eastern time, american forces began airstrikes against iranian—backed targets in iraq and syria. they hit 85 targets in total. white house national security spokesmanjohn kirby also added that three facilities were hit in iraq and four in syria. president biden has issued a statement on the strikes, saying: the strikes are in retaliation for a deadly drone attack on us forces. shortly before the us strikes just hours ago, president biden took part in a ceremony for the repatriation

of the bodies of the three american soldiers killed in that drone attack injordan. the three sergeants — williamj rivers, kennedy sanders and breonna moffett died in the strike near the border with syria on sunday. mr biden and the first lady, jill biden met the plane carrying their bodies that arrived at an air force base in dover, delaware. it's where they received military honours. that installation is where the remains of fallen us service members first return to the united states. the white house has said the attack on its military base known as tower 22, which wounded a0 others, was carried out by an iran—backed militia called islamic resistance in iraq. iran denies involvement, calling the accusations "baseless" and saying it was "not involved "in the decision—making of resistance groups". meanwhile, an iraqi spokesman has responded to the strikes saying:

he added that the outcomes will have severe implications on the security and stability in the region. earlier, my colleague sumi somaskanda spoke nafiseh kohnavard, from baghdad. they discussed tehran�*s relationship with iraq. tell us more about what you think this could mean bronte run�*s relationship with baghdad, which is already incredibly complex?- baghdad, which is already incredibly complex? yes, these attacks came — incredibly complex? yes, these attacks came when _ incredibly complex? yes, these attacks came when the - attacks came when the relationship between baghdad and tehran was not in good shape, as well iran carried off a massive attack a few days ago against positions in iraqi kurdistan, claiming they are hitting locations that lessard,

israeli is using it. accusation that both arab and baghdad strongly denied and sent strong messages based on what i heard from iraqi officials to tehran that these attacks can jeopardise the relationship between two countries. and also, i know, i heard from other iraqi officials here in baghdad that prime minister sue danni has also asked a run to contain and put more pressure but following irgc and attacks on us bases, mentioning to iran that these attacks are jeopardising the iraqi government's efforts to reduce the number of american forces in this country is part of the

coalition forces. and even it finished a mandate, because the war against isis has finished and this is what i iraqi militia also emphasise, that they want the us leave, the us forces or us combat forces, as they say, leave iraqi. and despite that the us says they do not have combat forces here but it is still complicated. that is why these iraqi militia repeatedly attacked us bases. not only after— before war in gaza but intensified attacks after the war in gaza. so, from the eyes of baghdad, these attacks both from washington on iraqi soil and also from iraqi militia related to iraq, or supportive on iran, against

americans, isjust putting americans, is just putting baghdad americans, isjust putting baghdad in an awkward situation between two countries. squeezed between two countries. squeezed between baghdad and between washington and tehran and unable to move forward to reduce a number of american forces here. fin reduce a number of american forces here-— reduce a number of american forces here. on more question, we've heard _ forces here. on more question, we've heard from _ forces here. on more question, we've heard from our _ we've heard from our correspondent in northern iraq that the mood had been quite tense the past few days and the expectation of something about to happen. what is your sense been there in baghdad?- been there in baghdad? well, the situation _ been there in baghdad? well, the situation is _ been there in baghdad? well, the situation is so _ been there in baghdad? well, the situation is so similar- been there in baghdad? well, the situation is so similar to i the situation is so similar to what happened in 2020, when the us assassinated iraq's force commander and everyone was thinking that i was here at that time and everyone was thinking a big war is going to happen between iran and the us.

