good to have you with us. parts of ukraine are again under attack by russian drones after two days of massive aerial assaults by both sides. ukraine's military says its air defence system has been activated in kyiv to repel a russian drone attack. and one person has been killed in kherson by russian shelling. meanwhile, officials in kharkiv say russian strikes hit a hotel and a residential building. 19 people were injured, no deaths have been reported. moscow has been retaliating after ukrainian strikes on the russian border city of belgorod, one of its biggest drone assaults on russian territory since the war began. these pictures show smoke rising above belgorod on saturday. russia says at least 20 people, including three children, were killed in air strikes. more than 100 others were injured. kyiv says only military facilities were targeted. the city is located approximately a0 kilometres north of the border with ukraine, 80 kilometres away from the ukrainian city of kharkiv. it follows friday's massive bombardment of ukraine,

the biggest of the war so far, which killed at least 39 people, according to ukraine's president volodymyr zelensky. here's our russia editor steve rosenberg. caught on dash—cam, a giant explosion in the centre of belgorod. there was panic as people ran for cover — not everyone could. russia says at least 20 civilians were killed and more than 100 injured after a series of ukrainian strikes on the heart of the city. although the russian military claimed it had shot down most of the missiles as emergency crews rushed to the scene, the scale of the damage became clear. billowing smoke making belgorod look more than ever like a front—line city. ukraine's border is

just 20 miles away. the local governor said these were the deadliest consequences of ukrainian shelling that his region had experienced. the attack came just a day after russia had carried out a huge wave of strikes across ukraine with missiles and with drones. at least 39 people, kyiv said, were killed. belgorod has come under attack before... ..with explosions like this one at the airport and at a power station. this kind of thing never happened before russia launched its full scale invasion of ukraine. now a deadly new strike on the eve of the new year holiday. russia has already hit back with new attacks of its own. steve rosenberg, bbc news, moscow.

let's turn now to the middle east where israel says its forces have raided hamas sites in the city of khan younis as it extends its offensive in the south of gaza. the idf says it's recovered what it called "very valuable intelligence material". health officials in gaza say 165 palestinians have been killed in the last day. a representative from the un relief agency for palestinian refugees told the bbc that displaced gazans are living in the open and in the parks. meanwhile, there are reports that in recent days at least 100,000 people have fled to rafah, which borders egypt in southern gaza. amid the deepening humanitarian crisis israeli prime minister benjamin netanyahu gave a defiant tv address, israel would continue fighting on "all fronts" and that the war would last many more months until victory is achieved. translation: the war is at its height. - we are fighting on all of the fronts. we have huge success but we also have painful cases. achieving victory will require time. as the israeli army chief of staff has said, the war will continue

for many more months. yolande knell sent this report from jerusalem. israel's widening military campaign in gaza is now focused on the three urban refugee camps in the centre, but hasn't abated in the north and in the south, and khan younis, seeing fierce street battles going on still between hamas fighters and israeli soldiers. this is where israel believes that hamas leaders may be hiding. right down on the border with egypt, tens of thousands of gazans have arrived there in just the past few days, fleeing from the latest fighting. they have been pitching makeshift tents but there is very little sanitation there, food and water are in short supply, and we're hearing about the spread, the increased spread of infectious diseases. looking forward into the new year, palestinians are desperate for a ceasefire and israeli families of those 100—plus hostages still held

by hamas in gaza are extremely worried, they want their loved ones brought home. in his latest television address, the israeli prime minister, benjamin netanyahu, has reiterated that the war will go on until victory was achieved over hamas and that could take months. yolande knell reporting. here in the us, federal prosecutors asked an appeals court on saturday to reject the former president's claims that he is immune from criminal charges related to efforts to overturn the 2020 election. mr trump faces four counts, including conspiring to defraud the us. he has pleaded not guilty. but mr trump's legal team is arguing the former president is immune from criminal liability. it comes as two us states — colorado and maine — have opted to remove the former president from the primary ballot over his actions they allege as insurrection onjanuary 6, 2021, moves which could be taken up by the us supreme court.

