Welcome to dateline london. Im jane hill. This week we discuss whether theresa may can go on and on as Prime Minister, well look at the latest round of brexit talks, and ask what can be done to defuse the north korea crisis . My guests this week are the author and journalist rachel shabi, are the politicaljournalist and commentator alex deane, the north american journalist and broadcaster Jeffrey Kofman and the writer and broadcaster mihir bose. Welcome to you all. The british Prime Minister theresa may ended up having a ratherfrank conversation with journalists on her flight to japan this week. She insisted she would like to lead her conservative party into the next general election, not something a lot of people were expecting. For politics watchers of a certain age, there were echoes of margaret thatchers stated determination to go on and on. Alex, what did you make of her comments . I think as soon as any political leader gives a deadline as to when they are going to go, speculation becomes rampant about who will replace them. Its healthy for a leader to want to fight whatever the next contest is that their party faces. It was the right thing for the Prime Minister to say. There is also more room to manoeuvre than in the blair brown years because there is no gordon brown. There is no one person going around with lots of aggression, both theirs and others, determined to oust the incumbent. I regard this as a good thing interestingly, tony blair also got caught by a pack ofjournalists on a plane coming back from china when doctor david kelly died. They got a lot of commentary out of him in that time. There seems to be something that happens on aircraft. I wonder if political leads should avoid this . I think you are right. The dilemma that theresa may faced was if she did not declare this, she was in danger of becoming a caretaker and lame duck Prime Minister. She has to be all in. She cant be, so to speak, half pregnant, so to speak. Whether it is the intention to stay, she needs to declare this or else she loses control. I dont think she is going to stay. Obviously she will wait until the brexit negotiations and then she will go and you are quite right. You know, she cant say now, i wont stay otherwise she will be dead in the water. She will wait for the brexit negotiations. I cant see her leading the conservative party. Into an general election . You say its obvious, but there was speculation after the election, which of course didnt go as the conservative party had planned, that theresa mays leadership might have been under attack before that, but her fortunes have improved considerably. David davis is the one to watch out for. The Bigger Picture is, you are right, it was the only answer she could give as the leader of the conservative government, but in national terms, what is this good for if she stays . She is, as many people have commented, she has lost her credibility. She went into an election she did not need to and lost the conservatives seats and ended up with a Hung Parliament which means that she is too weak, the government is too weak to legislate. At a time when britain is dealing with brexit, were dealing economic stagnation, wage stagnation and spiralling costs. We have a government that is ineffectual. They cannot do anything to address very real issues and very problems. So when we look at her in terms of she is doing the responsible thing, and that might be true for her party because the conservatives dont have another leader otherwise she would be replaced in a flash. They simply do not have anyone to replace her with. It might be good party, but what is good for the country . You could make the argument that it would be better for the conservative party to have a leadership challenge, even if that precipitates another election. Another elections . one of the reasons for her making the comment now is that the Party Conference is coming up. Yes. She would not want to Say Something like, im going to go because then the Party Conference will become an election for which is the last thing they want. Its going to be that anyway. No, but on a subdued level. They are too disgruntled with her and there is too much disunity within the party for that plaster, for that band aid to stick. And to your point, alex, there is no obvious successor and that is perhaps different to where we were a few months ago. As you suggested, it has changed remarkably quickly. There is no obvious person around whose ambitions might coalesce, but where i disagree with rachel is i think there are plenty of people who could lead the conservative party. There are plenty of people around the cabinet table that are qualified to hold the role of Prime Minister. Its simply that theresa mays position does more to defend itself when she is in the mode of governing and not campaigning. In campaigning, any party that calls an election when it doesnt have to and goes backwards rachel is right has not don as it wouldve wished. On the other hand, theresa may in government seems, actually, where i also disagree with rachel, seems to carry the trust of the conservative party and i think that challenges to theresa may are far less likely than these conversations imply. I know where going to talk about brexit in a moment, but it is part of this conversation. They dovetail as brexit goes, so does theresa may in many ways. We now see the labour party defining a different position over the last week and so it becomes a much more nuanced going for her to try to figure out how to navigate brexit. It is not going well and whether or not she can deliver something that is going to satisfy enough people, i think it will determine her own future. Mihir, you mentioned david davis. Lets talk about him and what he has been saying. To give him his full title, he is britains secretary of state for exiting the eu. Great title, isnt it . He said that things had got a little tense this week. Thats the word he used as brexit talkss were into their third round. Another british minister, liam fox, said the country shouldnt be blackmailed by the eu over the divorce bill. Michel barnier, the blocs chief negotiatior, expressed frustration at the slow