and until today run started to insinuate that they will carry out some attacks and will take some sort of revenge but they do not want to go to war with the us and the same thing i think happens now because the us gave enough advance warning, not only to tehran but also to militia here to evacuate the bases and assured it would not attack any positions inside iran. and nowi attack any positions inside iran. and now i see american officials are telling the us channels that they do not have any intention to attack any locations inside iran. it shows that they want to reduce tension, but for iraqis, most of this does not make any sense because either way there soil is being used by these two countries, by iran and the us for years and years as, like,

kind of, fighting each other in iraqi soil. the same thing that apparently iraqi officials mentioned this time too, refrain from attacking iraqi soil as part of retaliation against the attack that happened injordan against happened in jordan against americans, happened injordan against americans, because the attack that happened against the us base injordan was carried out from syria. but a prime minister advisor told me the response from washington was that the easiest and the best position and choice between all the worst choices they have on the worst choices they have on the table, is still carrying out some limited attack on iraqi soil. so, it chosen for iraqis still this is a battlefield for iraq and the us. this is what i hearfrom even, from top—down inner bark

from officials to people in the streets. for some analysis on these strikesjoining me is retired army colonel joe buccino. he was a spokesman for us central command, and served several deployments in the mid east. joining me remotely, as well, is former us ambassador to syria, robert ford. he's now a senior fellow at the middle east institute here in washington. thank you both forjoining us. joe, if i can start with the first, you mayjust break down in layperson's speak what happened tonight? fire in layperson's speak what happened tonight? are hearing 85 tar: ets happened tonight? are hearing 85 targets in — happened tonight? are hearing 85 targets in two _ happened tonight? are hearing 85 targets in two different - 85 targets in two different countries, all types of aircraft involved, it is a large scale attack? what can you tell us? , this is a larger version of what we been doing since late october. we have been striking their ammunition depo is. we have been striking she at militia groups funded by iraqi. hitting storage units, bunkers, bases in iraqi, predominantly in syria, a

little bit in iraq. here, we connected the two, did more strikes and hit the resupply lines that go between the two. so, it is a little bit of a larger version of what we have been doing, if you think about it along the range of options presented to the white house, this is in the middle to low range in terms of level of violence. but we should say us central command, for people not familiar with that, is a military division in this region. so you are very familiar with the region, the activities and so on. how effective do you think what happened tonight will be? flat happened tonight will be? not ve . 85 happened tonight will be? iirrt very. 85 sounds like a lot. relative to what we have been doing, which is a few here and there. think about it this way— there. think about it this way— the base, wanted the bases we hit in syria, another base in eastern syria, these bases have hundreds of complexes within them. we have also been signalling for five days, for five days we have been saying, boy, we're really going to hit

you hard and we really do want a war with you hard and we really do want a warwith iran. you hard and we really do want a war with iran. we're not going to hit iran back. that give them five days to harden these targets, bury their ammunition and really, with the kind of drones they have got, you're talking about, you are not talking about cutting—edge, high—tech drones, you are talking about handmade drones used in the ukraine, they can resupply these things in three weeks. they will be back to the full supply here in weeks, maybe in three to five weeks. robert foord, if i can turn to you. you are also very familiar having served in iraq and syria had in the diplomatic corps. how would this be received there, particularly in iraq which has that relationship with the us in these attacks have now happened on its oil? i think there will be some iraqis happy— think there will be some iraqis happy about this that do not like these iranians backed militia _ like these iranians backed militia. they are after role responsible for a lot of human rights — responsible for a lot of human rights violations, especially against _ rights violations, especially against the protest movement from _ against the protest movement from three years ago. but at

the same _ from three years ago. but at the same time, the governing shia _ the same time, the governing shia islamist coalition, many of them _ shia islamist coalition, many of them will use these american attacks— of them will use these american attacks as — of them will use these american attacks as a way to highlight american violations of iraqi sovereignty. and they will push harder— sovereignty. and they will push harder in— sovereignty. and they will push harder in bilateral negotiations that have already started. — negotiations that have already started, about the future of american forces. and they will insist— american forces. and they will insist that _ american forces. and they will insist that the americans withdraw.— insist that the americans withdraw. ~ ., , . ., withdraw. would you expect to see some _ withdraw. would you expect to see some kind _ withdraw. would you expect to see some kind of— withdraw. would you expect to see some kind of military - withdraw. would you expect to see some kind of military level response? see some kind of military level resaonse?_ response? military level resnonse _ response? military level response in _ response? military level response in terms - response? military level response in terms of. response? military level. response in terms of what? response? military level - response in terms of what? i'm sorry, _ response in terms of what? i'm sorry, i— response in terms of what? i'm sorry, i don't understand the questions? but in terms sorry, idon't understand the questions? but in terms of— there — questions? but in terms of— there has— questions? but in terms of— there has obviously been the strike, — there has obviously been the strike, attacks on the land there _ strike, attacks on the land there. will itjust be, as you are saying, the kind of chatter and involvement that it will have — and involvement that it will have at _ and involvement that it will have at talks or will there be something more serious? (cross

