Had 41 witnesses and bill clintons had three but some republican senators want president trumps to have none. Also on the programme hardly the royal welcome canadian Pm Justin Trudeau says discussions are still to be had about meghan and harry moving to canada and who will foot the bill for their security. And rutland, the one county in england, without a mcdonalds or a kfc. Its a fast food wasteland, though things might be about to change. If small towns like ours dont move with the times, we dont end up being a healthy town. Hello, and welcome. Im katty kay in washington. Christian fraser is in london. The moment donald trump withdrew from the Nuclear Agreement with iran, it was in trouble. The europeans tried to keep it alive, but they failed. For several months now, the iranians have been producing centrifuges in flagrant breach of the commitments they made. So, today, almost inevitably, the uk, france and germany triggered a dispute mechanism. Its a long process which will play out in the Un Security Council and could eventually lead to International Sanctions being reimposed. I says it is in support of any disruptive effort to save the agreement but today more sons had the old duo could be replaced by a new deal, a donald trump deal. The problem with the agreement is, from the americans perspective, its a flawed agreement, it expires. Plus, it was negotiated by president obama, and it has. From their point of view, it has many, many faults. Well, if were going to get rid of it, lets replace it. And lets replace it with the trump deal. Thats what we need to see. And i think that would be a great way forward. President trump is a great deal maker, by his own account and many others. Lets Work Together to replace the jcpoa and get the trump deal instead. But the European UnionsForeign Policy chief says the 2015 agreement is not dead yet and the so called dispute resolution mechanism they have triggered is intended not to push iran away, but bring it back into the fold. The objective is therefore to find solutions and return to full compliance within the framework of this agreement. Let me say this clearly the dispute resolution mechanism which is going to be triggered now is not about re imposing sanctions. So, what would a new agreement look like . If it were it to be re negotiated, it seems certain the americans would this time want much stricter control of the Iranian Missile programme. Iran has been busy. It already has a huge arsenal of missiles pointing at the middle east. We saw last week, with the strike on the american air bases in iraq, how accurate some of these missiles can be. Most of them can already reach israel, saudi arabia, bahrain, the United Arab Emirates and other regional neighbours. Some of irans Medium Range Missiles are capable of striking south eastern europe. But the biggest concern for the americans and their allies is that iran could one day build an Intercontinental Ballistic Missile capable of delivering a nuclear warhead. The us, russia, china, india, iran and north korea are the only countries that have operational icbms, which have a minimum range of 5500 km. The americans have signalled they would want to limit irans missile range below 2000 km. Michael elleman is the director of nonproliferation and Nuclear Policy programme at the International Institute for strategic studies and joins us now from washington. Is there a trump deal on the table . I dont know the anything specific has been laid out by the administration to the iranians but there have been a lot of background discussions about some limitations oii discussions about some limitations on the Iranian Missile arsenal as well as caps on some regional behaviour of the iranians. Plus some very detailed discussions about how to stretch out the sunset clauses on the nuclear deal that so many worry about. So that is what the americans would like and that is what they would like and that is what they would like and that is what they would like to get from iran. They also would like to get something not nuclear but on their involvement in the region. What is the white house prepared to give because obviously when the agreement was negotiated, there was a lot of back and forth and the europeans had to give and the americans had to give something. With the white house he prepared to give her something in order to get that deal . They would certainly have to give them the sanctions relief at a minimum. The sanctions relief that was intended under the old agreement. The question is will they go any further in lifting some of the terrorism sanctions that are placed on iran. Both unnecessarily affect the european parties to the agreement but it does affect american businesses and americas ability to engage with iran on economic fronts. Boris johnson pointed to one of the problems with the present deal and that is the legacy of president obama. He does not like things that were left over by president 0bama and we all know that. But he is right and one other aspect, that the deal has a sunset clause in it. And while the nuclear pa rt clause in it. And while the nuclear part of the development has been paused, this Missile Technology is developing at quite a pace. Yes, it is. Iran has relied on Ballistic Missiles for their defence and a terrance needs since the iran iraq war. And they have gone through several phases in developing this programme. 