some prominent republicans — including former trump white house counsel, ty cobb — are joining special counsel jack smith in arguing against immunity for the former president. i spoke with mr cobb earlier. ty cobb, thank you forjoining us here on bbc news. now, you were a lawyer for the trump white house. despite that, you have now decided to back special counsel jack smith and arguing against the former president, why is that? well, there is no change of view on my part. when i was at the white house i didn't believe that presidents had criminal immunity and i don't believe it constitutionally. as a free citizen and former government employee i am totally at ease with taking a position on this and one consistent with the constitution.

there is no criminal immunity in the constitution, and the president's position on impeachment is absurd and will be exposed as such. thejudge�*s opinion is quite impressive. she got it right. it was fairly stated and she dealt with every argument that the president and his lawyers presented, for which there was absolutely no legal support and rules consistent with the compass constitution. i just want to point out, donald trump has pleaded not guilty to charges, also overturn a presidential election, i want to get your view, how do you assess his actions between the november 2020 election, and the riots at the us capitol onjanuary 6, 2021? it is interesting, as you say. he plead not guilty to that conduct but his position

in this particular appeal is even if he did it it was ok, because he was immune as president of the united states. he's already conceded in other pleadings that he did so in his capacity as an individual and a candidate. that totally disposes of the argument that he's presented and will be considered by the dc circuit. my own view is, you know, in addition to being irrelevant, is that he did incite people and he did attempt to prevent the laws of the united states being carried out faithfully and he did prevent — attempt to prevent, a peaceful transfer of power. i think those are constitutional crimes we have never ever before encountered and i think they shake the foundation of — the constitutional foundation of the united states in a way

that requires justice. so all of that, then, i guess, brings us to the question of what we've seen in colorado and maine, with those moves to remove donald trump from the ballot under the 14th amendment of the us constitution. if we do see the supreme court take up that case, how do you think that it will rule in that? i believe the vote will be overwhelmingly contrary to the position that colorado and maine have taken, because, sadly, the article 3 specifies who it applies to and it doesn't mention the president or the vice president, unlike other articles in the constitution which, you know, specifically do mention the president and vice president when it talks to applicability and the case law is such as officers of the united states is a phrase that is understood to be appointed officers under

article 2, but doesn't, unless specified, include the president and vice president. i think the law favours the former president in connection with the maine and colorado decisions and i think he will be on the ballot. could ijust ask, what do you think this would mean for his campaign if the supreme court does rule in his favour? it's really hard to say, i mean, in an ordinary case somebody who has reasonably been found liable of sexual assault and related defamation and is facing 91 felony indictments would not be eligible material. in this crazy time in which we live, his supporters seem to think that qualifies him more for president. i'm sad that it's come to that in america and i hope that people wake up and do what they have to do. they're not going to be able to do it by kicking him off the ballot but they can certainly rebuke him at the ballot box and i think

that's the way our process was designed and hopefully it will be the way it will all work. i don't think there is a republican party at least as it was formerly known, as long as trump is the leader and continually picking candidates and using his influence. you know, to destroy the party. i mean, most of the candidates he supported and picked have cost seats in the senate and seats in the house, republicans would probably be up a0 seats in the house and ten in the senate, but for trump, i don't think that trump's stature does anything for the republican party, he doesn't really care on principle, i don't think, between the parties. he is interested in power and in being in charge. so i think that republicans... crosstalk. if i mayjust ask you... you wouldn't vote for him?

i never have. yeah, no, iwould not. and i never have and i do believe that it's important for republicans and chris christie to, you know, call him out. make it plain that he should not be a candidate for the united states, he should be injail. ty cobb, former trump white house lawyer, thank you for being with us. always a pleasure, thank you so much. with the 2024 us presidential election approaching, women's reproductive rights is a top issue for voters, according to polls. but there is an under—reported crisis where black mothers are far more likely to die in childbirth than any other race. according to the centers for disease control, for every 100,000 live births for black women, there are 69.9 deaths. that's nearly three times higher than white and hispanic or latina women. the cdc says that 84% of these deaths were preventable. the us has the highest rate of maternal deaths overall despite being one of

