tonight bringing us the context are amanda renteria, hillary clinton's former national political director and tom peck, political sketch writer at the independent. exactly 20 years ago today, us forces, with the uk and other allies, invaded iraq. the stated aim — to rid the country's dictator saddam hussein of his weapons of mass destruction — weapons that in the end were never found. it was part of the us's "war on terror", started by president george w bush after the terrorist attacks of september 11th, 2001. let's remind ourselves those first moments of the war. on this day in 2003, the first raids were on the capital baghdad — it was called "shock and awe". it took the us just over a month to defeat iraqi forces and saddam hussain�*s regime collapsed. president bush declared iraq to be free. but rather than an end to conflict, it was the beginning of many years of bloodshed for iraq and the wider region. the failure to plan for the aftermath of the invasion led, in part, to the rise of the so—called islamic state. 0ur international editor jeremy bowen talks us through some of the impact of that lack of planning. well, the americans thought they would be in and out quite quickly, that they would knock down saddam, there would be somehow a democracy and they could go home. it didn't work out that way. they lost control very quickly. there was massive amounts of looting, settling of scores, revenge attacks. and quite quickly an insurgency built up against the americans. the americans did not have a plan, no, but even had they had a better thought out plan it might not have worked then either. because there was a lot of pent up anger, i think, against the americans and against the british because of the way they had championed sections in the 1990s against iraq, against saddam, which weakened saddam but really, really hurt the iraqi people. and the consequences of what happened was that there was a huge cauldron of violence and these jihadist ideologies were nurtured within it. and we're still seeing the consequences. we can now speak to samir sumaidaie. he was the iraqi ambassador to the united nations. 20 years, what are your reflections on the invasion now? it is 20 years, what are your reflections on the invasion now?— 20 years, what are your reflections on the invasion now? it is deep and ve sad. on the invasion now? it is deep and very sad- we _ on the invasion now? it is deep and very sad. we went _ on the invasion now? it is deep and very sad. we went back _ on the invasion now? it is deep and very sad. we went back to - on the invasion now? it is deep and very sad. we went back to iraq - on the invasion now? it is deep and | very sad. we went back to iraq after 26 years in exile and being involved in the iraqi opposition, being one of the leaders, i went back and took a leading post in the post saddam world. we had our dreams, we thought we were going to go back and live in the country. but our dreams turned into nightmares for a whole number of reasons. not one of those people who said that saddam... two wars that because the huge amount of suffering. the intervention was bungled and here we are. let suffering. the intervention was bungled and here we are. let us try and draw out _ bungled and here we are. let us try and draw out some _ bungled and here we are. let us try and draw out some of— bungled and here we are. let us try and draw out some of the _ bungled and here we are. let us try and draw out some of the key - and draw out some of the key mistakes in your mind. but it goes wrong? at mistakes in your mind. but it goes wron: ? �* ., , mistakes in your mind. but it goes wronu? �* ., , ., , mistakes in your mind. but it goes wrona?�* ., , ., , �* wrong? a whole number of things. but it started even — wrong? a whole number of things. but it started even before _ wrong? a whole number of things. but it started even before the _ wrong? a whole number of things. but it started even before the american . it started even before the american intervention. the americans had a fairly simplified, two—dimensional image of iraqi society. iraqi society is quite a complex society. iraq is a country that is very ancient and had empires fighting over it, and so we have a complex society. the americans looked at it in simple terms. a gain for one is a loss for the other two sides. it was not really realistic. so when they came in, the policies which they adopted were such that they did not deal with the needs of the people. the people needed security, the people needed assurance, and the people needed assurance, and the people needed assurance, and the people needed leadership. find people needed assurance, and the people needed leadership. and that was not provided. _ people needed leadership. and that was not provided. and _ people needed leadership. and that was not provided. and you - people needed leadership. and that was not provided. and you talked i was not provided. and you talked about the need for security, for example. disbanding the army, is that in your eye is one of the mistakes?— that in your eye is one of the mistakes? ~ , ,., , ~ ., mistakes? absolutely. and what eo - le mistakes? absolutely. and what peeple forget — mistakes? absolutely. and what peeple forget to _ mistakes? absolutely. and what people forget to talk _ mistakes? absolutely. and what people forget to talk about - mistakes? absolutely. and what people forget to talk about wasl people forget to talk about was disbanding the police. can you imagine new york if the police is disbanded? what the situation would be? nobody talks about that. i briefly was minister of interior in the post—change period, and it was chaotic. the new police were recruited from x criminals, so it was really badly managed. i5 recruited from x criminals, so it was really badly managed. is there any sympathetic — was really badly managed. is there any sympathetic reading _ was really badly managed. is there any sympathetic reading of- was really badly managed. is there any sympathetic reading of this - any sympathetic reading of this where you can say i actually no one really predicted the level of corruption, the level of extremism, the level of violence that would come out of there? is there a sympathetic reason that itjust wasn't possible to plan for that? or does the responsibility squarely fall on those who led the invasion without a proper plan?