pace of discussions. Rachel, youve been writing a lot about europe. Are you optimistic, as david davis insists that he still is, despite all of this . No, i am not optimistic. It is not looking good, is it . Its a deadlock and it was to be expected. In terms of the eu blackmailing britain, i mean i would not expect anything other than the eu looking after now its 27 remaining states. I do not expect it to do anything different, so i think its a bit ridiculous and certainly, i can understand the frustration of the eu negotiators saying, look, we need to see some paperwork here. Something, anything. Just give us some indication of where this is going so we can negotiate, so we can start negotiating. What is becoming more and more clearer is how much brexit is really an ideology rather than a deliverable practical reality, but we are where we are, we voted to leave and we have to execute that. I think what is becoming clear now is that there is a difference between the two. The eu, their political reality of what they are saying rhetorically is very much what the negotiating situation is. For britain, the political reality differs from the rhetoric that brexiteers have been giving us over what we might expect from a deal and i think the government, its incumbent on them to manage peoples expectations and say look, we promised you a lot of stuff we cant deliver. They might say, we dont know yet, we might be able to deliver it. Its still quite early days, actually. The writing is on the wall. We do know, that there. The cake and eat it thing is something that we know. We cannot have the same conditions and exit. Things will change, right . Its likely they will change for the worst, at least in the short term and we almost certainly do need a transitional deal that leaves as much continuity in place as is possible and certainly parliament, with the labour party changing its position on that in the last few weeks, is moving in that direction, leaving no ground for the hard brexiteers to say, we should just drop out with no deal, we should just crash out. That is not a tenable position, that wont have any parliamentary weight. There is a big gap between what the public has been promised and what actually will be the case. That is a problem for britain in a way it isnt for the eu. I think this notion of blackmail is very much about trying to set up a bogeyman that says, oh, its their fault. In europe this is not a big deal as it is here. This is britains problem. Thats whats interesting to look at, yes. The people of france and germany and the netherlands arent waking up and saying, i wonder how the brexit negotiations went this week . They have their own issues. Macron is trying to completely transform the french economy. Thats what theyre talking about in the french media. And so this is an old political game. Those bad guys in brussels, the eu are making it difficult and not playing fair. This is a british problem and britain has to find a way to navigate with the eu. Alex, what was your reading of the language here . This is a strange conversation from both of these guys because on the one hand the rhetoric coming out of the eu is wholly accurate and representative of the negotiations. On the other hand the rhetoric from the United Kingdom is outrageous, absurd and does not reflect reality. Both sides are posturing. There is this weird self lacerating instinct amongst some in the United Kingdom to believe everything that comes out of the eu bloc and nothing that is said by our own government and representatives. Furtheremore, some of it is just not true. The suggestion that we need some paperwork to have some kind of negotiation as rachel said, that was a big gap there. There have been publications of Brexit Papers from the uk government. You may not like what they contain. You may want to disagree with them. In fact, i sense that you would. No, its not about whether i disagree, its about what is actually empirically in them. You are having your own meta debate where you say theres no paperwork. Oh, ok, that paperwork. No. Oh, i dont like that paperwork. Paperwork with substance. Can ijust say, historically, this reminds me of how the british withdrew from the empire, but there was a difference. The british then were in control. If you remember how they withdrew from the empire, and i take the question of india. India was going to become a republic. It was part of the empire. Back them the word commonwealth wasnt used. India was going to become a republic. Attlee and churchill wrote begging letters to nehru saying stay and they created the commonwealth which is a totally imaginary club, if you like. The queen has no powers in india or the various republics that formed. The british arent used to suddenly walking away. They like to be liked. They like to feel they are morally superior, that is the basis of their rule, we are morally right. What the eu is not giving them is enough of that reassurance, that feeling that we can create a club somehow and have links with the eu of a certain kind, and yet were outside it and i think that is going to be very difficult to do. For me, what is interesting this week is labours walk back. Now we have some differentiation between the two main parties and it creates an interesting opportunity for debate. Corbyn, for so many people is hard to stomach as much as that he has a huge following. He is also a very polarising figure, as is theresa may. Yet now you have him, or his party at least, straddling these different worlds. That distinction is interesting him and his party. Corbyn, until he became leader at least, used to say quite openly that he thought the eu was a stitch up, done in the interest of big business and big banks. Hes not completely wrong. Then he becomes the leader of a party that is vastly, at least in its parliamentary representaion, vastly more pro eu then he is. He sort of mumblingly and going on with his position. Its weird they get away with it. Keir starmer, whose position is different, it goes almost unsaid that there is this gulf between him and his leader. Does anyone think that there are moderate voices in europe who are not being heard in this