To dateline london. Im shaun ley. This week with brexit talks about to restart, has the blizzard of british policy papers dazzled or dazed the europeans . Is china open to discussion, or is the mood darkening for free speech there . And could there be regime change in the gulf state of qatar . My guests this week henry chu, International Editor of variety. The writer and broadcaster isabel hilton, editor of china dialogue. The portuguese writer eunice goes, and abdel bari atwan, writer on arab affairs. A warm welcome and thanks for being with us on dateline. British laws made by britishjudges one of the themes those who wanted britain out of the European Union campaigned on. Yet, the government said this week it may not be quite so straightforward to free us from the European Court ofjustice after all. When the negotiators reconvene in a few days time after their summer break, theyll have before them a series of position papers from the british team to absorb, on subjects including immigration, the irish border and the court. Eunice, have the europeans been impressed . Well, they have been somehow optimistic about a sudden outbreak of realism from the British Government. On the other hand, these position papers were strange because they were position papers without positions, just, kind of, scenarios, and the British Government has no position. But there are some signs of, welcome realism, in the sense that the British Government is ready to continue to contribute to the budget of the European Union for as long as it is a member of the eu. There has also been movement, Welcome Movement in the area of the authority of the European Court ofjustice and i think a fudge is going to be arranged. There are also interesting noises about britain wanting to have a deep and special relationship with the European Union, wanting to have also a special and deep relationship, a trade relationship with the eu, wanting to replicate the Customs Union and so on. The noises point to a kind of membership of the Single Market, but this also happens at the same time as the home office sending deportation letters to european citizens, so the status of european citizens has not yet been sorted, and the European Union and britain have not yet agreed about the process of the negotiations. The European Union would like to start with finding a solution for the budget, and the status of european citizens, and the irish border, and the British Government wants to negotiate the future of the relationship. This business of the irish border is interesting, because one of the things that britain was talking about in that context was how goods and people and services might be traded across the border once britain is out of the European Union, and, of course, the republic of ireland remains in because there is that land border. And the europeans said, we are not talking about that because it is about the trade relationship. In a sense, their distinction is artificial, and we must talk about the divorce before we talk about what comes after. Lets not pretend either side is a paragon of virtue in this discussion. Both sides are perhaps also trying to stake out maximalist positions, which is part and parcel of the negotiating process. This reminds me in some ways of back in the president ial campaign in the us, when people said, we shouldnt take trump literally but figuratively, or make the mistake of doing it the other way about. Sometimes, with negotiations like this, we can get stuck on literal statements that perhaps figuratively mean something else, and so i agree with eunice, in that there is a sign of moderation, of more realistic notions of what the relationship should be. In terms of ireland, you know, that is such a vexed situation from its political and religious sectarian history, and that has to be grappled with by both the eu and britain. It is not in the eus interest that there should be any friction along that border or any outbreak of unrest that could jeopardise the peace, which has been fragile, and both sides need to be more realistic when it comes to questions like that. Isabel, are you hearing realism in the political debate back in the uk . The observation that the position papers are without positions is spot on, because we know the government has great difficulty in arriving at a position. And the trajectory by which we got here was a series of promises of opportunity and little discussion of who bears what pain. And now were in negotiations, what the pain is, and how big it is going to be, and how it is shared will be the big political issue, done by a weak Prime Minister with a slim majority and a divided cabinet. I think we are going to hear a lot of magical thinking, still, on the domestic british front, because she. The Prime Minister is not ready to have that conversation, and it will be a tough one. So, the autumn ahead, notwithstanding the negotiations themselves, in terms of domestic british politics, could be fractious. It could be fractious and i think we will go on seeing this ball kicked down the road, this can kicked down the road. We have roughly a year and it will not happen. The most important thing is the lack of trust between this government and the European Union. The people of brussels dont trust theresa may at all. And isabel was absolutely right to say this is a weak government. They lost their majority in the parliament. The pound is losing its ground, more than 25 . Britain is actually about to lose its greatest trade partner. So i believe it is the curse of brexit. Are we going to lose it . The point brexiteers make is that in the end the trading relationship is so strong and well established that it is in nobodys interest to jeopardise that. But you have to keep the good relations. The problem now, when i say a lack trust, europeans say, let us talk about the cost of this divorce. It is £74 million. Lets agree on it. Billion. Sorry, billion. 