— without a proper plan? there is a sympathetic _ without a proper plan? there is a sympathetic explanation, - without a proper plan? there is a sympathetic explanation, if - without a proper plan? there is a sympathetic explanation, if you l sympathetic explanation, if you would like to describe it like that. but it is not an excuse. there was a plan, the state department conducted comprehensive studies with the help of many of us iraqis. the political decision was taking in washington to put the whole management in the hands of the pentagon, exclude the state department from this. so all the results of all those studies were not amounting to anything. but here again i would like to take the opportunity that we should not put all the blame on the americas. iraqi leaders have a big share. there is one important political error that the americans made and many iraqi leaders were complicit in. the americans had this doctrine of forced protection, they wanted minimum massive casualties. they translated this into a concept that if you keep the kurds on site, and if you keep the kurds on site, and if you keep the kurds on site, and if you keep the shi'ite on side, then you would have less trouble. well, the problem with that is that they thought of the shi'ite as being represented by the islamic parties which were actually created and nurtured by iran. they are notjust the islamist parties. also, in iraq there was quite a large middle educated, secular. who were running the administration during saddam's time. they were disempowered. and all power was given to the islamist parties. that was a huge political mistake. extrapolated, that led exactly to the situation that we are now in. w , , now in. exactly, let it bring it riaht u- now in. exactly, let it bring it right up to — now in. exactly, let it bring it right up to date. _ now in. exactly, let it bring it right up to date. can - now in. exactly, let it bring it right up to date. can you - now in. exactly, let it bring it| right up to date. can you draw now in. exactly, let it bring it. right up to date. can you draw a pretty straight line between what happened 20 years ago and many of the problems that are still with us? i can because i was a member of the governing council, the first iraqi administration made up of 25 of the leaders of the previous opposition and i could see the decisions, the political and security decisions, which were made at that time leading to this. we were in a minority. the americans did not listen to us. we want the americans... we tried to persuade them that it is important to have empowered the secular section of society. nobody listens to us. and i can see how that lead directly to where we are now. in the first round of elections, the idea was promoted to say and reassure all the communities, we need to apportion the top leadership posts. and this would be only for one round. it became now an established practice. so this is really where we are. ,,. practice. so this is really where we are, ,,., , ., , practice. so this is really where we are. , , , are. samir, please stay with us. it was fascinating _ are. samir, please stay with us. it was fascinating to _ are. samir, please stay with us. it was fascinating to hear _ are. samir, please stay with us. it was fascinating to hear your - was fascinating to hear your thoughts. as you said, you were there on the ground in the aftermath of the invasion. let's get a bit of a reaction now from our panel. amanda, how do you view now the role of the us and its allies? the conversation _ of the us and its allies? the conversation here _ of the us and its allies? the conversation here in - of the us and its allies? the conversation here in the states are really _ conversation here in the states are really what — conversation here in the states are really what happens in war. it was longer— really what happens in war. it was longer than — really what happens in war. it was longer than anticipated, it was costlier— longer than anticipated, it was costlier than anticipated and you are seeing now a costlier than anticipated and you are seeing nowa higher costlier than anticipated and you are seeing now a higher bar as we are seeing now a higher bar as we are having— are seeing now a higher bar as we are having conversations about what it means _ are having conversations about what it means to — are having conversations about what it means to engage in wars, in disputes— it means to engage in wars, in disputes around the world, because it really— disputes around the world, because it really was a lesson for americans. because of the time, it was in _ americans. because of the time, it was in and — americans. because of the time, it was in and out. now what we have learnt _ was in and out. now what we have learnt is _ was in and out. now what we have learnt is that words can be chaotic, they can _ learnt is that words can be chaotic, they can shape in a way that no one anticipated — they can shape in a way that no one anticipated and they can last for much _ anticipated and they can last for much longer than anyone expected at the beginning of it. i think what that has— the beginning of it. i think what that has done for a lot of folks in foreign _ that has done for a lot of folks in foreign policy in general is say when — foreign policy in general is say when we — foreign policy in general is say when we go in we must understand the different— when we go in we must understand the different ways of an exit strategy