0ver several phases in developing this programme. Over the last ten years or they have focused mostly on their shorter range systems that would be used in battlefield operations. And they demonstrated quite effectively la st they demonstrated quite effectively last week when they struck targets at the airbase in iraq where the american troops were located. There they eat very precisely hit a number of buildings, which suggests that they are on the cusp of fulfilling that goal of having militarily effective, conventionally armed Ballistic Missiles. The danger is if you tear up the still do another deal being in place, then you are heading into a period where Irans Nuclear ambitions are no longer constrained and then you get into a situation where the israelis come of the us maybe saudi arabia want to ta ke the us maybe saudi arabia want to take out the development of that Nuclear Capability and then maybe we are in dangerous times, are we not . I always find it somewhat ironic that the critics of the deal complained about the sunset clauses which would have been enacted in about ten or 15 years from now. But by pulling out of the jcpoa and dealing with current events, iran is at that point ten to 15 years earlier than anticipated so we have less time to deal with a potential break out by the iranians. But what i would want to stress is that although there were sunset clauses in the restrictions on the number of centrifuges in the top of centrifuges in the top of centrifuges that iran could operate, the International AtomicEnergy Agency was going to maintain in perpetuity the inspections and monitoring of those activities which would give us fair warning of any violation that the iranians would contemplate. Good have you on the programme this evening, thank for your input. That is some of the thinking here in washington. Nathalie tocci was special adviser to the eus Foreign Policy chief, federica mogerhini, at the time that the jcpoa was originally signed. Shes in rome. If the americans are putting this much pressure in the europeans are now saying this is not the end of the jcpoa, but now saying this is not the end of thejcpoa, but does trigger this not mean that effectively it is over . would not say it is effectively over but indeed we have taken very important andl but indeed we have taken very important and i think a very unfortunate step in that direction. Now they are right and highlighting the mechanism does not automatically entaila the mechanism does not automatically entail a snapback in the Un Security Council sanctions. But it is a route to it. And the timeframe available is essentially a timeframe of two months. Now that two months can be stretched if there is not a full agreement between the parties. But basically it is an increasingly narrow path that the e3 have placed themselves in and it is extremely high Risk Strategy that they are pursuing given that i dont see at the moment any willingness on the iranian side to come to make concessions simply being phased by pressure when the europeans on the other hand have not actually prove they are willing to deliver any of they are willing to deliver any of the monetary benefits that were outlined to iran that were basically withheld from iran in response to the us violation of the jcpoa. Withheld from iran in response to the us violation of the jcpoa. Which was already some of the concerns the iranians have. How concerned are you that we are heading for a period of Serious Nuclear proliferation in the region because of what has happened now . As i say, i think it is a very high Risk Strategy. Now i still dont think that we have to write the jcpoa off. I think there is still an the jcpoa off. I think there is stillan air the jcpoa off. I think there is still an air opportunity to eventually say we europeans have pressed the ultimate lever that we have in order to on the one hand induce iran back into the alliance if we are ready to actually get something to iran, essentially meaning if we are willing to carry out the first concrete transactions under the inspect mechanism that was established to allow for the lawful claiming of human material goods between the eu and iran without being subject to us economic sanctions. Then i think that chance would still be there. As i said, i think it is very High Risk Energy that the e3 have decided to pursue. I personally dont think that his decision that the iranians took on the 5th of january decision that the iranians took on the 5th ofjanuary actually merited this kind of decision. But here we are. But what im saying there is unless this row is credibly pursued, friendly speaking of is talking about our alternative agreement is pie in the sky. I wonder how we will get to this new deal. He will begin diplomacy . The us and iran dont talk. Not just diplomacy . The us and iran dont talk. Notjust at the us and iran dont talk, it is. The premise of any negotiation is there is not full trust for the parties, otherwise it would not be a need for negotiation in the first place. But there has to bea in the first place. But there has to be a modicum of trust between the parties to actually engage in many for negotiation. We are we are confronted to a situation where basically one party, the us, that has not lived up to its side of the deal. And the others, the iranians, have inevitably now very few incidents of them to their side of the deal and europeans that have been unable to essentially make up. The trust base is basically not there also demolished most trust necessary to engage in meaningful negotiation is essentially not there which is why i think that if the jcpoa would lapse can be will be a question of years and certainly not months before we can meaningfully Start Talking about a new agreement. Thank you very much for your time, natalie. The us house of representatives will vote tomorrow to send the articles of impeachment against donald trump to the senate. The vote will end the delay that Speaker Nancy Pelosi imposed on the process in order to try to win concessions from the white house, concessions she said would make the trial fairer and concessions the republicans refused to make. Specifically, democrats