the wealthiest nations in the world. kat stafford, really great to have you back with us on the bbc. i appreciate your time. when we spoke earlier this year, you'd just done an investigative deep dive into health disparities impacting black americans, all the way through the life course from birth to death, in particular as well, why so many more black women die in pregnancy. ijust wonder, do you think that started a conversation in this country? well, i think a lot of people were already discussing black maternal mortality and this long—standing impact that it's had on black women for decades. but i think what my project did at the time was really lay out and explain how this is something that is a generational problem, this isn't something that just started recently. and i think the project was really able to show the causes of this, the effects of this, and what a black baby

experiences at the start of its life lays the foundation for health inequities they encounter over the course of their life. i think right now, this conversation is really taking off. we are seeing a lot of people on the ground saying we know it need more attention on this, we need more action on this, since the publication of that project. as you said, your reporting was very clear when it comes to the cause and effects. that conversation continues. have we seen any concrete steps, though, coming out of that? well, i think one alarming thing that happened was when the cdc, the centers for disease control, released their most recent stats earlier this year, we saw another increase in terms of maternal mortality across the country and those numbers made a particular emphasis on how black women yet again were being disparately impacted. so, while the conversation has taken off, while we are seeing a lot of folks still discussing this,

demanding for this to be at the forefront, people are saying right now that we are just not seeing a real change and people are demanding that we see lawmakers, whether that's on a state and local level or in a federal level all the way up to the presidency, people — and when i say people, i mean advocates, doctors, experts, women who have had these disparate outcomes — they really want to see notjust money and resources go toward this, but they want to see some of the structural issues that i've reported about along the way, such as structural racism, biases, discrimination, all of these things that black women encounter throughout the course of their healthcare, they want to see these things actually addressed. as you point out, we had those stark statistics coming out from the cdc, and with all of that in mind, 2024 as well just around the corner, do you think that this is an issue that will come up in the election, especially if we look as well,

that this will be the first presidential election since the dobbs decision as well? when you think about reproductive rights in this country, a lot of people have been pointing to the fact that black women and other women of colour are going to be the ones that are most impacted by the dobbs decision. when you see less access in terms of reproductive rights, when they're talking about abortions, a lot of experts have been sounding the alarm already that we might continue to see another increase in terms of black maternal mortality. specifically, black women already are three times — almost three times more likely to die during childbirth than white women. so, we already have some pretty startling statistics, so people are looking at what is happening with abortion rights in this country and raising the question right now of — could we potentially see that rate increase yet again because of what's happening? so, we're seeing a lot of advocates, i would say, right now.

when they're looking ahead to 2024, they are looking at the presidential candidates and trying to understand, where do they stand on this? is itjust lip service or are we actually going to see resources being devoted to this? are we actually going to see the care that black women have been receiving, are we going to see this being disrupted? and i think people are willing to vote in regards to who they believe shows that they are actually caring about this issue that is really, again, been in place for such a long time in this country. and, kat, one thing that is striking, i guess, to perhaps people from outside the united states is how precarious health services can be in a developed country for people based on their employment status, based on their employment opportunities. ijust wonder — do you see the future of the affordable care act coming up for discussion once again through that prism of the presidential election? i think that's something that people really want to see discussed, right?

when you think about some of the critical issues that americans care about right now, healthcare is at the top of that. and if you think about health inequities and how black people across the board are more likely to experience a lot of these issues throughout the course of their lifetime, that is something that voters really care about right now. but one thing that i think is particularly interesting when you think about the black maternal mortality crisis is that for black women, regardless of their socioeconomic status, regardless of how much money they make, regardless of even how much education they receive, they are still more likely to die — and that includes even they have the best insurance — so this is indicative of a serious issue. this is something that, again, doctors have been raising for quite a long time and they are saying this isn't about black women, something being wrong with them. this is about something being wrong with our nation's healthca re system