here _ different ways of an exit strategy here and — different ways of an exit strategy here. and i think there are still a lot of— here. and i think there are still a lot of lessons that you have been hearing _ lot of lessons that you have been hearing out of the state department about _ hearing out of the state department about what has been learnt here, how we can _ about what has been learnt here, how we can mix _ about what has been learnt here, how we can mix in — about what has been learnt here, how we can mix in the future we do things— we can mix in the future we do things in— we can mix in the future we do things ina— we can mix in the future we do things in a way that thinks about all the _ things in a way that thinks about all the different ways it can end. recognising it as longer and more expensive — recognising it as longer and more expensive than anyone anticipated. and i'rn _ expensive than anyone anticipated. and i'm not — expensive than anyone anticipated. and i'm not sure anyone would call this at— and i'm not sure anyone would call this at the — and i'm not sure anyone would call this at the of it that this is what we thought would happen, this is what _ we thought would happen, this is what we — we thought would happen, this is what we were planning to happen. and i what we were planning to happen. and i hope _ what we were planning to happen. and i hope it— what we were planning to happen. and i hope it makes notjust america better, — i hope it makes notjust america better, but— i hope it makes notjust america better, but as we think of engagement around the world, what lessons _ engagement around the world, what lessons can we draw here? and that is the _ lessons can we draw here? and that is the discussion here in the states _ is the discussion here in the states. ., , states. tom, give us the uk pempective- _ states. tom, give us the uk perspective. at _ states. tom, give us the uk perspective. at the - states. tom, give us the uk perspective. at the time, i states. tom, give us the uk. perspective. at the time, there states. tom, give us the uk- perspective. at the time, there was a significant opposition to what was happening. it came to define tony blair's leadership for many for years and years to come. there was, but this was — years and years to come. there was, but this was the _ years and years to come. there was, but this was the thing. _ years and years to come. there was, but this was the thing. in _ years and years to come. there was, but this was the thing. in the - but this was the thing. in the huiid-up_ but this was the thing. in the build-up to _ but this was the thing. in the build—up to the _ but this was the thing. in the build—up to the war- but this was the thing. in the build—up to the war and - but this was the thing. in the - build—up to the war and arguably in the 20— build—up to the war and arguably in the 20 years— build—up to the war and arguably in the 20 years since, _ build—up to the war and arguably in the 20 years since, all— build—up to the war and arguably in the 20 years since, all of— build—up to the war and arguably in the 20 years since, all of the - the 20 years since, all of the debate — the 20 years since, all of the debate has _ the 20 years since, all of the debate has really— the 20 years since, all of the debate has really revolved . the 20 years since, all of the - debate has really revolved around, and the _ debate has really revolved around, and the inquiries, _ debate has really revolved around, and the inquiries, who— debate has really revolved around, and the inquiries, who knew- debate has really revolved around, i and the inquiries, who knew what? did they— and the inquiries, who knew what? did they know— and the inquiries, who knew what? did they know they _ and the inquiries, who knew what? did they know they were _ and the inquiries, who knew what? did they know they were wmd? . and the inquiries, who knew what? i did they know they were wmd? that turned _ did they know they were wmd? that turned out _ did they know they were wmd? that turned out not — did they know they were wmd? that turned out not to _ did they know they were wmd? that turned out not to be. _ did they know they were wmd? that turned out not to be. but _ did they know they were wmd? that turned out not to be. but that- turned out not to be. but that question— turned out not to be. but that question about _ turned out not to be. but that question about political - turned out not to be. but that. question about political honesty turned out not to be. but that- question about political honesty has dominated — question about political honesty has dominated for — question about political honesty has dominated for such— question about political honesty has dominated for such a _ question about political honesty has dominated for such a long _ question about political honesty has dominated for such a long time - question about political honesty has dominated for such a long time it. dominated for such a long time it really— dominated for such a long time it really hides — dominated for such a long time it really hides what _ dominated for such a long time it really hides what is _ dominated for such a long time it really hides what is the _ dominated for such a long time it really hides what is the signaturei really hides what is the signature here, _ really hides what is the signature here, which— really hides what is the signature here, which we _ really hides what is the signature here, which we have _ really hides what is the signature here, which we have just - really hides what is the signature here, which we have just been. here, which we have just been discussing _ here, which we have just been discussing. the _ here, which we have just been discussing. the complete - here, which we have just been discussing. the complete lack| here, which we have just been. discussing. the complete lack of a proper— discussing. the