debate . To alexs point, there will be posturing, this is part of a negotiating process and there are probably lots of reasonable people behind the scenes who do want to strike a deal with britain because it is in everyones interests, in terms of trade and harmony. Theyre worried if they give britain too good deal, other countries might want it as well. They have to keep the union together. If they have too many getaway clauses, other countries will want it. Isnt that a great eu worry . The fear of what will happen when you leave something is what keeps you in it. If you had a friend who was in a relationship and they wanted to leave, but were afraid to do so because of the consequences of what would happen, what would you advise them to do . That has no substance. That is an allegory that has no bearing. Sorry, what . Look, if you are a member of a club, then obviously you want the perks to be better than they would be if you were outside the club. Nobody in that club will want to see someone leave that club and have the same benefits, and that is what i meant by the rhetorical gap. That position is the eu position and that is consistent with what they are saying. They are constantly saying, look, things cant be the same for you. Ok, im going to pause it there because guess what . We will be talking about this a lot in many weeks to come. The next stage of the reading of the bill is in the Uk Parliament on thursday, so there may even be more next week. So thank you on all of that for now, but there will be more on that to come. We will turn our attention to the situation in north korea because tensions on the Korean Peninsula are the highest theyve been for years. The United Nations condemned as outrageous north koreas firing of a Ballistic Missile over japan a few days ago. President trump said all options were then on the table, and today we learn that the us and south korea have agreed in a phone call to strengthen seouls missile programme, and that donald trump approved the sale of billions of dollars worth of military equipment to the south. Jeffrey, the firing of this missile over hakkaido was a worrying escalation . We have talked about ratcheting it up a few times, but this is ratcheting it up again . These are frightening times. If you live in the Korean Peninsula and guam, these are terrifying times. What we have are two schoolyard bullies in kim jon un and trump. What we need is diplomacy. Simply, any kind of war, no one is going to win this, we know that. Ultimately the us will triumph, should it get to that horrific scenario, but its not one we can allow to happen. We have to bring it back and find a way to allow the sides to save face enough to dial this down. If that means the us and south korea pull back a bit on their military exercises, somehow we have to get north korea in its insanity to stop firing these missiles and say ok, you can save face. The problem is it now looks like extortion. It is extortion. It is. The sanctions that were passed in early august by the un are crippling against iron ore, an seafood and other exports from north korea. A major part of there economy, their pathetic economy. 25 Million People with an average income of about 1000 us a year. They need these sanctions lifted. This is related to all of that. Im really puzzled by the moral equivalance that you seem to suggest between donald trump, the duly elected president of the United States, whatever you think of him, and the Third Generation repressive dictator of a family that systematically abuses their country. I think its in term of their military belligerence. Exactly. Listen, i take your point, but the fact is we have a president in the us, this has gone on through obama, through bush, bill clinton, it goes right back to richard nixon, this belligerence we are seeing out of north korea. They have managed to contain it. The policy, like we have seen in the cold war, is one of containment. If through belligerence of a duly elected us president , and we can talk about that another time. Definitely another time if belligerence meets belligerence, are we going to be better off . The point is, why is kim on doing it . He is fearing regime change, which china will not accept. He has seen saddam and gaddafi, two very bad dictators, no question about it, not having nuclear weapons, removed. So there is at some stage some negotiations that need to take place and china is crucial to this to make sure that whatever your regime is, and of course you were not elected through the electoral college, like the americans have, but we dont want to remove you from power. How you do that is the crucial question and the more belligerent talk there is from trump, it becomes more difficult to get that. Its interesting to see the effect it has had onjapan. You look at the country, and whatever you think of the geopolitics of those nations, they are now looking out for the first time they have raised the possibility of installing pre emptive missile capacity. That is a really big deal for a country that constitutionally has been disinclined to do anything like that since the second world war. Its a really big change and of course, they are now having drills in a way that it must be very terrifying for the population, and there is a guardian story about this today. They have 600,000 northern koreans living in japan, a lot of them descendants of former prisoners and the tension being caused in the country itself between those two groups, is it is having terrible ramifications for that country as well and i do think that that is where the belligerence is really unhelpful. Lets get back to how we get to any form of negotiation. I have lost count of the number of academics, politicians, diplomats i have interviewed in the last few weeks who say, it is all about diplomacy, you have to get them around the table, but no one is coming up with an answer as to how we do that. What youre seeing out of washington is a two track narrative. On one hand the president with his belligerence and the people very close to him, tillerson, the secretary of state and others in the cabinet, being much more diplomatic and giving a different story. Thats