minus eight—and—a—half minutes. nuclear weapons are one of the greatest threats to humanity. every year, there's a meeting to assess the risk of global catastrophe and set the doomsday clock. the hands are currently at 90 seconds to midnight, the closest they've ever been. with unique access to the experts who set the clock... this is a very dangerous time. leaders are not acting responsibly. ..i want to find out what's brought us from oppenheimer's invention to this point. now, lam become death, the destroyer of worlds. nuclear weapons, nuclear terrorism, nuclear proliferation. right now, it'sjust going in the wrong direction. translation: i'm ordering the strategic nuclear- forces on special alert.

explosion in britain, our own weapons are on high alert. there's always one out there, at 15 minutes' notice to fire. somewhere out there? somewhere out there. and american nukes could soon be back on british soil. if we get trump in there next time and he may press the button because he's got a bigger button than putin, then we are a target. putin hasn'tjust challenged america, but all european countries in nato, protected under the us nuclear umbrella. russians have made direct threats to use nuclear weapons against britain, one of the founding members of nato.

that's put the uk's nuclear readiness on alert. britain's nuclear deterrent is housed in the west of scotland. since the height of the cold war, naval base clyde, on the banks of gare loch, has been at the heart of the uk's nuclear policy. here he is. feargal dalton is a retired lieutenant commander, who served on hms victorious as chief weapons engineer. hello. morning, jane. nice to meet you, feargal. and you. what a lovely morning. yeah. welcome to faslane. so, how does britain's nuclear

deterrent actually work? well, there's four submarines, four vanguard class submarines, and one of them is always deployed, one's ready to take over, one's doing maintenance, one's maybe in refit. there's always one out there at 15 minutes' notice to fire. somewhere out there? somewhere out there. do the crew, know where they're going? the crew absolutely do not know where they're going. the captain and the navigator will know where they're going. does the prime minister know where they are? no. nobody back on land knows where they are. nobody in the military chain of command on land knows where the submarine is, nobody in britain knows where it is. the prime minister doesn't know. and what is the command structure between government, between those submarines, wherever they are out at sea? how does it work? that starts with the prime minister. and the prime minister would give that instruction to the military, chief of defence staff. when the message would come in on board the submarine, myself, as the weapons

engineering officer and the executive officer, would both go to the communications department and pick up the message and we would hold it aloft, holding it to each side so the whole crew could see that we have this message and then we would go and encrypt it with the commanding officer and the strategic missile officer, and we would check that that is a properly authenticated, valid message. because there's a heck of a lot at stake. yes. the whole point of the nuclear deterrent is that it's never actually fired. people say, "oh, it's a weapon system "that would never be used." it's being used at the moment. as we speak, at the moment, there is a nuclear deterrent out there. the vladimir putins of this world know that it's out there and they know that it's credible and that we could use it, if needs be. the vanguard class submarine, launched in 1993, was supposed to have a lifespan of 25 years. the oldest is now entering

its 31st year of operation. a new class of four dreadnought submarines are currently under construction, at a potential cost of £40 billion. for decades, britain has been reducing its warhead stockpile to around 225. we asked the ministry of defence to explain their nuclear strategy. they turned down our request for an on—camera interview. but the uk's policy is in publicly available documents, from 2021. well... well, this is interesting. it says, following the government's most recent defence review, they announced that the cap on the uk's nuclear stockpile would actually increase to no more than 260 warheads. and given the current global security environment, they say they'd be extending their policy of deliberate ambiguity and no longer making

public any operational details. so, britain has increased the cap on its nuclear arsenal by 35 warheads and there's even greater secrecy around them. sir lawrence freedman is a professor of war studies at king's college, london. why do you think the uk government has recently become less transparent about the nuclear stockpile? i think because when they did discuss it in �*21, i think they felt it was overinterpreted. people were making more of it than it deserved. it becomes an issue every time you look at replacing one generation with the next because it looks expensive, you know, billions and billions of pounds involved. but that's a question

of government priorities rather than sort of the basic strategic principle of whether you're a nuclear weapon power or not. has it allowed britain to, as it were, punch above its weight over the years? we're not trying to compete with the big boys. we're not trying to be a superpower. we just want to make sure that we have a credible deterrent. is there an argument that what happened with putin's threats over ukraine, which was essentially outrage across the world, has put them out of bounds? the whole morality of nuclear weapons has been shown up to be a real problem for states. the problem is that nuclear deterrent�*s worked for putin. i don't think he thinks nuclear deterrence has been a failure for him, whatever the moral outrage caused by his invasion of ukraine, because the biden administration and other nato governments said, "we understand that if we get directly involved fighting side "by side with the ukrainians,