complete lack of a proper plan — discussing. the complete lack of a proper plan. and _ discussing. the complete lack of a proper plan. and that _ discussing. the complete lack of a proper plan. and that is— discussing. the complete lack of a proper plan. and that is what - discussing. the complete lack of a . proper plan. and that is what caused so much _ proper plan. and that is what caused so much sectarian _ proper plan. and that is what caused so much sectarian violence, - proper plan. and that is what caused so much sectarian violence, so - proper plan. and that is what causedj so much sectarian violence, so much mess— so much sectarian violence, so much mess and _ so much sectarian violence, so much mess and a _ so much sectarian violence, so much mess and a toss _ so much sectarian violence, so much mess and a toss in _ so much sectarian violence, so much mess and a loss in confidence, - so much sectarian violence, so much mess and a loss in confidence, as. mess and a loss in confidence, as has been — mess and a loss in confidence, as has been discussed. _ mess and a loss in confidence, as has been discussed. it— mess and a loss in confidence, as has been discussed. it has- mess and a loss in confidence, as has been discussed. it has madel mess and a loss in confidence, as. has been discussed. it has made the uk and _ has been discussed. it has made the uk and the _ has been discussed. it has made the uk and the us— has been discussed. it has made the uk and the us choose _ has been discussed. it has made the uk and the us choose not _ has been discussed. it has made the uk and the us choose not to - has been discussed. it has made the uk and the us choose not to go - has been discussed. it has made the uk and the us choose not to go into| uk and the us choose not to go into syria. _ uk and the us choose not to go into syria. hasn't— uk and the us choose not to go into syria, hasn't necessarily— uk and the us choose not to go into syria, hasn't necessarily gone - uk and the us choose not to go into syria, hasn't necessarily gone any . syria, hasn't necessarily gone any better— syria, hasn't necessarily gone any better than— syria, hasn't necessarily gone any better than going _ syria, hasn't necessarily gone any better than going into— syria, hasn't necessarily gone any better than going into iraq. - syria, hasn't necessarily gone any better than going into iraq. but. syria, hasn't necessarily gone any better than going into iraq. but i. better than going into iraq. but i think— better than going into iraq. but i think it _ better than going into iraq. but i think it is — better than going into iraq. but i think it is really— better than going into iraq. but i think it is really important - better than going into iraq. but i think it is really important not i better than going into iraq. but i think it is really important not to focus _ think it is really important not to focus realty _ think it is really important not to focus really on _ think it is really important not to focus really on the _ think it is really important not to focus really on the lies _ think it is really important not to focus really on the lies are - think it is really important not to focus really on the lies are the l focus really on the lies are the potential— focus really on the lies are the potential lies _ focus really on the lies are the potential lies around - focus really on the lies are the potential lies around wmd. i focus really on the lies are the l potential lies around wmd. but around — potential lies around wmd. but around reat— potential lies around wmd. but around real capability— potential lies around wmd. but around real capability and - potential lies around wmd. but around real capability and what| around real capability and what should — around real capability and what should have _ around real capability and what should have been _ around real capability and what should have been seen, - around real capability and what should have been seen, the . around real capability and what - should have been seen, the complete lack of— should have been seen, the complete lack of a _ should have been seen, the complete lack of a plan — should have been seen, the complete lack of a plan to— should have been seen, the complete lack of a plan to rebuild _ should have been seen, the complete lack of a plan to rebuild the _ lack of a plan to rebuild the country— lack of a plan to rebuild the country after— lack of a plan to rebuild the country after you _ lack of a plan to rebuild the country after you topple - lack of a plan to rebuild the country after you topple a l lack of a plan to rebuild the - country after you topple a dictator. and it _ country after you topple a dictator. and it is _ country after you topple a dictator. and it is not — country after you topple a dictator. and it is not something _ country after you topple a dictator. and it is not something that - country after you topple a dictator. | and it is not something that should have really— and it is not something that should have really come _ and it is not something that should have really come as _ and it is not something that should have really come as a _ and it is not something that should have really come as a surprise - and it is not something that should have really come as a surprise to l have really come as a surprise to anyone — have really come as a surprise to anyone and _ have really come as a surprise to anyone. and that _ have really come as a surprise to anyone. and that was _ have really come as a surprise to anyone. and that was the - have really come as a surprise to anyone. and that was the real. anyone. and that was the real failure — anyone. and that was the real failure and _ anyone. and that was the real failure. and that— anyone. and that was the real failure. and that is— anyone. and that was the real failure. and that is the - anyone. and that was the real failure. and that