he said he would use the military to annex greenland or to re—seize the panama canal or to re—seize the panama canal or wouldn't rule out putting boots on the ground in gaza, i think that's just kind th'nt�* “a?” jest fine “t "t"'” "w7” | th'nt�* “a?” jest fine “t "t"'” "wt” i think he's . the think he's - :: �*the pot k he's - :: �*the pot and �*s i ii �*the pot and - i ii �*the pot and — you ee �*the pot and — you know, to stir the pot and — you know, he loves to have people talking about him in this way. gets all aboot hire in this wav. gets all . ~ ~ . ...... the abet-it hire in this way. gets. all . ~ .. . ..... the at abet-it hire in this way. gets all . ~ .. . ..... the at the abet-it hire in this way. gets all e ee e e e eeeew the at the end abet-it hire in this way. gets all e ee e e e eewe the at the end of of the attention. at the end of the day — again, he did campaign on not any us campaign on not putting any us. on the ground, ending troops on the ground. ending . . they called ar77id i think it�*s and i think it'sjust wars", and i think it'sjust really a way trying to open negotiations. 7 7 negotiations. 7is 7 negotiations. 7is it up negotiations. is it reckless? yes. is it, you know, reckless? yes. is it. veaknen 7777————~~~ little bit reckless? yes. is it. treats-sen . ~ . ~ little bit out of the a little bit out of the ordinary? absolutely. but, you know, a lot of times, people think that it does do a little of good, and he does push bit of good, and he does push

those conversations forward. visit our website or the bbc news app — this article runs through 15 things president trump and his team did this week, including everything we've been discussing, plus the latest on tariffs, domestic politics and much much more. stay with us here on bbc news. i'll have more news for you at the top of the hour. join me then, if you can. see you then. hello there. this evening and overnight. settling snow will be mainly confined to the hills, lower levels seeing the rain, and, in fact, it will be reverting back to rain across southern areas as we pick up some less cold air. this area of low pressure is the culprit, pushing north out of iberia, squeezing the isobars together, bringing the windy weather.

but you'll notice it also bring some lighter colours across the country for this weekend, area of high pressure for next week on an easterly wind. of england and wales. mainly rain, central and southern areas, but we'll see accumulating snow across the hills of wales — 1cm to 5cm here — and some snow, perhaps, for the pennines, some of this snow getting in a little bit further north but the rest of scotland and northern ireland will see clear skies, a sharp frost in places. and east, where we have the cloud, the breeze and the rain. so for saturday, it's a rather grey picture. we'll have further spots of rain the best of the sunshine, again, across this northwest corner, and perhaps some brightness one or two rain showers here. and the winds lighter across the board on saturday to what we've had today.

temperatures range from around six so that's how saturday is looking. through saturday night, it looks like that cloud spells to develop. there'll still be a few spots of rain and hill snow where skies are clear, then we're likely to see frost and maybe some fog, because the winds will be lighter. where we hold on to the cloud, then generally above freezing. so for sunday, high pressure starts to build back in. that will be noticeable across north sea coasts. the better day of the weekend, perhaps drier and a bit brighter. should be more sunny spells around, but some areas could stay cloudy all day. but into next week, temperatures drop below the seasonal norm. it turns colder, easterly winds. a lot of dry weather because of high pressure, but there will still be some rain and some hill snow across central, northern and eastern areas.

voice-over: this is bbc news. we'll have the headlines for you at the top of the hour, which is straight after this programme. this week on the media show, how do you future—proof the news business? we'll talk to a number of senior industry leaders about how they're trying to get

the attention of gen z. to what age children should access social media. that's coming up on the media show. now, it's the challenge all media organisations are grappling with — how to attract the next generation. channel it is one of the uk's biggest broadcasters, and it's released new research on gen z and made suggestions for how reliable, truthful information to geordie greig from the independent, but we started with the ceo of channel 4, alex mahon. we've always had a role as a broadcaster to focus on younger people, not kids, but adolescents or young adults, for about five years, which actually is not a long time. but even in five years,