74 billion. Was going to say, if it was 7a million, well pay that britain shot itself in the foot by saying it does not want to be part of the Single Market or a part of the Customs Union. When you are outside these aspects of the european integration project, you are essentially killing off business opportunities, but also creating problems in ireland. The question with the irish border, the problem is created by the british position, the british stance. Yes, we want a frictionless border, but we are out of the Single Market and out of the Customs Union. It is not possible. Like as you said, trying to create a new potential Customs Union between just as and the eu, and this issue of direct jurisdiction of the European Court ofjustice, that will end with some role for the court could remain . Are these blurrings. You talked about a fudge, but these blurrings or however you want to describe it, could they be enough to get us through . They have such emotional resonance amongst the brexiteers here that this is the problem. If you have a Major Trading relationship with a block like the European Union, you need some itiebiis of arbitrating disputes. You cant have it. If you and i were to do a contract, we would agree who would arbitrate if there was a dispute. So to paint the European Court ofjustice as a great dominant thing which imposes laws is nonsense, but you cant roll that back with the group that theresa may as the biggest problem with, the hardline brexiteers in her own cabinet. Some have been making a bit of noise in a mollified direction saying that, look, it is not directjurisdiction. There will be some kind of dispute resolution mechanism and perhaps european judges will perhaps be involved, but this is not the same as being under the thumb of. I agree the rhetoric has been so strident that anything that seems to climb away from that position is dangerous ground, but in the end, as you say, politics is the art of compromise. Some of this is going to have to be compromised, whether you call it fudge or compromise. We will stay on the question of compromise on a different subject and that is china, because the worlds oldest publisher, Cambridge University press, found itself caught between the lure of entering china and the rigour of Academic Freedom. Earlier this month, it accepted a request from beijing that politically sensitive articles on its china quarterly website should be blocked. A few days a go, it reversed that decision. Taken with other instances of a government crackdown on free expression, is a trend emerging. Isabel, tell us about the background to this case and then tell us the other things that are perhaps beginning to make people nervous . As you say, Cambridge University press the publisher of the china quarterly, a respected academic journal which actually comes out of the school of oriental and african studies. They are the publisher but the content is produced elsewhere. When they announced as a fait accompli, that they had removed 300 articles from their website at the request of the chinese authorities, its still not absolutely clear which authorities. But also 1,000 e books had been removed. This was a major purge. There was a howl of outrage from the Academic Community. But this is, you know, a row that has broken out four or five years into a tightening in china, increasing censorship, increasing ideological control from the chinese authority, and an increasing boldness from the Chinese Government, that as china gets stronger, not only is the party capable of imposing its view of history, its very narrow ideological intellectual traditions on china, but it can impose them on the rest of the world. So, if you want to publish in china, as newspapers have found, you have to weigh your International Reputation against what you see as your market opportunity. The New York Times, for example, when they publish those big takeouts on the corruption and the private wealth of the leading members of the party, immediately blocked in china. Had they backed down, they would have suffered a tremendous loss to their International Reputation, and that was what Cambridge University press was facing. They made the wrong call, as it turned out, and that have suffered they made the wrong call, as it turned out, and they have suffered a lot of reputational damage. But it goes much further. Chinese authorities routinely screen out academics from international conferences, not only in china, but they try to stop them presenting papers in conferences elsewhere, and