gaddafi and his family having fled. this is what's left of gaddafi's palace. the last time you were here? >> the last time the revolution was finishing. a lot of people, normal people something expensive here like the salt and like the gold. >> while talking we didn't notice several pickup trucks of local militia had closed in on us. >> stop. just relax. >> this is their turf or their area of operation or somehow under their control. whatever the case they're the group in charge today. an argument ensues between our guys and their guys. all of whom fought against the same forces on this ground a year ago. >> he wasn't afraid of going to a place like libya which is a very complex, you know, all these different kind of political parties and competing groups. and he was always very good at sort of being aware of the complexity of a place and not dumbing it down or not even trying to give a dissertation on it. >> another morning in tripoli and life goes on. vendors are out, people go about their daily routines. >> this is our traditional breakfast. >> what is this

he would be risking the fate of saddam hussein and gaddafi. the realistic path forward would be step-by-step. the question is, can we get to a process where our concessions are modest enough we don't give soon, but bigtoo enough that north korea once to play ball? host: whaaryo worried about giving away as we move forward? guest: for the u.s.-south korea a partialor denuclearization deal would be bad. complete lifting of the un sanctions in return for north korean steps that could be reversed. saying that we will let you inspect the shutdown of our centrifuges and we have to lift the un sanctions, if they start treating, we have -- if they start cheating, and we have a hard time convincing the world those sanctions. you --ow comfortable are how confident are you kim jong-un will keep his word? guest: i'm not confident at all. all he said is that he wanted a denuclearization. he meant the nuclear element has to and. denuclearization is a broader concept for them. it is not the physical presence obama's on the peninsula, it is the whole associat

libya hardly came up on the rar d radar in the theater before they over threw gaddafi. but in the aftermath and weak regime that replaced it, libya has been, terrorism spiked, isis gained a foothold. it's since been on the receiving end of u.s. military action with do you know us legal authority under the aumf. isis to make a more egresssive example, still the group that engenders the most fear and headlines, isis grew out of the sunni insurgency that fight in the iraq. as general put it, quote, there would be no isis if we had not invaded iraq. as early as 2006, u.s. national intelligence estimate on trends and global terrorism found the iraq war was, quote, shaping a new generation of terrorist leaders and operatives. the war had become a cause celebrated for jihadist. the hard numbers bear it out. in 2015, number of fatalities by 2015, the number of fatalities from terrorism in the middle east had increased by a staggering 397 percent since 2001. and in seven countries that the united states either bombed or invaded since 9/11, terrorist attacks, the number of indivi

he does not want the same fate as omar gaddafi. there are other iues that need to be resolved. the regime still possesses massive chemical, biological, and conventional arsenal that's capable of mass murder and destruction. the regime still desires to reunify the korean peninsula under its rule. the regimetivide weapons technology to other bad actors like iran and syria. the regime is still the number one abuseof human rights in the world. whatever outcome is achieved in further negotiations, we must not forget who we are ding with. the kim dynasty is historically a brutal regime whoemains states sponsors of terror. we made the mistake of removing this label, believing north korea negotiated in good faith. as we learned they lied. any negotiations needs to have the most stringent safeguards. we must preserve the presence of united states forces in south korea and the china sea. inspectors should have access to all sites in north korea. no side deals, no holds barred. any indication of weakness by us or our allies will embolden the regime. complacency has always been our y's bt

and by gaddafi.ing what's going to happen next. there was a cry for help from benghazi and the united nations. the west is so utterly ignorant... would it have been better to let him do what he wanted to do? no, we didn't make the country any better. if we're going to go in, same thing with iraq, you've got to have a ten—year plan and you've got to know the society. the victorians, the imperialists, when they went into the middle east they spoke the languages, even the bedouin tribal languages, they knew the societies which they were trying to take control of. we are in the middle of this great gap of information and knowledge and trust and then we go in. i don't think it helps. finally, as we look at the end of the g7 summit that perhaps has no place any more in your collective view, what is your hope for what might emerge, if we can get beyond this uncertain phase? does human creativity give you cause for hope? i don't know. i wish i did know. but i think yasmin is right that what we are seeing is

