a heavy price" and says the attacks on ships are set to continue. hello, i'm lucy grey. let me take you straight to these live pictures from the hague, where israel is presenting its response to the international court ofjustice — after south africa claimed its actions in gaza were genocide. it's the second and final day of hearings at the united nations�* highest court. let's listen in. or are being committed. _ let's listen in. or are being committed, but _ let's listen in. or are being committed, but it - let's listen in. or are being committed, but it does - let's listen in. or are being l committed, but it does have let's listen in. or are being - committed, but it does have to show that the genocide convention is in play. after all, this court has no jurisdiction to consider any other alleged crimes, however serious. we are only concerned with genocide. it

is indeed a difficult balance for the court. the court has... i is indeed a difficult balance for the court. the court has... i think we may have _ the court. the court has... i think we may have lost _ the court. the court has... i think we may have lost the _ the court. the court has... i think we may have lost the feed, - the court. the court has... i think we may have lost the feed, it - the court. the court has... i think we may have lost the feed, it hasj we may have lost the feed, it has frozen for a moment. professor malcolm sure casey is speaking on behalf of israel, presenting their case. —— malcolm shaw kc. he said that it case. —— malcolm shaw kc. he said thatitis case. —— malcolm shaw kc. he said that it is an outrageous allegation, israel said earlier that hamas was seeking genocide against israel. i think the feed has come back now. let's try again. think the feed has come back now. let's try again-— let's try again. israel to act in order to defend _ let's try again. israel to act in order to defend itself - let's try again. israel to act in order to defend itself so - let's try again. israel to act in order to defend itself so as i let's try again. israel to act in order to defend itself so as to j order to defend itself so as to terminate the threats against it and rescue the hostages certainly exists. the intent to deal with the armed militants of hamas and other such groups is undeniable. where it is the case, which we deny, that israeli forces have transgressed

some of the rules of conflict, then the matter will be tackled at the appropriate time by israel's robust and independent legal system. but thatis and independent legal system. but that is not the intent to destroy all or part of a people as such. israel's and actions in restricting its targeting practices to attack military personnel or objectives in accordance with international humanitarian law, in a proportionate manner, in each case, as well as its practice of mitigating civilian harm, such as by four warning civilians of impending action, by the unprecedented and extensive use of telephone calls, leafleting and so forth, coupled with the facilitation of humanitarian assistance, all demonstrates the precise opposite of any possible genocidal intent. south africa, in

seeking to discover the necessary intent, presents a distorted picture. it misunderstands the nature and provenance of certain comments made by some israeli politicians. let me try to explain... politicians. let me try to explain- - -_ politicians. let me try to exlain. .. ~ ., explain... we will leave the feed there. live now to our correspondent, anna holligan, who's in the hague. the argument we were hearing was that south africa's case was profoundly distorted. let us know a bit about what israel has been sane response to what south africa said yesterday. response to what south africa said esterda . , , ., ., , response to what south africa said esterda. , h, , yesterday. yes, israel has accused south africa _ yesterday. yes, israel has accused south africa of _ yesterday. yes, israel has accused south africa of bringing _ yesterday. yes, israel has accused south africa of bringing this - yesterday. yes, israel has accused south africa of bringing this case, | south africa of bringing this case, trivialising and recognising the genocide convention. israel's first speaker said that actually, what they had witnessed on the 7th of october, the hamas attacks, was the largest calculated mass murder of

jews since the holocaust and also pointed out that israel was one of the first countries to sign the genocide convention under which this case was brought by south africa. just to explain, if this were ruled against israel, the court does not have any power of enforcement, does it but i suppose it would add hugely to the political pressure on israel. pressure, absolutely. this is all down to interpretation. israel is arguing its acts in gaza since the 7th of october have been about self defence in line with international humanitarian law, that they have sought to move civilians out of harm's way in order to protect them, not as forced displacement as africa alleged, and also defended statements by senior israeli politicians, saying that they had no genocidal intent. ijust want

politicians, saying that they had no genocidal intent. i just want to take you around and show you, if we can, scene outside the icj because you are right, the court has no powers of enforcement, and yet, any ruling that goes against israel, so the court could order provisional measures, an interim injunction asking israel to cease hostilities, if israel were to ignore that order, it would be seen as being in violation of international law, which would make it much harderfor countries like the uk and us to continue supporting israel. just behind me come here, you might be able to make out in the background groups of palestinian supporters waving flags. among them, images of nelson mandela, south africa has drawn parallels between what is happening in gaza and apartheid south africa. i will bring you back around to the peace palace, now, you can't see them but behind the gates, a little further down, police have created a cordin to try to keep the