is the bit- anyone. and that was the real failure. and that is the bit we| failure. and that is the bit we should — failure. and that is the bit we should cling _ failure. and that is the bit we should cling on _ failure. and that is the bit we should cling on to, _ failure. and that is the bit we should cling on to, not- failure. and that is the bit we should cling on to, not the i failure. and that is the bit we i should cling on to, not the wmd aspect — should cling on to, not the wmd asect. �* . . should cling on to, not the wmd asect. �* ., ., ., ,., aspect. amanda, the end of your answer there, _ aspect. amanda, the end of your answer there, we _ aspect. amanda, the end of your answer there, we are _ aspect. amanda, the end of your answer there, we are talking - aspect. amanda, the end of your l answer there, we are talking about some of the lessons learned about that hesitancy to act in a similar way again. but on the issue of planning and having a more rounded approach to international affairs, do you think there is kind of lessons have been learned? absolutely. and you are even in the current _ absolutely. and you are even in the current conflicts today, you are seeing — current conflicts today, you are seeing a — current conflicts today, you are seeing a much broader conversation. and not— seeing a much broader conversation. and notjust — seeing a much broader conversation. and notjust what is happening in the state — and notjust what is happening in the state department. but this is actually— the state department. but this is actually the broader context of the conversation in america broadly with the public— conversation in america broadly with the public about why and when we engage _ the public about why and when we engage it — the public about why and when we engage. it is not an easy conversation to have, but some of the lessons — conversation to have, but some of the lessons learned are engaging internationally, it needs to be a thoughtful approach. internationally, it needs to be a thoughtfulapproach. 0ne internationally, it needs to be a thoughtful approach. one of the thoughtful approach. 0ne of the things— thoughtful approach. one of the things that your bride has really brought— things that your bride has really brought to his credit or presidency -- joe _ brought to his credit or presidency —— joe biden has brought to his presidency _ —— joe biden has brought to his presidency. it is not easily, especially at times when people are worried _ especially at times when people are worried about inflation at home, it is necessary conversation as we move forward _ is necessary conversation as we move forward. w is necessary conversation as we move forward. ,,., , is necessary conversation as we move forward. , , ., ., , forward. samir, 'ust before we wrap this u -. forward. samir, 'ust before we wrap this up. rm — forward. samir, just before we wrap this up. i'm afraid _ forward. samir, just before we wrap this up. i'm afraid we _ forward. samir, just before we wrap this up. i'm afraid we are _ forward. samir, just before we wrap this up. i'm afraid we are almost - this up. i'm afraid we are almost out of time. i want to give one last thought to you, briefly unfortunately, but as you sit there now 20 years on, are you optimistic about the state of iraq? what now 20 years on, are you optimistic about the state of iraq?— about the state of iraq? what is our about the state of iraq? what is your feeling? — about the state of iraq? what is your feeling? well, _ about the state of iraq? what is your feeling? well, i— about the state of iraq? what is your feeling? well, i am - about the state of iraq? what is your feeling? well, i am an - yourfeeling? well, i am an optimistic sort of person. whereas when i went back to iraq in 2003, i thought maybe within five years things can be turned around and the country will be... now the timescale has drastically changed. and i think it will probably be more like two generations, three generations, more like 50 years. just one last comment from what amanda has mentioned. i hate to think that the united states takes an entrenched position from an essential role of leadership in the world. there was this wave after vietnam and then after iraq, basically saying that the united states should not be involved in situations which need some leadership. i don't support that. i think the role of the united states can still be important and positive, provided it is based on real detailed understanding and responding to what people actually need on the ground, if they are to intervene. irate need on the ground, if they are to intervene. ~ need on the ground, if they are to intervene-— need on the ground, if they are to intervene. ~ , ., ., ., ,, intervene. we will let you go. thank ou so intervene. we will let you go. thank you so much — intervene. we will let you go. thank you so much for— intervene. we will let you go. thank you so much for coming _ intervene. we will let you go. thank you so much for coming on - intervene. we will let you go. thank you so much for coming on and - you so much for coming on and talking to us. it is absolutely invaluable to hear from you and your experiences right there on the ground at the time. thank you so much. right, let's take a look at some of the other stories making headlines today. in the uk, former prime minister boris johnson has formally submitted evidence ahead of a parliamentary hearing over allegations he misled parliament. the privileges committee, made up of mps from several different parties, is investigating whether mrjohnson misled the house of commons when he denied rules were broken over lockdown parties in downing street. the former prime minister denies misleading mps and says he wants his defence to be published as soon as possible. members of the uk's largest transport union vote to accept a new offer on pay, jobs and conditions from network rail. the rmt union says