in the Academic Community there has been mounting alarm that the Chinese Communist partys attempting to impose one view of history to completely exclude a whole bunch of topics like tibet, taiwan, tiananmen square, cultural revolution, because the party has to maintain its position in china which says, we are going to rule china forever and this is why. And that means excluding all negative past history, and everyone is expected to swallow it. What the west must decide is, are we going to swallow this . What i find troubling about this Cambridge University press case is that blocking western media, whether its the New York Times or the other publications, that has been ongoing for years, so nothing new. When i lived in china 15 years ago those sites were blocked. But 15 years ago Academic Freedom was beginning to actually flower. This was an area where it seemed that there could be real cooperation and real delving into issues between china and outside. With that tightening, that is a real sign that this new regime under xijinping is not allowing any kind of dissent or different view than what it wants to put forward. The fact that there is this Party Conference coming up in october, its the 90th anniversary of the founding of the Peoples Liberation army, all that is contributing to this ideological constriction, that some people are hopefully saying will then be loosened after this is over. I dont think so. I think we have a regime that does insist on ideological purity, actually and i think we will see more of it. You said four or five years, which more or less puts us at the time when president xi took office. It is very much driven by his perspective. Absolutely. There have been leaks of documents, the notorious document nine which somebody went to jail for leaking, which was an explicit rejection of western values, as they call it. So that included rule of law, and what they call the nihilistic view of history, the freedom to explore history from any angle. It included freedom of speech. You know, those are explicit enemies of the party, as the party sees it. It is returning to, kind of, leninist principles in a bizarre way. One area where this has perhaps caused consternation is in hong kong, and there has always been a debate about how one country, two systems would function. Britain is supposed to be a co guarantor of hong kongs freedom, and that it continues to cooperate under this system. Is britain making enough of that role, do you think . Is britains speaking out enough on these issues . A lot of the dissidents there complain they cant even get a speak to british ministers even if they come to britain. I believe it is not. I dont believe britain is doing it all here. I dont believe britain is doing its role here. I believe staying away gradually from hong kong and even china. Now china is a strong power, it is the second biggest economy in the world, and they are gaining confidence now. They would like to send a message, look, here we are. For the first time, china used the veto, the security council, eight times. So, before. Tens of years ago, they never involved themselves in any international crisis. They stayed away, either abstained or even not to take any action at all. So now the message is very clear. We are not a western democracy. We dont believe in the western democracy. We have our own way to handle things. And either you respect that or go to hell. That is the message, very clear. I have had experience with them, they published, beijing University Press publish my book, the secret history of alqaeda and they dont care. After ten years of publishing the book, now they realise that there is this book called the secret history of alqaeda maybe they like it, maybe. I dont know, but about the message is very clear. We are not democracy. We are not western democracy. It worked for us, now we are the second biggest power on earth so why not . That is the message. This nervousness is to do with theyre not clear what they are. Are they a communist party state . They dont look like a communist party. Redistribution of wealth upwards, not downwards . There are kind of state capitalist so they have reverted to a lot of imperial traditions they used to denigrate and despise. Thats very interesting because theres a longer history that predates the communist party. If there something cultural that perhaps we in the west havent fully grasped . Or is that an excuse . It is about modernity and modernisation. For 100 years china has been arguing with itself about who owns the state, ever since the 1911 revolution. On the streets in 1911 people were calling for mr science and mr democracy and they still are 100 years later. The other interesting and perhaps worrying aspect of all of this is that since china joined the wto, there was a great hope that very soon china would become a democracy and capitalism would bring democracy and so on. Actually what is happening is that china is transforming the west. The west is not very assertive in its dealings with china. We are allowing ourselves to be transformed by china . We are and it is shocking the number of Media Companies who have not only bow to the requests of censorship coming from the Chinese Government, bowed