that risks a nuclear war." and they didn't. and they made that clear right at the start. the lesson of ukraine is that deterrence can work. the british government is not alone in seeing the value of increasing their nuclear deterrent programme. according to the pentagon, china has significantly expanded its nuclear stockpile in the last year to 500 operational warheads, and it's hoping to double that to 1,000 in the next six years. in russia, president putin has recently revealed there will be two new nuclear submarines added to the russian fleet. in new mexico, the united states is also modernising and expanding its nuclear arsenal. los alamos is still one

of the jewels in the crown of the us nuclear programme. building on the history of 0ppenheimer and his team, the labs here design and develop the main element, the explosive nuclear warhead. thomas mason is the director of the los alamos lab. due to the secrecy of the work, we are meeting in the historic part of the old town. the russians and the chinese might look at what's happening here in the states, more money being spent on developing these kind of weapons and say, "this is ramping it all up. "why wouldn't we do the same?" well, in fact, they have been. for decades, the us policy was to not do anything towards developing new weapons, to not do anything that might be seen as provocative, and as it turned out, well, we sort of pursued that policy of not developing new systems. you know, russia went

and modernised their systems. in fact, they're largely complete with that modernisation, have introduced a lot of new weapons. china is in the midst of what has been characterised as strategic breakout. so, you know, ithink it was a good effort to kind of demonstrate restraint, but it appears not to have been successful. in chicago, the scientists are meeting to decide where to set the doomsday clock for 202a. the war in ukraine is entering its third year. there's new conflict in the middle east and many nuclear arsenals around the world are growing. the doomsday clock discussions are some of the most interesting that i participate in. there's really a full exchange of views. at various times, i've been on both sides of this, arguing there's reasons for optimism and hope.

i've also at other times pointed out how the risks have increased significa ntly. i think when we come into the room, it's a heavy feeling. it's a sobering feeling. there's a lot of responsibility. we know a lot of people are going to pay a lot of attention to what we say. as always, we know there'll be a lot of criticism, but that it will be used by leaders at the highest of levels, and by kids writing book reports. everybody uses the clock. what's the general feeling amongst the board, as to where we're at now? this is a very dangerous time. we have moved from a period where nuclear weapons were considered unusable and a nuclear war unwinnable. we're seeming to move into a period of time

where we're not so sure. every major country, uk included, is investing in their nuclear arsenal. but nevertheless, no nuclear weapon has been used for 70, 80 years. people would say, "isn't this scare mongering?" there's no way we're moving towards that again. and they'd be wrong. people would be wrong to say there's no way we're moving towards that again. in fact, when you look at operational plans from the russians, they militarily practise as if nuclear weapons are usable. with the major nuclear powers investing billions, global tensions are increasing, so newer players could see these weapons as the ultimate guarantee of preserving their status, even their very existence.

like north korea. leader kim jong—un regularly showcases their military might on state tv. this clip from 2022 shows the testing of a long range missile, capable of carrying a nuclear warhead. so far, the immediate threat is to their neighbours, south korea and japan. but kim jong un�*s also made a big show with his recent test of a missile capable of hitting america. i'm meeting scientist sig hecker, who's travelled the world visiting nuclear

programmes, including those of russia and north korea. hi, good morning, sig. i'mjane. pleasure to meet you. and you. thanks for coming. thank you. come on in. he's also been involved in setting the doomsday clock for many years. i've been to north korea seven times, so i've been to their nuclear facilities, i've talked to their diplomats. people sometimes look at crazy behaviour by the north koreans, they'd launch a missile or do a nuclear test. i see all much more of sort of a calculated progression. so, what do they have and what could they do with it? so, of course, north korea being what it is, it's pretty difficult to look inside. so, my best estimate at this point, they have been able to build up a pretty good stockpile of highly enriched uranium, over 1,000 kilograms by now. and if they turn all of that into weapons, they may have 50 to 60 weapons today.