in terms of really providing equitable care across the board for everyone. black women throughout the course of the time that i've been reporting on the subject, have told me and many other reporters is that when they enter the healthcare system, they feel their concerns aren't heard, they feel that they aren't listened to. so, yes, ithink the affordable care act is something that people are really — something that they really care about, they are also saying that right now we need to deal with these rude and structural issues that have caused a lot of these long—standing inequities. all right. kat stafford, global race and justice editor at reuters, always great to hear more about your reporting. thank you. the president of burundi, evariste ndayishimiye, has said that gay people should be taken to stadiums and stoned. speaking to journalists, the president also said his country would not bow to international pressures to respect the rights of those in the lgbt community. the president is the latest african leader to denounce homosexuality. same—sex relationships

are illegal in burundi and punishable by up to two years in prison. north korea's leader, kimjong—un, says his country faces unprecedented pressure from the united states and has no option but to press on with its nuclear ambitions. mr kim was speaking at his country's year—end party meeting, which wrapped up just hours ago. he also ruled out any possibility of reunification on the korean peninsula and said that he plans to launch three more spy satellites next year according to state media. earlier, i spoke with professor robert kelly, an expert in inter—korean affairs. it's very good to have you with us this evening. what do you make of some of these comments from kim jong—un, and do you think that regional leaders, western allies, will be taking them seriously? well, they're nothing really that we haven't heard from the north koreans before. i mean, it would be really remarkable if kimjong—un or anyone in the leadership came out and said that things were getting better and we can talk to the south koreans and maybe the americans aren't so bad

and maybe we can strike a deal with them, right? i mean, the north koreans really never talk like that and a lot of that is almost certainly because north korea needs to justify its own existence, right? if north korea wasn't in this harsh, oppositional relationship with south korea and the united states, there would be no reason for north korea to exist in the same way that, you know, once east germany gave up socialism and the berlin wall opened, there was no reason to it exist anymore, so the north koreans always have to talk this way because it helps to explain why the regime exists at all and it also explains the privation that its citizens suffer. so, i don't think it's really remarkable the north talks this way. they often have threatened to make war with the united states and south korea before. to be honest, i think the big thing coming up, from what i've heard from the conference, is this discussion about more reconnaissance satellites. that's operationally something new. but in terms of political rhetoric, no, i don't think there's much new here. well, talking about some of that reconnaissance, those spy satellites and plans to reportedly put three more up next year... right. ..how concerned do you think the west should be about that if you say it's something new? is it getting to a point now

when it comes to that military technology that there is a strong advancement here? yeah, it looks — well, we don't know yet, right? i mean, the last — the first couple of crashes — the first couple of launches last year crashed. then there was one that went up. the south koreans and the americans were a little bit coy sharing with the international community of what exactly they think the north koreans are getting. in the past, the north koreans have put stuff up and then lied about it, right? so, it's all — you know, right now, it's kind of hard to know. but i think what's important is that the north koreans are increasingly looking for satellite reconnaissance over south korea, presumably, and the united states, right? they're probably — i think we are concerned, one, that they're getting that from the russians, right? because we know now that kimjong—un has really thrown his weight, whatever there is of it, behind the russian war in ukraine and the russians in turn are giving kim missile and satellite technology. that's the first thing. and the second thing is it's now increasingly clear, you know, if you're putting satellites up for reconnaissance, what that basically means is that the north koreans are planning to fight any future conflict with missiles and that almost certainly means nuclear—tipped missiles, right? the south korean stalemate really is not

a conventional terrestrial one anymore. it's really now all about missiles and you've to have the satellites for better targeting, so this is new. you know, the bbc has spoken with north korean defectors who've described a deteriorating humanitarian situation inside north korea that you werejust alluding to... right. ..you know, from anything to, you know, severe food shortages. do you think that this heightened rhetoric by kimjong—un — or continued heightened rhetoric — could essentially be interpreted as a way to distract from the situation within its own borders? absolutely, right. i mean, north korea has had a caloric deficiency on average going back to the 1990s. north korea requires outside subsidisation in order to survive. china provides that but, you know, doesn't fully step up. the north korean military sucks an enormous amount of resources out of north korean gdp, away from the agricultural sector where it's really needed. you know, again, we don't have a lot of good information and, like you said, there is a defector community and we can talk to them.