the deal includes a pay rise of up to 14.4% for its lowest paid staff. it means they will not take part in any more strikes but rmt members who work for ia other train operating companies are still due to walk out later this month. the largest unionist party in northern ireland, the dup, says it won't support changes to the northern ireland protocol agreed between the uk government and the european commission. the party also won't re—enter the power sharing agreement to restore the country's government until the protocol is removed. its leader, sirjeffrey donaldson, said he would continue to work with the government on "outstanding issues". right, they is pick in little more detail on the northern ireland politics. tom, let's start with you. if you would be so kind, just give us a quick refresher on where we are here. , ,, ., ~', , , here. rishi sunak publish the winter framework. — here. rishi sunak publish the winter framework, which _ here. rishi sunak publish the winter framework, which is _ here. rishi sunak publish the winter framework, which is kind _ here. rishi sunak publish the winter framework, which is kind of- here. rishi sunak publish the winter framework, which is kind of his - here. rishi sunak publish the winter framework, which is kind of his new| framework, which is kind of his new version of the northern ireland protocol. —— winter framework. version of the northern ireland protocol. —— winterframework. it was unveiled with ursula von der leyen, and the dup, the largest unionist party in northern ireland, have said that they are not going to bid for it. it was still almost certainly pass. it doesn't really matter in westminster terms. but it does make it harderfor there to be a return to power—sharing in northern ireland. now, why this winterframework northern ireland. now, why this winter framework is a breakthrough and is something that the eu didn't grant any of the previous deals that it will supersede, is that it gives stormont, the northern ireland assembly, the power to say no to any new eu regulations, at least temporarily. so it is a very clever ruse for rishi sunak, because the northern ireland assembly can only say no if they are in session. and by the wider dup are in trouble is kind of lots of complex northern irish political reasons, they don't necessarily want a return to power—sharing and it is much easier if they can blame it all on brexit. they have kind of had their bluff called a little bit, but it is a bluff calling the doesn't really result in a clear win for anyone. there are expertly set out because it is not a straightforward issue to detail will stop you did brilliantly. amanda, this is a significant political issue in the us, too? ~ ., ., significant political issue in the us, too? ., ., significant political issue in the us,too? ., ., , significant political issue in the us, too? ., ., us, too? whenever i am not as up on the news i _ us, too? whenever i am not as up on the news i will — us, too? whenever i am not as up on the news i will say _ us, too? whenever i am not as up on the news i will say so, _ us, too? whenever i am not as up on the news i will say so, and _ us, too? whenever i am not as up on the news i will say so, and i - us, too? whenever i am not as up on the news i will say so, and i have - the news i will say so, and i have not been — the news i will say so, and i have not been following it and i was appreciative of the simplicity. but i appreciative of the simplicity. but i want _ appreciative of the simplicity. but i want to — appreciative of the simplicity. but i want to be careful not to speak out of _ i want to be careful not to speak out of turn — i want to be careful not to speak out of turn here.— i want to be careful not to speak out of turn here. very, very wise. but of out of turn here. very, very wise. ibut of course. — out of turn here. very, very wise. but of course, the _ out of turn here. very, very wise. but of course, the good - out of turn here. very, very wise. but of course, the good friday i but of course, the good friday agreement, the peace process is something that president biden, it is a point. i appreciate on the us side it is less about following every particular development. but the principle of the importance of the principle of the importance of the good friday agreement is absolutely paramount.- the good friday agreement is absolutely paramount. that's right. and what you _ absolutely paramount. that's right. and what you did _ absolutely paramount. that's right. and what you did see _ absolutely paramount. that's right. and what you did see it _ absolutely paramount. that's right. and what you did see it secretary . and what you did see it secretary clinton _ and what you did see it secretary clinton was over in ireland. you do see joe _ clinton was over in ireland. you do see joe biden talk about this quite a bit here — see joe biden talk about this quite a bit here. and it is also why and even _ a bit here. and it is also why and even more — a bit here. and it is also why and even more careful about it. we are auoin to even more careful about it. we are going to move _ even more careful about it. we are going to move on _ even more careful about it. we are going to move on to _ even more careful about it. we are going to move on to rail— even more careful about it. we are going to move on to rail strikes - going to move on to rail strikes here. amanda, again, this is not for you so much. rail strikes in the uk has been a huge issue here and we seem to have some kind of breakthrough now?