that's really significant, isn't it? that's really significant. what makes it even worse is what kind of weapons do they have? they've done six nuclear tests. first one in 2006 didn't work so well, the last one so far in 2017, that worked too well. so because of that today, my general assessment is they can put a nuclear warhead on their short and medium range missiles and deliver them. so, in other words, all of south korea and most ofjapan is within reach of a north korean nuclear—tipped missile. that's really bad. you know, we should have never let them get there, but that's where they are. they have demonstrated the missile or rocket capabilities to reach all of the united states, but they still haven't done

enough nuclear test to make the warhead small enough to put into those missiles and survive essentially the ride, including the re—entry. and so they're not yet there, but that's what they're currently focused on because they want to be able to threaten the united states. they're not there yet, but they could be. they will be there eventually, because i've watched them. and every time when somebody said, "north korea can't do this," a few years later, they did it. as i think about it, the big concern is nuclear weapons use. 0k. who would nuke the united states? well, you know, possibly russia. they have the capability. possibly china. they've been improving that capability. who else? north korea. that's it. so, there are only three countries that can threaten the united states with nuclear weapons and this little—bitty north korea of 25 million people is one of those. so, another player in this whole field is iran.

iran wants nuclear weapons. where's it got to? iran today has everything in place. so, should they decide that they're going to go ahead and enrich the uranium fully up to weapons grade, they could build a bomb in six months to a year timeframe. that must be a concern. that is a great concern because that in the middle east, particularly as we see what's happening today, is really... that's very different than north korea. but iran, it's a sea of instability, the whole middle east, and so that's a great concern. but they don't have the nuclear weapons and haven't decided to go there at this point. some governments see the benefits of having nuclear weapons. but their existence has always

proved controversial with the public. since the birth of the atomic bomb, there's been protest. in the 1980s, millions took to the streets to voice their opposition to nuclear weapons. in britain, it's notjust been protest against our own warheads, but against having american ones based here, too. the greenham peace camp was home to thousands of women who fought to get the weapons removed. women protesters were doing their best to tear down the airfield's perimeter fence with their bare hands. if we get together, we can actually force the government to turn back the decision that nato made on siting cruise

missiles in europe. after a long battle, they succeeded. since 2008, there have been no american nuclear weapons in the uk. but that may be coming to an end. pentagon budget documents suggest the uk will now be one of six nato countries where us special weapons will be stationed. it could well be here, raf lakenheath in suffolk. us fighter planes that will be capable of dropping such weapons are already based here. and there are now plans by the us air force to increase accommodation for a potential nuclear mission. protestor chants it's small scale so far, but there's protest here by the campaign

for nuclear disarmament. this is all about putting the spotlight on lakenheath. we've got overwhelming evidence that the us are planning to site nuclear bombs here. the government will neither confirm nor deny, but it's absolutely clear, and we know that we've got public opinion on our side. so tell me about the �*80s. were you at greenham common? we were part of a women—only demonstration, and we came from all over the country, women who were just desperate to get rid of these terrible weapons that were going to be put on our soil. that's why i can't believe we're doing this again. we've got nothing. to do with this base. it's totally under- the united states' control. if we get trump in there next time and he may press- the button because he's got a bigger button than putin, | then, we are a target. the british government and the american government would say we need this because putin has threatened to use nuclear weapons in the context of the invasion

of ukraine. the idea that like we just have to... everybody has to nuke up, it's not... it's false. it's not working. do you know what i mean? if you look at it, nuclear weapons haven't kept the peace. we're now in this very, very dangerous situation where, you know, the doomsday clock, the atomic scientists who put that together, they're now saying the world is in a far more dangerous situation, precisely because of what's happening in ukraine. so, we feel that, like, just adding more nuclear bombs to that situation is not going to make it safer. so, that's why we're going to continue protesting here, because we don't want these nuclear weapons coming here. we want to encourage our government to say, "no, we're not going to accept them." say hey! hey! say ho! ho! nato nukes have got to go! say hey! ho! nato nukes have got to go!

there's now a global movement for a total ban on these weapons. the international campaign to abolish nuclear weapons has introduced a ground—breaking treaty. in 2017, they won the nobel peace prize. daniel hogsta is the deputy director. hi, there. hello, i'm jane. i'm daniel. welcome to ican. what is the treaty about? the treaty on the prohibition of nuclear weapons is the first treaty among governments that comprehensively prohibits nuclear weapons and all activities involved in nuclear weapons, from use to testing to modernisation. but it also contains other important provisions that are aimed at helping the communities that were impacted by the nuclear weapons test, over 2,000 of which took place since 1945 as well. so, how many nations have signed up and how many are you still trying to get on board? well, of course, we're trying to get all governments to join