families or the important people at the top of the regime are likely to suffer the fates of colonel gaddafil us and it makes all sorts of sense from their perspective. they we re sense from their perspective. they were not simply give away the nuclear programme but they are prepared to contemplate negotiating it away with the security deal. the only difference is that some in the us administration want to have immediate dismantlement of all of the programmes and some, and trump and mike pompeo from this perspective, they are prepared to ta ke perspective, they are prepared to take intermediate steps towards that final goal. the north koreans are quite clear about what denuclearisation means to the rest of the world, getting rid of the nuclear programme, and this is because the security council sanctions which involved all the major powers and every state that is a member of the un, they made clear that without denuclearisation, there will be no economic assistance and trade for north korea and they want that. fascinating. if mr smith, we have to leave it there. —— professor smith. the new p

well, we know what happened to colonel gaddafi and libya after he gave up his weapons of mass destructionrthrown and murdered rather brutally by rebel forces there. it is an analogy, an image, which is not welcome at all in pyongyang. it presents here might cause a few negative feelings, shall we say? —— his presence here. there is so much that will be deliberated by both sides. the queues and messages, the visible messaging that might be there as we watch the two teams over there as we watch the two teams over the course of the next few days. thank you, rupert. let's go to the st regis hotel, just five minutes down the road from shangri—la. that is where kim jong un down the road from shangri—la. that is where kimjong unis down the road from shangri—la. that is where kim jong un is staying. have you seen any sign of him? well, he arrived earlier this afternoon and he left here to meet with the singaporean prime minister, lee hsien loong. it is not farfrom where president trump is staying. you can practically walk it within ten minutes. this is a 5—star hotel buying in the middle of the a

its residents for allegedly committing atrocities against rebels during the uprising that toppled gaddafi will that then why have has more from misrata. here in this room right behind me a representative from both cities the city of misrata and the city of have just finished signing a reconciliation deal that has called their reconciliation a charter and that allows the people of the river to return back home after almost six years of this placement the people of the whatever accused by misrata rebels of committing atrocities against rebels and yet twenty eleven during the revolution that toppled of moammar gadhafi also the people of there were they have been living in camps all over libya for almost six years now and they are accused of killing civilians of shelling of targeting civilian areas during the seventy's of revolution and twenty eleven that toppled the regime of moammar gadhafi now after signing this deal today the people of the whatever who are stuck on the way back home to to whatever and those who are living in camps all over libya the can finally return home both sides here

in south africa, a regime change, but libya as an example clearly did not go according to plan for gaddafith africa is the best example of the country, a government that made a genuine decision to give up its nuclear weapons. and co—operated with the international atomic agency to verify that took place. but it is very different when it is a different regime, it is very different to seeing this dynasty, the son of the son of a son stopping something that whole country has been built upon now. i see no evidence that kim jong—un has made such a fundamental decision. as i said, he might be willing to accept limits which of course is valuable and important, we would like to see north korea's nuclear and missile programme limited in some respect, and a diplomatic process is better than going to war. i am in favour of trump's policy of starting a diplomatic process, ijust don't think it will end up in elimination of weapons. it is great to talk to you, thank you very much indeed. tomorrow has been called the brexit showdown. now, steady yourselves. there may not ultimately be too many fireworks.

because libya is story of denuclearization gone wrong for gaddafi. they are afraid of regime change after all. so what happens they set a date and bolton and pence talk about libya. so, my question is, is there enough restraint in this white house that they don't say stupid things between now and june 12th? >> i don't think they have to say anything now because north korea has gotten what it wants. they have this face-to-face with the president of the united states, and now trump is what can i give away to the russians before this syria summit? >> didn't he say he didn't want to use the term maximum pressure? >> what he's saying there is that basically sanctions are collapsing and they're already collapsing without north korea giving up anything in return. to the point what we're hearing here, he's a horrible negotiator. he's only a great negotiator in his own mind. his great achievement is to sell this line to people, and make people think because he repeats it it must be true. >> he gets people to believe it. again he took aim at comedian samantha

regime and finding muammar gaddafi ultimately murdered by his own people.he north korean leader did not want that so it's going to be customary handshake when they come out of the meeting. we will get more from the room in which they are meeting. asia has had a chance to respond in real time. the nikkei off a half percent but all the major park it's around asia are either soft and nominally on the upside more towards the support of the dollar and our own stock market futures again are doing okay here. we had a so-so day here but a lot will hinge on how this meeting goes. and what promises from each side the role of the military that option what is on the table and what are we telling the north koreans and what are the north koreans telling us? rob o'neil on that the man who brought oma bin laden down on how to prevent another one, after this. it's easy to think that all money managers are pretty much the same. but while some push high commission investment products, fisher investments avoids them. some advisers have hidden and layered fees. fisher investmen