- seem to have some kind of breakthrough now? yeah, so the rmt. .. breakthrough now? yeah, so the rmt... network— breakthrough now? yeah, so the rmt. .. network rail— breakthrough now? yeah, so the rmt. .. network rail have - breakthrough now? yeah, so the| rmt. .. network rail have agreed breakthrough now? yeah, so the i rmt. .. network rail have agreed to breakthrough now? yeah, so the - rmt. .. network rail have agreed to i rmt... network rail have agreed to i think a 5% pay rise, so partially the industrial dispute will be resolved. but of course you still need the trains to be driven once the people who maintain the track are not on strike any more. it is a breakthrough and hopefully there will be subsequent breakthroughs. but what i think is the most interesting thing about this by far is that we are not and used to train related strikes in this country. these must have been quite bad and quite severe but i personally have not really detected much in the way of public anger with the strikers themselves. normally the unions get blamed and the union bosses get criticised, but i think everyone is struggling and everyone can sympathise with someone looking for a pay rise. and i think that is why the unions were able to hold out for so long and achieve a partial success. because the anger with them, as is usual, never materialised to the same extent this time. , ~ ., ., time. interesting. amanda, in the us, the time. interesting. amanda, in the us, the cost— time. interesting. amanda, in the us, the cost of— time. interesting. amanda, in the us, the cost of living _ time. interesting. amanda, in the us, the cost of living is _ time. interesting. amanda, in the us, the cost of living is increasingj us, the cost of living is increasing as well. the same pressures of inflation. what is the situation with workers�*s demands and pay there? with workers's demands and pay there? ., , ., , �* there? you might remember it wasn't too lona there? you might remember it wasn't too long ago — there? you might remember it wasn't too long ago that _ there? you might remember it wasn't too long ago that the _ there? you might remember it wasn't too long ago that the united - there? you might remember it wasn't too long ago that the united states i too long ago that the united states was facing the same kind of rail strike — was facing the same kind of rail strike. president biden came in, you so the _ strike. president biden came in, you so the secretary of labour come in to try— so the secretary of labour come in to try and — so the secretary of labour come in to try and strike a deal to stop there — to try and strike a deal to stop there is— to try and strike a deal to stop there is a _ to try and strike a deal to stop there is a real understanding that people _ there is a real understanding that people, hard—working unions are having _ people, hard—working unions are having a — people, hard—working unions are having a tough time. you are beginning _ having a tough time. you are beginning to see governments move. the federal— beginning to see governments move. the federal government made one of the biggest increase as it is ever made _ the biggest increase as it is ever made in — the biggest increase as it is ever made in the united states here very recently _ made in the united states here very recently. you are starting to see a union— recently. you are starting to see a union movement coming together and saying _ union movement coming together and saying it _ union movement coming together and saying it is _ union movement coming together and saying it is fair and right. it has been _ saying it is fair and right. it has been a — saying it is fair and right. it has been a long time since you have seen people _ been a long time since you have seen people not— been a long time since you have seen people not get a raise to keep up with things. there is almost a healthy— with things. there is almost a healthy back and forth that is moving — healthy back and forth that is moving workers forward that i think is good _ moving workers forward that i think is good for— moving workers forward that i think is good for the countries in general but also _ is good for the countries in general but also for— is good for the countries in general but also for people making day in and day— but also for people making day in and day out with all of the pressures people are facing on the ground _ pressures people are facing on the round. ~ . pressures people are facing on the rround. . ., ., ,., pressures people are facing on the round. ~ ., ., ,., ., pressures people are facing on the round. ~ ., ., ., , ground. what about more broadly? cost of living _ ground. what about more broadly? cost of living pressures _ ground. what about more broadly? cost of living pressures in - ground. what about more broadly? cost of living pressures in the - ground. what about more broadly? cost of living pressures in the us? | cost of living pressures in the us? where are we? so a lot of folk right now are _ where are we? so a lot of folk right now are talking gas prices, how are they managing this? what are the different— they managing this? what are the different threats and environmental challenges? undoubtedly food prices. and then _ challenges? undoubtedly food prices. and then as of this week a run on banking — and then as of this week a run on banking. there isjust a lot of instability— banking. there isjust a lot of instability going on right now, and at the _ instability going on right now, and at the same time you have heard right— at the same time you have heard right now— at the same time you have heard right now for months and months that workers _ right now for months and months that workers need help making up their wage _ workers need help making up their wage growth. i think we are going to continue _ wage growth. i think we are going to continue seeing this into the year as we _ continue seeing this into the year as we see — continue seeing this into the year as we see more instability. the good news _ as we see more instability. the good news is _ as we see more instability. the good news is that— as we see more instability. the good news is that there are more healthy discussions — news is that there are more healthy discussions happening, you are beginning to see collective