two rival groups of supporters apart —— a cordon. israeli supporters have gathered and set up a symbolic shabbat table with images of some of the israelis who are still being held hostage by hamas in gaza, attached to the backs of empty chairs. this is turning into a legal battleground and the decision from the judges battleground and the decision from thejudges here battleground and the decision from the judges here on these battleground and the decision from thejudges here on these interim measures, we are talking about, not the fundamentals, the merits of the case, the interim injunction will be ruled upon within a matter of weeks. it could be quite soon. thank you, anna holligan, in the hague. the us, the uk and eight other countries which are taking part in a mission to protect shipping in the red sea — following a series of attacks by yemen's houthi rebels — say the aim of the air strikes in yemen overnight was to "de—escalate" tensions in the region. this was the moment us warplanes took off from an aircraft carrier, which is patrolling in the region.

the us air force says its planes, and those of its allies, struck more than 60 targets at 16 locations — all of which were being used by the houthi rebels. four typhoon warplanes from the uk's royal air force also took part in the mission. they flew from cyprus, carrying guided bombs. all four aircraft returned to base. four other countries — australia, the netherlands, canada and bahrain, provided support to the mission. according to the us, more than 12 sites were hit across yemen — including what america says were houthi command and control nodes, munitions depots, launching systems, production facilities and air defence radar systems. among the areas targeted, the capital sanaa, and the port of hudaydah. these pictures were filmed in hudaydah. the extent of any casualties is not yet known, but as you can see, there are large plumes of smoke reaching into the sky. the military action has been condemned by iran — which supports the houthis — and russia, which has requested an urgent un security council meeting.

that's likely to take place at 1500 gmt on friday. president biden has issued this statement... the uk's prime minister rishi sunak addressed the attacks by houthis, saying... the houthis spokesman, mohammed abdulsalam, has also responded. with me is our defence

correspondentjonathan beale. just on that last point about the ships which have been targeted, the british government has been saying that one of their warships was targeted within the last 48 hours and they are talking about self defence being the justification for the attacks. defence being the 'ustification for the awash defence being the 'ustification for the attackeh the attacks. yes, and the two thints, the attacks. yes, and the two things, making _ the attacks. yes, and the two things, making sure - the attacks. yes, and the two things, making sure freedom | the attacks. yes, and the two l things, making sure freedom of navigation because a lot of trade goes through it, 12% of the world's trade goes through the red sea but also, because, they say, and i think grant shapps said, that being attacked, the biggest yet come and remember, the houthis have done 26 or 27 out of these kind of attacks using drones and missiles against shipping, the biggest was two days ago and grant shapps, the uk defence secretary, thinks a british warship was among the targets. the americans have also felt the same. so you know, when you hear americans saying

this is about de—escalation, well, military action never results in de—escalation. i think at best this could be deterrence. the question is, will it be enough deterrence to stop the houthis doing what they are doing and i think the other day that is properly not. i doing and i think the other day that is preperly not-— is properly not. i spoke to frank gardner afterwards _ is properly not. i spoke to frank gardner afterwards about - is properly not. i spoke to frank l gardner afterwards about whether is properly not. i spoke to frank - gardner afterwards about whether it was a show of strength rather than the targets that we were talking through, the targets that have been hit, whether it was actually enough to make a substantial difference to the houthis capability. it to make a substantial difference to the houthis capability.— the houthis capability. it will make a difference. _ the houthis capability. it will make a difference, they _ the houthis capability. it will make a difference, they have, _ the houthis capability. it will make a difference, they have, as - the houthis capability. it will make a difference, they have, as they i a difference, they have, as they say, hit 60 targets in 16 locations, they focused on something specific thatis they focused on something specific that is linked to what has been going on in the red sea, production of drones, launch sites, missile sites. they have focused on military capabilities. they won't have destroyed all of the houthis literary capabilities, the saudis have been bombing the houthis for years and they were still defiant and had military capability. but i