to the requests of censorship coming from the Chinese Government, but actually have helped the Chinese Government to arrest dissidents. Yahoo is a case in point. It is worrying when an academic publisher, who is supposed to be a little bit above profit making, which they are clearly not, is ready to revoke any claims to be a defender of Academic Freedom, for access of a huge market. The economy plays a very major role. Look at shanghai or other cities, they are prospering, a huge market. Many people think twice before taking any steps which. Even the British Government here know it is a dictatorship and they are banning the press. They know they are arresting dissidents but despite that they would like to do business. I would not actually be surprised if, for example, Cambridge University said, 0k, we have Good Business with them, i am not surprised. The governments are doing, so the universities can do the same. The reality is if you read made in china 2025 its quite clear that from now on there will be less access to that market for foreign companies. The dream of the chinese market, which the chinese have used to devastating effect, to get their way, is actually fading. We sell three times as much to ireland as we to china. We sell three times as much to ireland as we do to china. Lets kowtow to ireland instead. Chinas Economic Development is undeniable, and because of the primacy thats been placed on that around the world, it has been able to market, notjust its economic model but its political model as well. You say it has been influencing the west, its also influencing other countries, whether its turkey or other parts of asia who say, look, we can become Economic Prosperity without liberalisation and that is dangerous. They have been having a massive role in africa. Thats rigt, but then to take that long view you were talking about, china loves to go on about its 5000 year history, even to take thats right, but then to take that long view you were talking about, china loves to go on about its 5000 year history, even to take the last 100 years that isabel was pointing out, from 1911 onwards. Anyone who studies china knows that there are periods of tightening and periods of liberalising and periods of tightening. I dont know that i would feel very confident in making any kind of prediction in term sof 20 years from now where we will be. Of prediction in terms of 20 years from now where we will be. Will it have tightened further or will it have undergone another liberalisation . Hard to say. It maybe that story that comes to mind about the chinese politician who was asked about the outcome of the french revolution, its too soon to say. Weve talked before on dateline london about the standoff between a number of gulf states and qatar. Abdel bari has been watching this closely for us. Youre detecting signs of regime change, who wants it and how might it come about . It is very dangerous. Now the conflict started with a media war between saudi arabia and its allies against qatar. They presented about 13 demands for qatar to apply or else. One of them, closing l jazeera, the other to stop one of them, closing aljazeera, the other to stop financing and supporting the muslim brotherhood. Terrorism. Now, there is a huge step forward for a regime change in qatar. It seems that all mediation between the two sides failed completely, so now saudi arabia is grooming another prince from the royal family, they want to split he qatar royal family and they are grooming a prince and they believe that this one should be replacing sheikh tamim, bin hamad. So this is the most dangerous thing. If this happens, how will send him to power, for example, reinstate him in power . Because he belongs to the founder of qatar, part of the royal family there. So, how they are going to do it . Are they planning for an internal military coup or political revolution, or popular revolution . Are going to carry him on the tanks to doha, for example, to rule the country . We dont know yet. The most important thing, the saudi are furious and very serious and now they are giving this man all the authority. They are creating, you know, a parallel government. So it is extremely dangerous. How will qataris respond to that . There were reports after this, confrontation began that the emir was becoming like a pop star on the streets of the capital, that people were putting up his portrait and singing his praises, that they admired him, for taking a stand against this pressure from outside. Has that changed, has the mood changed in qatar . It has not changed. There are no traces of changes but we have to remember that it is a tribal society, a tribal country, and these tribes are divided, between saudi arabia, between qatar and the emirates and they have roots there. They could play on the tribal nerve here and they could also split, as i said, the royal family. There are always disputes in these royal families. There is a wing in power. There is another one outside power. And qatar, for example, witnessed more than three or four military coups or political coups, so we dont know what will happen. Bu it is really deadly serious. Qatar is now under blockade and aljazeera is now launching but it is