talk) _ something more serious? (cross talk) we — something more serious? (cross talk) we will see a track which the iraqi — talk) we will see a track which the iraqi government has energised, a diplomatic track to get— energised, a diplomatic track to get the americans to withdraw their forces and i think— withdraw their forces and i think the kernel is exactly right, _ think the kernel is exactly right, that within a week or two, _ right, that within a week or two. we _ right, that within a week or two, we will again start seeing small—scale attacks against american operating bases in syria — american operating bases in syria and _ american operating bases in syria and possibly in iraq. and sort _ syria and possibly in iraq. and sort of— syria and possibly in iraq. and sort of a — syria and possibly in iraq. and sort of a return to where we were — sort of a return to where we were six. _ sort of a return to where we were six, seven days ago. what do ou were six, seven days ago. what do you think. — were six, seven days ago. what do you think, joe? _ were six, seven days ago. what do you think, joe? olakau - were six, seven days ago. ixarisgt do you think, joe? 0lakau think he is absolutely right. part of what iran wants here is what the ambassador it is talking about, part of what iran wants he is discussion in baghdad, in washington dc, to get american troops out. what iran is looking for, wanted them to think about gas the afghanistan withdraw looms large over the region. there is thinking in iran, let's start a conversation in dc. there is an

america first movement. 0kay— america first movement. okay— the conversation does what we have all the sitting ducks sitting here injordan, in iraq, and syria? what national interest they represent? what iran wants is a withdrawal of american troops, then they can really bully the region around, which is what they want. how does that all feed into the starting point for this current conflict, which was those attacks on october seven and israel's response to them? i israel's response to them? i think iran has hijacked that palestinian movement. this war in gaza. iran mac does not care about the palestinian movement, never has. iran back, shia country, 1979, the palestinian movement is a largely sunni movement. this is a movement that iran does not care about. the people of iran back out and do not care about. you do not see protests about iran, inside iran. they have hijacked that and shut down commercial shipping in the red sea and what iran mac has done here,

they have created a low—grade war with the west. it is a kind of war they want, because they have subcontracted all the fighting to the shia proxy groups that we just hit. we have not hit anything that iran truly cares about.— truly cares about. robert forward. _ truly cares about. robert forward, do _ truly cares about. robert forward, do you - truly cares about. robert forward, do you agree i truly cares about. robert i forward, do you agree with truly cares about. robert - forward, do you agree with that or what we might see next? this i or what we might see next? as i said, we or what we might see next? as i said. we will— or what we might see next? as i said, we will be _ or what we might see next? as i said, we will be back _ or what we might see next? as i said, we will be back where we were _ said, we will be back where we were just — said, we will be back where we were just a _ said, we will be back where we were just a week or two ago. i will say— were just a week or two ago. i will say this also, i think this— will say this also, i think this is— will say this also, i think this is important for viewers to understand— iran mac is not 100 vtol _ to understand— iran mac is not 100 vtol. iran mac has a lot of vulnerabilities itself, not the least — vulnerabilities itself, not the least of— vulnerabilities itself, not the least of it is its economic situation. even these malicious have _ situation. even these malicious have caused huge resentment inside — have caused huge resentment inside iraq. in addition, they feed — inside iraq. in addition, they feed best— inside iraq. in addition, they feed best in neighbouring states— feed best in neighbouring states that have themselves problems of miss governance and ethnic— problems of miss governance and ethnic divides. 11 on, for example. syria, for example. iraq, — example. syria, for example. iraq, for— example. syria, for example. iraq, for example. militias witt—