want witnesses to testify, believing that if people like the secretary of state or the chief of staff have to say under oath what they knew about mr trump putting pressure on ukraine, it could sway the outcome of the trial. Republicans dont want any witnesses and havent agreed to summon any. Today, senior House DemocratHakeem Jeffries said the ball is in the senates court, but had this advice. The next step is simple. The senate should conduct a fair trial. A fair trial involves witnesses and documents. What is the president hiding from the American People . Werejoined now form capitol hill by melanie zanona, the congressional reporter for politico. Did the Democrats Gain anything with this whatever it was, too week delay, in the preceding . She took a gamble and it did not pay off in the immediate term. They wanted to pick off some moderate republicans to side with them in their place for documents and for witnesses and so far no republicans are siding with them. They are siding with the majority leader. But if he taught to democrats on capitol hill, when they say is we did get something out of this and that is they waited long enough or new evidence to emerge in the form of unredacted e mails, indicted associate of Rudy Giuliani has turned over a trove of Text Messages to house investigators which could be added to the body of evidence. And they said they have ke pt evidence. And they said they have kept net of public pressure on the senate gop to eventually turn to the question of whether there will be witnesses. So it did not pay off in the immediate but they are hoping that down the road eventually this will help them because they were able to keep the narrative focus on the question of witnesses. Lets ta ke the question of witnesses. Lets take a quick look at some of that pressure that there is on those moderate republicans who are in moderate republicans who are in moderate states, purple states if you like. Call regarding the republican senator from colorado. You like. Call regarding the republican senatorfrom colorado. Cory gardner. Take a look at the kind of pressure he is underfrom liberal groups are putting out groups like this. The only thing youll fight for it is trump. Youre just another trump servant weak, frightened, impotent, a small man terrified of a political bully. So scared of his tweets, youll do anything trump orders. Breaking your oath to follow the constitution and the law. Might not be cory gardner but there are some republicans who are open to the idea of having witnesses. You are right. Including Susan Collins of maine, murkowski of alaska. They are a tough spot. They cannot alienate the conservative base and there is not a whole lot of room in this party for criticism of the president these days. But on the hand, they cannot love their ticking marching orders from the president either. They need to show there is some daylight between them and the president and woman do that is support that if they want to hear witnesses and get other documents and they wouldve had this trial as seriously as possible for they ultimately make this very consequential decision. the ticket witnesses, some republicans like rand paul who will wa nt to republicans like rand paul who will want to his own witnesses and that of course might then drag it back to joe biden who want to stay out of this reasonably. It could get really messy here on capitol hill. Rand paul warned colleagues if you got some paul warned colleagues if you got some democrats in this butcher witnesses and democrats succeed, we have folks on our side we were going to want to then push witnesses like joe bidens son, like adam schiff, like the whistle blower brought the whole episode to light. He is trying to ward his colleagues to not side with democrats on this front but according to our webcams we take hear them according to our webcams we take hearthem are according to our webcams we take hear them are not the votes or Something Like calling in hunter biden at this moment. That could change depending on the tenor of the trial and how things play out over the next few weeks. Quickly, the process to date, the choosing of managers at the house has to go through him of these are the people who will prosecute the case if you will in the senate. Why is there appointment significant and whom i would be looking at . These democrats who will be tasked with prosecuting the case against president from a theyll be speaking on the senate floor which is a very high honour and so far nancy pelosi keeping her cards close to the vest but we do know adam schiff and jerry nadler will likely be leading the charge along with a couple of other democrats, like a half dozen of what we are being told. Thank you for the update from capitol hill. Talking about the bidens, a big focus is on this Ukrainian Gas Company burisma and there was a story in the New York Times that a Cyber Security firm found that Russian Hackers have hacked into the e mails of this company that got access to the computers and it is possible the documents have come from them. This isa documents have come from them. This is a statement they made about the timing of this. This is what they are concerned about. We could see a repeat of the hacking of the dnc service. If they have hacked burisma, they could have a trove of documents which they either dump during the impeachment trial or maybe before the election ifjoe biden is the candidate. Trial or maybe before the election if joe biden is the candidate. Two issues, one that hunter biden was on the board at burisma and are there any documents in this trove that she had a bad light on hunter biden or on his conversations Withjoe Biden . And the Bigger Picture and equip critical picture of what the russians are doing and will they interfere again in t