think, you know, this will... once the west had said, stop this or else, they had to do the or else. and this is it. but to be honest, there are not many other options to this. there is no suggestion in an election year that they are going to put boots on the ground, the west. they have bitter experience of both iraq and afghanistan. this is pretty much what they can do, they can do it on a bigger scale if they want to but this is pretty much all they can do in terms of military action. fiend do in terms of military action. and the can do in terms of military action. and they can seemingly do it without asking parliament first. the liberal democrats were very cross earlier that there was not a debate in parliament and they did not get a chance to discuss this but the uk is able to take these military decisions in terms of what it has done. , , ., , , . done. yes, you must remember that last time, done. yes, you must remember that last time. when _ done. yes, you must remember that last time, when david _ done. yes, you must remember that last time, when david cameron - done. yes, you must remember that last time, when david cameron went to parliament to ask for authorisation of attacks against the syrian regime, he lost the vote. and

then barack obama said the use of chemical weapons by president assad in syria was a red line but did not follow through on it. i think there is a cost of going to parliament and there is a cost of not taking action. ultimately, these countries will say, we had a un security council resolution vote. i5 will say, we had a un security council resolution vote. is that enouth? council resolution vote. is that enough? that _ council resolution vote. is that enough? that gives _ council resolution vote. is that enough? that gives you, - council resolution vote. is that enough? that gives you, you | council resolution vote. is that - enough? that gives you, you know, the cover to — enough? that gives you, you know, the cover to carry _ enough? that gives you, you know, the cover to carry out _ enough? that gives you, you know, the cover to carry out this _ enough? that gives you, you know, the cover to carry out this military l the cover to carry out this military action. i think it would be difficult to see many politicians, when asked, you know, was this the right thing to do, to say no because they have all said that what the houthis are doing in the red sea is wrong and has to stop. we houthis are doing in the red sea is wrong and has to stop.— houthis are doing in the red sea is wrong and has to stop. we will see. there will probably _ wrong and has to stop. we will see. there will probably be _ wrong and has to stop. we will see. there will probably be a _ wrong and has to stop. we will see. there will probably be a debate - wrong and has to stop. we will see. | there will probably be a debate soon enough. there will probably be a debate soon enouth. , , . enough. yes, there will be a debate but the action _ enough. yes, there will be a debate but the action has _ enough. yes, there will be a debate but the action has been _ enough. yes, there will be a debate but the action has been taken. - enough. yes, there will be a debate but the action has been taken. butl but the action has been taken. but not in advance of the action. the l not in advance of the action. the action has _ not in advance of the action. the action has been _ not in advance of the action. tie: action has been taken and there's not much they can do. ok.

action has been taken and there's not much they can do.— action has been taken and there's not much they can do. ok, thank you very much. — not much they can do. ok, thank you very much, jonathan _ not much they can do. ok, thank you very much, jonathan beale. - around the world and across the uk. this is bbc news. let's stay with those strikes in yemen, and hear from lord dannatt, a crossbench peer and former head of the british army. he explained why the uk and the us committed to military action. this situation has been building over the last few days and couple of weeks. we have seen evidence, growing evidence of attacks by houthi missiles and drones on international shipping in the red sea. of course, that has begun to have quite a significant effect, diverting a lot of international shipping around the cape, obviously, extending journey times for international trade and commodity and increasing the costs of shipping, and that obviously is going to have an effect on domestic economies. the decision has been i think quite rightly taken that action must be taken against the houthis to stop them attacking international shipping, to protect the international sea lanes

of the world, and hence we have seen the action that began late last night. you're live with bbc news. let's focus now and what damage these could have courted the houthis military structure and ability to attack shipping in the red sea. i asked our security correspondent frank gardner to explain. it's primarily about message sending, i think. they have chosen the targets quite carefully, 6o targets in 16 locations including the capital sanaa and hudaydah, the main port. they have hit airfields and missile storage sites and in one case at least a command and control centre, but they have tried i think quite carefully to minimise casualties. they have been after equipment and sites rather than people. but it is too early to judge whether they are a success or not.