there is an ngo community that's had sporadic access to north korea. but it looks like most north koreans don't meet the minimum who caloric intake threshold, right? in other words, what that means is that most north koreans are living under malnutrition and there's no reason to expect that to stop. if north korea is going to say, you know, we are going to build more missiles, we're going to build more nuclear weapons, the things in the speech, we're going to put up submarines, all the satellites — all that requires a lot of resources from a country that's very poor, right? i mean, north korea didn't have nuclear weapons. we basically understand them as something like a third world backward or a failed state. and so, you know, the more you put into the military in a country like north korea, you know, the end result of that is civilian privations. so, yes, this will continue. all right, robert kelly, a political analyst on inter—korean affairs. always good to get your take. thank you, robert. thank you for having me. finally, to a dog walk in madrid with a message. hundreds of dogs and their humans strolled the streets of madrid saturday, raising awareness about animal abandonment. an animal protection group arranges the annual event that's their take on the traditional end—of—year run through the city. it promotes pet adoption.

who could resist any of them? stay with us here on bbc news. it is good night from washington. bye—bye. hello. the weather's been continuing to cause some disruption through the final few days of 2023. we've had heavy rain, heavy snow across parts of scotland on saturday. for new year's eve on sunday, still some strong winds and heavy showers, especially in the south and the west. generally, a bit drier and less windy across the northeast of the uk, away from the northern isles — thatis, where we'll have this lingering weather front. but low pressure very much with us, drifting its way gradually eastwards, and there'll be a rash of showers rotating around that area of low pressure, blown in on these brisk west or southwesterly winds. so, the strongest of the winds probably for the southwest of england, the channel isles could be gusting 60mph. similar for the northern isles too. 50mph gusts possible through the davis straits, for instance. and plenty of those heavy showers really across southern and western

parts of england, wales, northern ireland and southwest scotland. 6 to 10 degrees cooler than recent days. some drier conditions for central parts of scotland, perhaps the east of the pennines and in northern england as well. but if you're planning on heading out to see some fireworks new year's eve, let's look at what the weather is doing around about midnight. and there are still some showers across southern england and wales, but they will, i think, tend to ease a little bit in frequency, so you may miss them. they are still blown in on these fairly brisk winds, though i think most of the showers will be across northern england, perhaps northern ireland as well and a few of them across the northeast of scotland, where they could be wintry, but some clearer and drier weather for central and western scotland as well. so, really is going to be a mixed picture around midnight with a scattering of showers almost anywhere. moving through into the early hours of monday, new year's day, and the winds will start to ease a little bit. for most of us, it'll be frost—free but some frost and some icy conditions, particularly if you've got that lying snow across the northeast of scotland. new year's day itself,

still some showers around, but they're going to tend to ease for northern ireland, parts of southern scotland, northern england as well, so some drier, brighter, less windy weather for many of us. but heavy rain close to the south coast here just could push in for the likes of the isle of wight, perhaps sussex and kent, for instance, as well. and then, more persistent rain will rattle its way through later on monday into tuesday as well, so a spell of wetter weather, i think, later in the day and more of the same to come over the next week or so. it's still unsettled. further spells of rain. perhaps a little bit cooler and drier towards the end of next week. bye— bye.

voice-over: this is bbc news. we will have the headlines for you at the top of the hour, which is straight after this programme. from the moment we arrive on this planet, we are all heading in the same direction. i could come up with a date predicting when you would die. well, thanks, but maybe the way that the years play out isn't inevitable. so, how about the idea of being able to increase our health span — live the better years of our life for longer, till, like, we're 40 at 60. there is a 15—17 years of healthy life that is up for grab for all of us. we head to california to meet

the scientists and founders who want to make it a reality. ageing by itself is the largest risk factor for every single disease, this chronic disease of ageing, so by targeting it, you target all disease together. but how do we separate science from snake oil? the longevity industry is worth billions with hopes of delaying disease, extending our sprightly years and maybe even throwing in a few extra. i let a system of science and data run my body. it does a betterjob taking care of me than i can. maybe even our furry friends can be with us for longer. he sneezed in my face. and the things some people will do to stay young! push it out, push it out. you got this. do you consider yourself a guinea pig?