what happened to gaddafi at the end.e administration say there is no competent because basically this is what can dongguan -- kim jong-un has wanted. they have not given up anything yet and all we had is trump agreeing to the meeting. is that fair or poor has their been something that has been accomplished? yet.would say not however, i'd say that is premature. officialsr military with u.s. have said they are very skeptical. they have broken the armistice , but really the question is strategic choice of north korea seems to be making. we won't know until negotiations take place. that's how do you tie them down to meaningful -- down inyou tie them to do you see the sanctions that have been applied, it feels like north korea has no choice but to come to the table. >> that is the way i look at it. i think sanctions were the noose tightening around north korea's and. -- north korea's and i -- north korea's snack. -- neck. by not testing, he made a calculation that the cost exceeds the benefit. he has achieved that and moreove

and obama's toppling of gaddafi would be a partner with the west.ld in the open slave market think of that prediction. and when the kumerrouge took over cam boddia. for most a better life. the times has yet to issue a correction. now a day the times is telling us moscow was the greatest threat to the country when it is not. and in syria, saying that assad gassed his own people. once again they are lying. the "new york times" is hardly the powerful institution that distorts the truth. the republicans in the house may announce a amnesty. and letting foreigners ignore the laws is good for america. they are lying. our country is changed a lot. the divide is not between republican and democrats. it is between competence and everybody else. a small amount of people are mismanaging. it is called ship of fools and you can order it now if you want. remember you don't reflectively owe anyone your allegiance outside of your own family. and that includes the news media. stay skeptical. they lie a lot. that's it for us tonight. what a great hour that was. tune i

comparing north korea to the libyan model, which of course did not end particularly well for colonel gaddafihat. donald trump was not happy with him and made opinions known and wish that mr bolton had not intervened quite when he did. but it yes, there he is at the table. the decision was only made really in the days, in the run—up, to that summit. it was really touch and go whether he appeared at all. but, there we go, he was there. the question remains, do they have enough now to build upon? does this communique, which is very vague, very aspirational, give them enough to actually continue with the process everybody hopes will happen? this is beyond 100 days on the bbc. coming up: the british government avoids defeat on its brexit bill, seeing off a move that would give mps a final say on the deal. all that's still to come. iam sure i am sure you have noticed just how much fresher it is outside. it will stay relatively cool over the next few days. the wind will increase as well. tomorrow, the bulk of the day is looking fine. a few light showers. all eyes on the atlantic right now. the powe

its word to the leaders and the regimes that i convinces to give up some power, much like muammar gaddafi>> the specter of libya and what happened to more marked the coffee clovers -- hovers over this agreement. given donald trump history and rhetoric, he is not in any way interested in regime change. he is constantly beating the table on how our mideast policy has resulted in chaos when we did endeavor to try and effect regime change in that region. a commitmentking toward north korean security, i do not see how as a practical matter, we can guarantee it. no one knows what is going on within the north korea political sphere, and certainly there is nothing the u.s. can do to guarantee his security. opaque situation in so many ways. he will stick with us as a guest host for the hour on this historic day. when the u.s. president sat down and metsupreme leader of north korea for the first time in history. we are minutes away from the open. let's not forget about the markets. there are about to open and kickoff in the midst of this excitement about the summit. joining us now from our equities

there was a sort of sneaking suspicion out there —— gaddafi.the room to say, we should strike north korea. we tried talks, didn't work, that it we have to drive action. a lot of people are worried about the preparation that goes into it. is there some material that you can pick out from previous negotiations that are habitable here? we arejust watching the convoy moved out of the airport here some of it is maybe just that the president is unwilling to harken back to people that came before him. it is obvious that president trump does not like president trump does not like president obama. there was work done under the obama administration and bill clinton's administration had a deal with the north koreans. george w bush has talks with the north koreans. there is a long history of negotiation and hopefully some of it will be used and repurposed. hopefully the president will not start from zero. of all the criticism that he has of other presidents, let us not forget that what he has been promised thus far by the north korean side— denuclearisatio

when gaddafi negotiated libya's weapons of mass destruction and it did not turn out well for him.mr giuliani about getting kim jong—un oi'i giuliani about getting kim jong—un on calling on his knees to seek the summit has been equally unhelpful. that is a huge insult to any korean, north or south. it is the image of crawling on hands and knees demeans someone. crawling on hands and knees demeans someone. those statements are not helpful if the objective is to resolve this through negotiation. that is an insult anybody actually. you for coming. thanks for having me. well, president trump and prime minister abe will fly from washington to quebec to take up some of those international concerns. that's where mr trump will face strong criticism from american allies for imposing tariffs on their exports. that's the disagreement of the moment. it follows of course the president's decision to pull out of both the paris climate deal and the iran nuclear agreement. here's the french leader emmanuel macron earlier today. the us is of course a strong economic power but if they become more iso