iraq, for example. militias will not _ iraq, for example. militias will not go and take over jordan, _ will not go and take over jordan, will not go and take over— jordan, will not go and take over saudi arabia. those countries have themselves vast resources — countries have themselves vast resources and a sort of unity which — resources and a sort of unity which has _ resources and a sort of unity which has long been lacking in places— which has long been lacking in places like iraq and lebanon on. places like iraq and lebanon on and _ places like iraq and lebanon on and it— places like iraq and lebanon on. and it is important for the united — on. and it is important for the united states, as we look at this— united states, as we look at this situation, to decide how bil this situation, to decide how big are — this situation, to decide how big are american interests in keeping _ big are american interests in keeping small american forces in places— keeping small american forces in places like iraq and syria? what — in places like iraq and syria? what is _ in places like iraq and syria? what is their mission and is the — what is their mission and is the intent to leave them there indefinitely, or is the intent to have _ indefinitely, or is the intent to have a _ indefinitely, or is the intent to have a strategy whereby at some — to have a strategy whereby at some point they can be withdrawn? we have been in iraq now since — withdrawn? we have been in iraq now since 2003. it is 21 years. and when you answer that question yourself? what do you think? i

question yourself? what do you think? ~' question yourself? what do you think? ~ , , ., think? i think if the mission is to achieve _ think? i think if the mission is to achieve the _ think? i think if the mission is to achieve the endearing | is to achieve the endearing feat — is to achieve the endearing feat of— is to achieve the endearing feat of isis, of daesh, i think we have _ feat of isis, of daesh, i think we have gone about as far as we no. we have gone about as far as we go -- _ we have gone about as far as we go -- we — we have gone about as far as we go. —— we can go. american special— go. —— we can go. american special forces cannot eliminate isis~ _ special forces cannot eliminate isis~ and — special forces cannot eliminate isis. and really, indian, and the — isis. and really, indian, and the indigenous forces, whether in iraq — the indigenous forces, whether in iraq or— the indigenous forces, whether in iraq or in syria, by going to he— in iraq or in syria, by going to be able— in iraq or in syria, by going to be able to do that. and the americans have spent years training _ americans have spent years training these forces. 0ne training these forces. one thing _ training these forces. one thing we should learn from afghanistan is that the americans' efforts cannot supplant those of local actors. let's _ supplant those of local actors. let's hear _ supplant those of local actors. let's hear your view, joe, do you see that pullout, that pressure to do that? i you see that pullout, that pressure to do that? i hate to be in total — pressure to do that? i hate to be in total agreement - pressure to do that? i hate to be in total agreement in - pressure to do that? i hate to be in total agreement in thisl be in total agreement in this kind of a programme, but i have come around on this issue, when you visit those bases, the american special operations basesin american special operations bases in iraq and syria, there is not much more they can do to advance the syrian democratic forces that are fighting isis. and right now the americans are not doing a whole lot of

training or defeating isis. they are hunkered down. they are trying to weather the storm here of the next series of attacks from these shia proxy groups. there is also no offramp, no strategic exit, no strategic end stage to having americans in these countries. i think it is really time to re—examine why we have forces, what we have hundreds of troops in iraq and syria.— in iraq and syria. very briefly. _ in iraq and syria. very briefly, we _ in iraq and syria. very briefly, we have - in iraq and syria. very briefly, we have been| in iraq and syria. very - briefly, we have been told by the white house this is the first in a series of a response. with your military knowledge, your central command knowledge, your central command knowledge, what do you think will come next?— will come next? more of the same. i think— will come next? more of the same. i think we're - will come next? more of the same. i think we're to - will come next? more of the same. i think we're to do . same. i think we're to do another pass, battle damage assessment, identify which of these bunkers we hit, which we missed, how badly we have damaged some of these facilities and structures, and then do another pass. just to keepin then do another pass. just to keep in mind, the structures rebuilt, they can rebuild them