the treaty, but currently we have 69 governments that have ratified, since the treaty entered into force in 2021. but there's 190—some countries in the world, so you're a long way to go. we are a long way to go. we're under no illusions about how difficult this is going to be. i mean, the nuclear weapon states are steadfastly against this treaty. what about britain? because they haven't signed up. we're a nuclear weapon state and not going to sign that treaty. the uk is one of the countries that is very much opposed to the treaty on the prohibition of nuclear weapons and is perhaps even pressuring other countries to not join the treaty. the uk always talks about nuclear weapons as its deterrent. it never refers to them as what they are, which is weapons of mass destruction as well, which put its own citizens at risk. when asked for comment, the ministry of defence said, "the uk is committed "to the long term goal of a world without nuclear weapons, "in line with our obligations under the npt.

"we firmly believe the best way to achieve "this is through gradual multilateral disarmament." the bulletin of atomic scientists will soon reveal where the hands of the doomsday clock will now be set. in 2023, we judged that the risks of catastrophe were increasing and unacceptably high and so we set the clock to 90 seconds closer to midnight. and i would judge that the risks of catastrophe still remain unacceptably high. nuclear weapons, nuclear terrorism, nuclear proliferation. right now, it'sjust going in the wrong direction.

you're investing across i the globe as if the nuclear weapons are usable for a very long time. - and these are not the | weapons that we need for the 21st century. people are scared. it doesn't feel- normal out there. it feels dangerous. and in some ways we can say it is, you're not crazy. - we should think it's. scary and dangerous. leaders are not. acting responsibly.

hello, there. there were some spells of sunshine around on saturday, but hopefully a good bit more of it to come on sunday. but also some outbreaks of rain, so a bit of a mixed picture. and beyond the weekend, it's a fairly mixed picture into next week, with low pressure systems tending to dominate. and after monday, temperatures actually tending to climb. but let's look at all of that in detail. first of all, through the overnight period, we can see we've got fairly wet weather towards parts of eastern england, in towards eastern scotland. elsewhere, a little bit drier with some clear skies. where it's clear we could see some mist and fog. and still a number of showers pushing in towards the west and the south. that wet weather, though, across parts of the north—east of england, into north—eastern scotland, with us first thing on sunday and tracking its way northwards into the northern isles. elsewhere, though, sunday is an improving picture with some decent spells of sunshine and also a few showers coming

in on a westerly wind. so by mid—afternoon, much of that heavy rain has cleared. although lingering across parts of the north—east of aberdeenshire and in towards the northern isles. elsewhere, though, avoid the showers and you will see some sunshine and temperatures up to around 10 or 11 degrees. and then through sunday evening and sunday night, we start to see largely dry and clear conditions, and that means it will be colder than overnight saturday into sunday. so this is tomorrow night, sunday night. you can see temperatures there in towns and cities but across parts of northern england and scotland, a touch of frost in the countryside. to monday, low pressure situated to the north—west, and we are dragging in some rather cool air from the north—west. so showers pushing in through parts of scotland, could well be wintry on higher ground, a number of showers in towards northern ireland as well. but elsewhere for much of england and wales, it's a dry and a fine day. it will be a chilly start, mind, a touch of frost here and there, but by the afternoon, temperatures up to 9 or 10 celsius. cooler further north.

and then from tuesday onwards we start to see a shift, because the wind is changing direction to more of a south—westerly, so we are dragging in cloudier skies and some outbreaks of rain, but the temperatures will be on the rise. on tuesday it should still be largely dry and sunny across scotland, some showers in the north, but the general trend from tuesday onwards is for cloudier conditions with outbreaks of rain. but you can see on the outlook there, the temperatures will begin to climb and certainly for some reaching the low to mid—teens. that's the forecast for now.

live from washington, this is bbc news. animalfeed and rice — gaza residents resort to desperate measures for food as the un warns of a looming famine. a missing six—year—old girl is found dead in a bombed—out car in gaza city, days

after her pleas for help drew international attention. and hungary's president resigns over her decision to pardon a man convicted of covering up child abuse. hello, i'm carl nasman. we begin in gaza, where the humanitarian crisis is deepening. residents tell the bbc they are surviving on animal feed and rice as food stocks dwindle. the un says 300,000 people living in the isolated north of gaza are largely cut off from aid. more than half the aid missions to northern gaza were denied access last month. that is according to the un's humanitarian co—ordination agency.