the point. Thats exactly what nixon did with russia and china in his triangulation policy and kissinger had negotiations, notwithstanding the fact that the president was thumping the table and saying terrible things about communists. Maybe there is a rationale here. Maybe people dont want to see because they dont like president trump, maybe they see it. Ultimately, this is about buying them off and working out what the price is, as compared to the fact that the people that have been most resistant is the north koreans. They have acquired the technology to have Nuclear Capacity and attack others. Not that they will do it in some mad act of self destruction, but it is to raise their stakes in the game. Its about self preservation. North korea, its much more complex than german reunification was in the 905. This economy has been in a decrepit state for so long and china has so much interest in not seeing an outcome that ultimately makes a unified korea with western allies. There are all things at play in terms of the chess game in that region. We will pause it there for now. We have mihir with us. I have to ask you, and it is well documented that my knowledge of football is negligible. Even i know that the transfer window closed this week and the sums involved were astronomical. Its a new record. What is going on here . There is more money available. The premier league, which is the best run, most successful league in the world in money terms, they did a deal a year ago, 8. 4 billion, which is almost double what they had. More importantly, the money is going down to clubs that dont expect to be in the premier league, like bournemouth and others who now have more money to spend. Britain has allowed a free market so most of the Top Premier League clubs are owned by foreigners, some of them in effect foreign states. Manchester city is owned by the united arab emirates. Like america, it doesnt believe in socialism, but it does believe in sporting socialism, where it doesnt allow anybody to come in, but we allow everyone to come in. Leicester city is owned by someone nobody knew about. They see this as branding exercises and as far as they are concerned, most of the money is going abroad. In the old days, there used to be reaganite trickle down economics. The big clubs paid the Lower Division clubs. Now they pay all sorts of foreign clubs. This owners think if they can get into the premier league and brand themselves, look at what has happened by psg. They are owned by the qatar state. They pay 198 million, a bit than what you might be getting from the bbc, for neymar. Why . Because qatar is saying this is our soft path. Maybe that is a solution for kim. Perhaps if he paid 198 million for neymar and they could say that north korea has a great footballer. Maybe that is the solution. If only i am a fan of the best club in the United Kingdom, ipswich town. We have secured a new striker from rangers, so we have done our acquisition in the uk. It does seem that when other clubs see that an english club is making an acquisition, the price goes up. People can pay more, so they do. We play very exciting football that the world wants to watch and that is what is a sign of success. When people say that the sums are obscene, are we just wringing our hands . There is nothing we can do about it, it is the new world order. Much of neymars money went to his father. These players, because of the money they earn, they are little corporate entities. They can employ the best lawyers, the best agents and because of the way that football works, the agents are also the recruiters. But what about smaller clubs, grassroots . This is what is wrong with the 215t century economy. We talk about the titans of wall street and the city salaries, but this kind of polarisation of wealth, they are given a lot of money, but £30 million, 35 million, it isjust ludicrous. As we sit around the table at the bbc, lets not pretend its just football that has a problem with salaries. Thats what i said. The americans have done it better. They disclose more details about players salaries and they do control. The germans insist that 51 of the club is owned inside their own country. We have owners iiow who have no connection. Abramovich has never given an interview. At the end of the day, football is meant to be a community sport. If the owners are somebody you have never heard of, theyjust come in and buy the club, what is their purpose in doing it . There we are. We attempted to solve geopolitical problems through football. Thank goodness you managed to do that for us. Lovely to have you all here. Thank you all very much indeed. Much more to discuss same time, same place next week. Thank you for being with us. Goodbye. Hello. Anything other than a cloudy start, be surprised. We will try to brighten things up in england and wales away from western and coastal areas to the west. The east of wales and england, sunny spells. Warm and humid. Low 20s. A band of rain in northern ireland. Brightening up in the west. Scotland and further north west, brightening up before the end of the day. Windy in shetland. Gales. Monday night, rain propping up before clearing south east before tuesday, allowing some cool and fresh air. Sunshine and showers. Thursday, by then, signs of a change. Rain coming to scotla nd signs of a change. Rain coming to scotland and northern ireland. Wet and windy for many of us on friday. Welcome to bbc news, broadcasting to viewers in north america and around the globe. Im duncan golestani. Our Top Stories International condemnation of north koreas latest and most powerful nuclear test, as the us issues a blunt warning. Any threat to the United States or its territories, including guam, or our allies, will be met with a massive military response, a response both effective and overwhelming. A bbc investigation finds recruiters from so called Islamic State were trying to direct would be attackers a year before westminster and london bridge. South asias devastating floods leave millions destitute. Aid agencies say theyre struggling to cope. And walter becker, guitarist and co founder of the influential band steely dan, has died at the age of 67