pretty easily, these shia proxy groups can just take over houses, they can take over structures. they can also get their munitions back. iran can ship these rockets, these munitions back within three weeks, as i said. so the damage done here is not significantly lasting damage. tote done here is not significantly lasting damage.— done here is not significantly lasting damage. we will leave it on that note _ lasting damage. we will leave it on that note for— lasting damage. we will leave it on that note for now. - it on that note for now. retired coloneljoe biccno and ambassador robert ford, thanks forjoining us. —— buccino. let's take a step back and look at the tense situation in the region, particularly iran. although iran has denied any direct involvement in that drone attack, we know there are a number of pro—iranian militias based in iraq, syria, lebanon, the palestinian territories and as far south as yemen. all are opposed to israel and the united states. the bbc�*s analysis editor, ros atkins, takes a closer look now at what we know about iran's alliances, and the so—called axis of resistance. as the crisis in the middle east escalates, there's one country the us references all the time. we do not want this war to widen.

but if iran or its proxies attack us personnel anywhere, make no mistake — we will defend our people, we will defend our security, swiftly and decisively. last weekend, three us soldiers were killed in a drone attack. the location was north—eastern jordan. the target was a us military base, called tower 22. the group claiming responsibility is the islamic resistance in iraq. but the us is clear on where blame really lies. 0ur teams here are continuing to do the analysis, but we know that iran is behind it, and certainly, as as we've said before here in this in this briefing room, iran continues to arm and equip these groups to launch these attacks. iran calls these claims "baseless accusations". but iran does have a network of allies across the region. it has a name for it, the axis of resistance — united, it says, in its

opposition to israel and the us. this axis includes the group behind the tower 22 attack. iran has taken advantage, frankly, of the current moment of conflict to do what iran has been doing for many, many years, which is to disrupt, to target the us and partners in a variety of ways, mostly through the efforts of its proxy militias. and since hamas's attack on october 7th, and israel's response to it, this disruption has taken many forms. for example, houthi rebels in yemen have repeatedly attacked shipping in the red sea. the us says there have been over 160 attacks by militia on its military positions in iraq and syria. but how does this network of allies work, how close is their relationship with iran, and what is iran trying to achieve? if we go back to 1979, there was an uprising in iran against the monarchy — iran became an islamic republic.

ever since, it's sought to spread its influence in the region. in recent years, that's involved support for the assad regime in syria, where iranian forces have been deployed, support for large militant groups such as hezbollah in lebanon and the houthis in yemen, and support for smaller groups, including in iraq. we have a whole range of iraqi shia militias, which have been formed in lots of different ways and have very different connections with iran. and, in fact, they're in an umbrella movement that has non—shia militias included as well, so it's very complicated to navigate the types of links within that part of the axis of resistance. and iran's support for its network comes in several forms. first, money. in 2020, the us estimated that iran gave hezbollah $700 million a year, as well as $100 million a year to palestinian groups, including hamas, and it estimates the houthis have received hundreds of millions of dollars, too. iran doesn't acknowledge this funding. but as well as money,

iran is supplying weapons, too. recently, two us military personnel died in an operation to intercept a boat in the red sea. the us released this image. it says the boat was transporting iranian—made weapons to the houthis. 0r there's hezbollah. 0ne estimate put his arsenal at 130,000 rockets and missiles. it's believed many of them come from iran. and if iran is supplying money and weapons, is it also coordinating the actions of its allies? after october 7th, the us acknowledged, "we have not yet seen evidence that iran "directed or was behind this particular attack." more broadly, iran's allies appear to operate with a significant degree of independence. but that needs placing in context. iran does not necessarily exert day—to—day operational control over each and every one of its proxies. but, that being said, when you provide strategic

direction, when you provide significant materiel, and you provide significant training, you cannot avoid culpability. and given this level of support from iran, inevitably, many are asking, what does it want? well, to understand this, we again need to look at iran's history — not least the iran—iraq war of the 1980s, which began when iraq invaded. iran doesn't necessarily see itself as an aggressive actor. it sees itself as deeply vulnerable. in particular, memories of the iran—iraq war, when it was very vulnerable to iraqi missiles, and many people died, are absolutely key in iran's political conception of where it sits in the region. so its whole policy is built on never again allowing itself to be encircled or isolated.