bargaining agreements coming to realisation, whether it is the trains— realisation, whether it is the trains here in the united states or is really— trains here in the united states or is really making some headway in building _ is really making some headway in building first—time collective bargaining agreements or updating their collective bargaining agreements again. interesting. i 'ust want agreements again. interesting. i just want to _ agreements again. interesting. i just want to go _ agreements again. interesting. i just want to go back, _ agreements again. interesting. i just want to go back, because i agreements again. interesting. i| just want to go back, because we were talking there about northern ireland and the windsor framework and the new brexit deal. we were talking about the fact that the dup have said that they will not vote for it, as tom pointed out that shouldn't make too much difference to the uk parliament. the tories have the support of the labour party so it should go through anyway. we have just got a line through for our corresponded from the bristol side of things, saying that the brexit deal, the eu states are expected to endorse this revised brexit deal for northern ireland tomorrow morning. that is 1145 am in brussels time. just being sent through to us here from jessica parker. "the windsor framework will be considered by ministers at the general affairs council in brussels as part of the formalities ahead of the eu— uk joint committee on friday." so slightly technical language there. a little bit of legal ease. but that was the thrust of it. a quick update there from our corresponded jessica parker there on that story. do stay with us. i am lewis vaughanjones. goodbye. hello. there is no shortage of rain in our forecast for the week ahead, and that is thanks to something of an atmospheric conveyor belt. the jet stream racing across the atlantic. the strong winds high up in the atmosphere delivering bouts of cloud, outbreaks of persistent rain, some heavy, thundery showers, and also delivering us some pretty mild air. now, the rain is really going to pile up across western areas, over some hills in northwest england, wales, the southwest of england. you can see the bright colours here. this is where we could see around 100mm of rain falling over the next five days, but a pretty soggy week for many of us. tuesday certainly will bring some rain. the most persistent rain likely to move across the northern isles, particularly shetland. behind that we see some sunny spells, yes, but some big showers will pop up, some heavy, thundery ones, and then later in the day, the next weather system on the conveyor belt starts to push into northern ireland, some outbreaks of persistent rain here through the late afternoon. but very mild, 11—15. so this weather system swings its way eastwards during tuesday night. behind it, we end up with quite a strong southwesterly wind and that will feed plenty of showers in our direction. so this band of rain here swirls away northeastwards. it will linger across the northern isles for a time. then we're back into sunny spells and heavy, thundery, blustery showers, wind gusts around some western coasts on wednesday could well get to around 50mph or a touch more. but despite that brisk wind, it will again feel mild. seven for lerwick, 14 for hull and norwich. the weather front this week controlled by this big, lumbering area of low pressure to the northwest of us. little weather system there running into the south. that could introduce some more persistent rain later in the day across the channel islands. that may get into southern counties of england. elsewhere, sunny spells and hefty downpours, another breezy day, another mild day with highs of 14—15. now, as we move into thursday night, that little weather system likely to run across some southern parts with some persistent rain. that area of low pressure still with us driving further showers and thunderstorms, albeit with some spells of sunshine in between. friday will be mild for most of us but we start to develop a northerly wind in the north of scotland, and as that northerly wind kicks in it will start to bring something a little chillier. and that is the scene as we start the weekend. this area of low pressure moving eastwards. that does allow northerly winds to develop across many parts of the uk. i think the coldest weather will be in the north of scotland. further south, a bit of a milder influence around our next area of low pressure. that will start to bring some rain in from the far southwest later in the day. before that arrives, some sunny spells, some showers. wintry showers perhaps in the northern half of the uk with that colder air beginning to work its way in. as we head through sunday, we'll see this little ridge in the jet stream here. that is a window of drier, quieter weather, albeit with a slightly chillier feel. but it doesn't last long. the weather conveyor belt is set to start up again as we head into next week, delivering further weather systems, further bouts of heavy rain and brisk winds. but after that brief colder interlude, we will see a return to something milder, with temperatures likely to be in double digits for the vast majority. that's all from me, bye—bye. tonight at ten, it's called a "survival guide for humanity" — a major new report on saving the world from climate change. if the catastrophic effects of global warming are to be slowed down, the un says there will need to be radical reductions in the use of fossil fuels. concentrations of carbon dioxide are at their highest in at least 2 million years. the climate time bomb is ticking. we'll have details of the major new report, and we'll be looking at the uk's performance in the quest for zero emissions. also tonight... president xi arrives in moscow, but how will president putin respond to china's peace plan for ukraine? 20 years ago tonight, baghdad was under attack,