did they hit the targets they intended? yes. will they have the desired effect? we will have to wait and see because the houthis have vowed to continue their attacks on shipping and i think probably i would compare this to the missile strikes that took place against very limited targets in syria some years ago in response to syria's use of chemical weapons. it didn't really have the desired effect. and the houthis are quite a resilient bunch. they are a tribal mountain militia that have come down from the north of yemen, took over the country legally in 2014, but they have illegally in 2014, but they have amassed a very serious arsenal with iranian help, of drones, missiles, cruise missiles, antiballistic and anti—ship missiles. they have still got a lot of them left and they have vowed to inflict

a painful retaliation on the us and uk and i think the most likely form of that is that they will try to hit western warships in the way that they did on tuesday, where they mounted a complex mass attack, a combination of drones and missiles, in an attempt to overwhelm the air defences of those western warships. in the case of hms diamond, the royal navy type 25 destroyer, it had to rely on its close—in support weapons because the missiles that it had were not on their own going to be enough to stop some of the incoming ordnance. that is what they are trying to do, trying to punch a hole in a western warship. can you explain the motivation behind what the houthis are doing in the red sea? as you say, they have been attacking these warships and they said they were primarily attacking israeli ships and ships that were heading towards what they call palestinian territories. what are they getting out of it, i suppose is my question?

the houthis are punching well above their weight geopolitically because up until now their war and conflict has been confined to the borders of yemen and just beyond, where they have been hitting targets in saudi arabia and in a couple of cases the uae. but they have decided tojoin in the gaza war on the side of hamas. they have professed themselves to be a part of the iranian—backed axis of resistance alongside hezbollah, hamas, and any other iranian allies in the region. they have decided that they are going to essentially police their part of the red sea coast and choose which ships can pass and which can't. they have accused a number of ships that have got no relation to israel and no connection whatsoever of being israeli owned or israeli

linked or calling at an israeli port and have fired missiles at them. the western warships that are down there, mainly us and british but some other ones, they have been trying to fend off these attacks and have now found themselves to be the target of these attacks. initially, it started out with houthis firing missiles at eilat in israel, and at the commercial ships and it has ended up with them targeting the warships themselves. i don't think we have seen the end of this. i think it is very possible that the houthis are going to try to show that they have not been beaten and keep on attacking ships and shipping. our middle east correspondent yolande knell has been monitoring developments from jerusalem. i asked her what reaction there had been from the region. it has been linked to the possibilities of regional escalation of the war in gaza. israel has not formally commented on what is happening but we have had hamas say that the us and the uk

will bear responsibility for those strikes, for the impact on the security of the middle east. they have strongly condemned the strikes as well. otherwise, the saudis have been commenting and they have warned about the possibility of an escalation here. they said they are monitoring things very closely, that they are gravely concerned. of course, in recent months, the saudis have been involved in peace talks with the houthis, saudi arabia neighbours of yemen, where they are based. some strong words from the houthis in terms of what might happen next, in terms of what they have said, they have said the us and uk will pay a heavy price for this blatant aggression. can you just explain first of all what the objective is of the houthis in terms of the attacks in the red sea? is it purely that they are trying to show their support for hamas?

they are trying to show their support for hamas. they are backed by iran, as is hamas, and other organisations, armed organisations around the region. going back for years, now, the mass rallies the houthis have called, one of their official slogans is "death to america, death to israel", they will call for that when they're having rallies, but until the war in gaza, we have not really seen any direct confrontation between the houthis, based in yemen, and israel itself. in the early days of the military offensive by israel, drones and missiles were being fired by the houthis towards the red sea, towards israel's red sea resort of eilat. they were intercepted by israeli warplanes and its arrow missile defence system which was used operationally for the first time here. but then the houthis started to say that any ships that they saw

as being linked to israel or heading to israeli ports were for them legitimate targets because of the ongoing war, although many of the attacks that we have seen by the houthis on commercial shipping vessels, of course, so much international concern, don't appear to have had any actual link to israel. yolande knell, reporting from jerusalem, there. let's go back to the hague where the international court ofjustice is hearing israel's response to south africa's allegations that israel is committing genocide in gaza. this is the spokesperson for israel now, professor malcolm shaw kc, let's your what he is saying.— your what he is saying. military tresence your what he is saying. military presence in _ your what he is saying. military presence in gaza _ your what he is saying. military presence in gaza in _ your what he is saying. military presence in gaza in 2005, - your what he is saying. military - presence in gaza in 2005, bringing an end to its military occupation, and the violent coming to power of hamas in 2007, a situation of conflict has existed with hamas

firing rockets at israeli towns and villages unceasingly. however, the attack on israel on the 7th of october was qualitatively different from all that went before. the truth is, if there has been any genocide of activity in this situation, it was the events of the 7th of october. acts and intent can be and has been demonstrated. but hamas recognised as a terrorist group by at least 41 states, including the us, the uk, all members of the eu, canada, australia, saudi arabia, japan and colombia, is not before the court. only south africa, a third party that is not involved in the armed conflict, appears. nevertheless, as south africa has pointed out, complicity in genocide is in play. states that supported,