and to meet that goal, the axis of resistance is crucial. it is not looking for a massive escalation and a war outright with the us or israel. what it's interested in, however, is maintaining the kind of equilibrium and violence groups that it has across the region. in a statement this week, iran's revolutionary guard said, "we do not seek war, but we are not afraid of war." iran's motivations and ambitions are a fiercely contested subject. but as the us calibrates its response to the tower 22 attack, there's no debate that the axis of resistance is crucial to iran's efforts to position itself in the region and to challenge israel and america. ros atkins there on the story so far. you can get the very latest from our correspondents and our analysts around the world on the bbc website. we will keep you up to date right here on

the bbc news channel. i am katrina perry. thanks for watching us, and stay with us here on bbc news as we bring you all of the latest. hello, there. some very mild conditions around at the moment. plenty of cloud, but also some sunshine at times, such as here in aberdeenshire on friday. a blustery day of weather but temperatures lifted 15 degrees. 15.5 degrees in the south—east of northern ireland, but towards western coasts, a very different story. still mild, but grey, drizzly, lots of low cloud, mistand murk, and not a lot is set to change through the weekend. it certainly stays mild and it will be blustery, too, with brisk south—westerly winds blowing. on saturday, high pressure remains to the south, we keep the strength of the wind, this cold front just thinking a little further southwards, but not making too many inroads at all into the south of england and wales, where, again, a very mild start on saturday morning. temperatures in double figures, clear spells through the night. further north, here a chillier start to the day but again temperatures well above the average, but it's across northern england, northern ireland, and eastern scotland where we see the best

of the day's sunshine. still strong, gusty winds to the east of the pennines, showers piling into western scotland, and where we have this cold front across wales and stretching into east anglia, some outbreaks of rain on and off, but it is grey, drizzly, mild for the south of the front, 13 or 1a celsius. even in cardiff, temperatures all the way up to 11 degrees as we go through the afternoon, for the six nations rugby, there will be a brisk, westerly, south—westerly wind blowing, as well. on sunday, a few changes. now, this is a warm front. it will be dragging that very mild air further northwards, as we head throughout the day, so we will see some rain to start the day in northern ireland, that rain pushing into western scotland,

where it will turn really quite heavy, particularly as we go into the evening. again, very mild—feeling conditions, 8 to 1a celsius, those temperatures picking up in northern scotland late in the night. some particularly heavy downpours across western scotland as we head through sunday night and again into monday, some more spots, across western ross, into argyll, could see as much as 150 to 170 millimetres of rainfall. elsewhere, across the rest of the uk on monday, largely dry, again, if you are spots of dried to the west, the rest of the brightness will be towards the east but temperatures once again for many 12 to 1a celsius. there will be some brightness around on monday. on tuesday, we start to see perhaps a little bit more in the way of rain, and a northerly wind developing could bring us colder conditions into wednesday.

v0|ce—0ver: this is bbc news. we'll have the headlines and all the main news stories for you at the top of the hour, straight after this programme. in september 2014, 43 students disappeared from passenger buses in the mexican town of iguala, guerrero. they were in police custody, and then they're just gone. the federal government took charge of the case.

police started finding many places with clandestine graves. it was just horrifying. just three months after the disappearance, the government announced they had solved the case. we were analysing the evidence. it was just not matching the official story. protests erupted across mexico. a team of independent experts began their own investigation and the government case starts to unravel.