the iranians, give up your nukes and to the north koreans, give up your nukes, finally somebody, gaddafis okay, i'll give up my neeks, going to trust the americans, brutally murdered and so sodomized on television on the streets of his own people. that's the foreign policy of obama and it's haunted kim jong-un. why should he trust america. here are these people who have committed these foreign policy blunders lecturing us on whether trump should try to seek peace. lou: i think there would be a ready consensus available at any time that no part of the national security team of president obama nor the t himself or his secretary of state should ever have any comment on anything over those past eight years, other than, perhaps, a deep but only sincere apology whenever they are so mofs. i would not expect it anytime soon but perhaps that would be possible. as we look at what kim jong-un is doing here, in the room with these two leaders, but of course only in spirit, is president xi jinping. how big of an influence will he have, has it been determined in your judgment that he will have over th

he would be risking the fate of saddam hussein and gaddafi the realistic path forward would be step-by-stepthe question is, can we get to a process where our concessions are modest enough we don't give soon, but bigtoo enough that north korea once to play ball? host: what are you worried about giving away as we move forward? guest: for the u.s.-south korea a partialor denuclearization deal would be bad. complete lifting of the un ti retr korean steps that could be reversed. saying that we will let you inspect the shutdn our centrifuges and we have to lift the un sanctions, if they start treating, we have -- if they start cheating, and we have a hard time convincing the world those sanctions. you --ow comfortable are how confident are you kim jong-un will keep his word? guest: i'm not confident at all. all he said is that he wanted a denuclearization. he meant the nuclear element has to and. denuclearization is a broader concept for them. it is not the physical presence obama's on the peninsula, it is the whole association. they are not going to give up butr bombs, ever perhaps, not until th

he -- he wants nuclear weapons and i don't think he has any plans to go the way of gaddafi. >> rememberity industry. it's a key. richard actually keeps a copy of that on his desk, i think. >> two thoughts. just because something hasn't happened before doesn't mean it's historic. that's one thing. i think when you call something historic it means that it has a good chance of having lasting implications, and i think it's very unclear at least to my layman's eye that this does that. i think richard's exactly right. if i were china right now i'd be thinking hey, i had a pretty good week because these two other figures are making my life easier. the other question and this is a direct historical point is negotiating with nation states that have some accility within their body politic is a different thing from negotiating with dictators. and i think if -- if we didn't learn anything else from the 1930s, i think we learned that happy summitry, emptywords, potentially empty words and lots of flags and lots of ceremony don't necessarily lead to the consequences that we hope for. and so i think a

. >> gaddafi gave up nuclear weapons and got killed by the united states. >> he was nuclear free and that. >> he remembers it well. i mean, you know, there's a possible mot possible model here. but many dictators wouldn't mind having a mcdonald's without the democracy that goes along with the mcdonald's, so there's a posz lts of economic reform here. it's hard to imagine the h family loosening its absolute hold on power. >> there are two models and i've always been fascinated by the two models. there's the russian model where you give some commit cal freedoms and then there's the chinese model which starts in 1989 and continues forward where you don't give political freedom but you allow capitalism to run rampant unchecked. >> the china model now prefers that model and so does russia. putin is trying to put them on the same path and that's appealing obviously to people like kim jong un whether it's rep reply kabl in there, if you start out tomorrow and open it up to the west, it would take decades to get anywhere close to where south korea is. >> and le's not forget human rights. the

he does not want the same fate as omar gaddafi. there are other issues that need to be resolved. the regime still possesses massive chemical, biological,an capable of mass murder and destruction. the regime still desires to reunify the korean peninsula under its rule. the regime still provides weapons technology to other bad actors like iran a syria. the regime istill the number one abuser of human rights in the world. whatever outcome is achieved in further negotiations, we must not forget who we are dealing with. the kim dynasty is historically a brutal regime who remains states sponsors of terror. we made the mistake of removing this label, believing north korea negotiated in good faith. as we learned they lied. any negotiations needs to have the most stringent safeguards. we must preserve the presence of united states forces in south korea and the china sea. inspectors should have access to all sites in north korea. no side deals, no holds barred. any indication of weakness by us or our allies will embolden the regime complacency has always been our enemy's best friend. expec