condoned, praised or glorified the events of the 7th of october, both at the time and later, stand guilty of a violation of article three of the convention as being complicit in genocide —— articles three e of the convention. and against the duty to prevent their side under article one. south africa has given succour and support to hamas at the least, as has been pointed out. clearly of relevance to a discussion of the situation is the facilitation of humanitarian assistance, something that hardly fits well with accusations of genocidal intent, as my colleagues will demonstrate, israel's activities in this area need to be addressed and not swept aside as south africa seeks to do. prime amongst the rights of the

respondent that are critical to any legal evaluation of the situation, is the inherent right of any state to defend itself, embedded in customary international law and enshrined in the un charter, this right, afforded to states, reaffirms and underlines the responsibility of all states towards their citizens, and marks the acceptance by the international community and the political reality and legal confirmation that states when attacked, legitimately may respond in a forceful and proportionate manner. professor lowe yesterday to maintain that israel has no right to self—defence in situation. how could anyone possibly argue that israel could not defend itself, faced with the 7th of october atrocities, and

the 7th of october atrocities, and the incessant attacks against civilians since. indeed, a very wide range of states have acknowledged the right of self—defence here, ranging from the uk to the us, france, germany, italy and canada. israel, putting its case on the second day of this two day fearing at the international court of justice. israel responding to south africa's allegations that it is committing genocide in gaza. plenty more on bbc news throughout the day. stay with us. hello. we have got a window of slightly less cold weather for the next couple of days. we did not see such widespread ice and frost around this morning, certainly compared to earlier in the week. still quite chilly and cloudy for many of us. temperatures not as low as they have been. high pressure holding onto our weather. the winds rotating, coming in off the atlantic nd the

north sea, bringing quite a lot of moisture and that blanket of cloud for most of us. clearer skies today across scotland. could be the odd lingering misty patch around. temperatures 2—4 across scotland but for most of us, typically 6—8. into the evening and we will see this weather front in the north slipping further south, bringing a bit of overnight rain to scotland and some snow on the very highest mountains. that will slip further south across parts of northern ireland and northern england on saturday morning but either side of that, clear spells. a bit of frost first thing tomorrow, a colder morning than this morning. through the day on saturday, a fair amount of dry and bright weather, a few splashes of light rain for northern ireland, north wales and perhaps in the midlands. sunny spells breaking through the cloud either side of that. reasonably mild, 5—8 on saturday. still lower than average but not as cold as it has been. into sunday, the wind turns more northerly. you can see the white colours of snow showers starting to move in across north and north—eastern scotland in particular. most of us still relatively dry and quiet on sunday. the change in wind direction through

sunday into monday brings a chance of some snow showers, particularly for parts of scotland and also some exposed coasts around the irish sea and the north sea as well. heading through into tuesday, we could well see this area of low pressure starting to move in. the potentialfor a bit more sleet and snow for parts of northern ireland, scotland, perhaps into northern england for tuesday and wednesday. midweek onwards, as we head through wednesday and into thursday, we still have a cold northerly wind in the north. low pressure may well stay across france but it has the potential to be a bit further north. just a small chance on wednesday and thursday of snow in the far south of england but again it will mostly be parts of scotland and northern ireland that see the chance of something a bit more wintry. either way, next week looks colder with northerly winds setting in. some snow showers, could be some disruption. keep tuned to the latest forecast.

this is bbc news, the headlines: this is the scene live inside the international court ofjustice, which is today hearing israel's defence against accusations of genocide in gaza brought by south africa. explosions across yemen as us and uk forces launch air strikes against houthi rebel targets in retaliation for attacks on commercial ships in the red sea. uk prime minister rishi sunak says that the strikes are a "limited,

necessary and proportionate action in self—defence". a senior houthi leader warns that the us and uk would "pay a heavy price" and says the attacks on ships are set to continue. let me take you straight to these live pictures from the hague, where the international court ofjustice is hearing israels response to south africa s allegations that it's committing genocide in gaza. it's the second and final day of hearings at the united nations' highest court. south africa is asking the icj to issue an injunction to stop israel's military campaign and protect the palestinian people. israel has said that south africa's demands would render israel defenceless and that that south africa had presented a profoundly distorted factual and legal picture.

on thursday south africa accused the highest levels of the israeli