really deadly serious. Qatar is now under blockade and aljazeera is now launching a huge war against saudi arabia and the United Arab Emirates and a huge war against saudi arabia and the United Arab Emirates and egypt also. Whether they succeed are not, we dont know, but the outcome is a mess. This part of the world is to be the most stable part. It is very wealthy, very rich. The people are the same attitudes, the same background, but for the first time there is an earthquake hitting the whole area and where it will last we dont know. I will give you one example. If you tweet sympathising with qatar, if you are in saudi arabia or the United Arab Emirates you could be imprisoned for ten or 15 years, with a huge fine, maybe a quarter of a million, maybe a million. Things are really developing to the worst. Short of actually developing a government in exile, or preparing a government to takeover, there are other things these four countries can do which they have not done yet. For example, imposing formal sanctions and going further. They have not yet taken that route. It seems it is a stand off at the moment, that there is no upper hand on either side. I dont know that there is a good outcome necessarily, but it hasnt escalated to the point yet, it seems, where. Will it come to terrorism . All these countries actually were financing and supporting some kind of terrorism in iraq, in syria, libya. This is not the problem. The real problem which is facing them, you know, qatar is a small nation, 300,000. The population of qatar is 300,000, and one of the richest, if not the richest countries on earth. Not least its sovereign wealth fund, which spends huge amount of money in many european countries. They have about 320 billion in theirsovereign fund, so they are rich and they know how to buy their own people to make them happy. The problem is the blockade is starting to hurt. Its that starting to change things. It is starting change and people are now saying, 0k, why shall we be besieged . Saudi arabia and its allies, egypt and bahrain and United Arab Emirates, they are saying, we have time. We are well established and we have also. Qatar is besieged. I think we have to be a bit careful with all this talk, because the potential of instability, it is absolutely huge. There is no guarantee whatsoever, and this is perhaps what the saudis have to think about, that the population of qatar is going to support a prince that is a stooge of the saudis. It is likely that actually the actual population will support the current emir. But the other aspect of all of this is what are the original implications of this instability. We have on one hand, qatar being supported by turkey, iran, there is a strengthening of the relationship with iran. And israel is on the side more or less of the saudis, but there were previous relationships with qatar, so it is hugely complicated the potential for instability. The short term effect has been to drive qatar closer into the arms of iran, restoring full diplomatic Relations Just this week. I wonder, had president trumps visit to saudi arabia not given such explicit encouragement to this action, whether we might not. I believe he gave the green light. Because when he went to saudi arabia, they gave him or promised him 460 billion. He was very happy. He went back to the United States saying, ive brought jobs for you, a lot ofjobs. We must leave it there. Thank you all very much. Dojoin us again at the same time next week. Thanks for watching, goodbye. Hello. Cooler weather across the week. Monday brings hotness in south east england. Cloud running to north west england. Cloud running to north west england and west wales. From the cloud in Northern Ireland and scotland, a band of rain moving south, where it will be windy. Some of us will key the rain clear, then brightening up before sunset. The rain moves to near 30 in south east england. Anything above 28. 3 will make it the warmest Late August Bank Holiday on record. This is the picture through monday evening. Thickening cloud to the far north of england, north wales, eventually bringing rain. Not much rain left on this. Very warm sunny spells across east anglia and south east england. Elsewhere, a cooler, fresherfeel to things. Breezy in scotland and Northern Ireland, and a few showers around, especially running into northern scotland. A range of temperatures again on tuesday. Even where its still very warm, it will be cooler by wednesday. Bye bye. Welcome to bbc news, broadcasting to viewers in north america and around the globe. My name is duncan golestani. Our top stories in houston, more than 1,000 people have been rescued from the rising waters caused by Tropical Storm harvey. Hundreds of others are stranded in their homes. We just. We prayed a lot. And we just praised god and he rescued us, so we are very thankful. Texas continues to be battered by heavy rain with nearly 80cm falling over the last 48hours. Texans brace themselves as forecasters warn more is on its way. Eight mountain climbers have died in three separate accidents this weekend in the austrian and italian alps. Europes largest festival gets under way in west london, with a tribute to the victims of the Grenfell Tower disaster