week, chaotic every minute. this week, three british aid worker is killed in gaza, adding to the dole. civilians should never be paying the consequences of war. figs civilians should never be paying the consequences of war.— civilians should never be paying the consequences of war. as war rages in middle east, _ consequences of war. as war rages in middle east, the _ consequences of war. as war rages in middle east, the british _ consequences of war. as war rages in middle east, the british governmentl middle east, the british government faces demands from across the spectrum to stop arms sales to israel. iii spectrum to stop arms sales to israel. ., , spectrum to stop arms sales to israel. . , , spectrum to stop arms sales to israel. . , . ., , ., israel. if it was the case that international _ israel. if it was the case that international law _ israel. if it was the case that international law has - israel. if it was the case that international law has been . israel. if it was the case that - international law has been broken it is absolutely right that offensive arms are suspended, to israel. find arms are suspended, to israel. and strikes taking _ arms are suspended, to israel. and strikes taking more lives in ukraine, this latest attack on russian missiles made in iran. the defence alliance nato touting this week for more pounds, euros and dollars to help repel russia. it is vital for us _ dollars to help repel russia. it is vital for us that _ dollars to help repel russia. it 3 vital for us that ukraine wins and vladimir putin loses. iliuiith vital for us that ukraine wins and vladimir putin loses.— vladimir putin loses. with a dangerous _ vladimir putin loses. with a dangerous diplomatic - vladimir putin loses. with a l dangerous diplomaticjigsaw, vladimir putin loses. with a - dangerous diplomaticjigsaw, we have one big question this morning, how can we deal with the rising threat

to our world? with us this morning, the prime minister's right—hand man, oliver dowden. and by the man who wants to be the next foreign secretary, labour's david lammy. and the chief of the defence alliance nato, jens stoltenberg, tells us about the growing threats to the west. we live in a more dangerous world, and we have to be prepared for crisis. morning. today we're reflecting on two important anniversaries — six months since the october 7th hamas attacks on israel, but also 75 years since the founding of the defence partnership, nato. we are living in serious times,

but i promise we will have lots of enlightening conversations too, maybe even a bit of wit with our panel this morning — ruby wax, lord mark sedwill, who was the national security advisor and cabinet secretary in charge of the civil service, and baroness amos, former labour cabinet minister under tony blair, and master of university college oxford, a very warm welcome to you all and a very warm welcome, of course, to you at home. let's check the headlines. the sunday times and the observer both lead on david cameron — the foreign secretary says the uk's backing for israel "is not unconditional" and warns of famine in gaza. a royal navy ship is being sent with aid. the sunday telegraph — former defence ministers say that the uk has failed to prepare itself for war. whilst the sunday mirror says there's unease at the rovers return, revealing the number of corrie stars

is being cut to save money. the bbc has lots of coverage of storm kathleen. and storm kathleen has brought strong winds and the warmest day of the year so far. dozens of flights have been cancelled. be safe! we will talk a lot about security, our security, and what is going on around the world. find our security, and what is going on around the world.— around the world. and mark, you sent around the world. and mark, you spent years _ around the world. and mark, you spent years working _ around the world. and mark, you spent years working in _ around the world. and mark, you spent years working in this - spent years working in this field. it feels as a citizen, it looks really bad. it feels as a citizen, it looks really bad-— it feels as a citizen, it looks reall bad. ~ ., really bad. we are in the most dangerous _ really bad. we are in the most dangerous period _ really bad. we are in the most dangerous period since - really bad. we are in the most dangerous period since the - really bad. we are in the most| dangerous period since the end of the cold war. what people are finding overwhelming is notjust that but the complexity of the international environment, war you drink in a crisis in gaza, less reported conflicts across sub—sa ha ran reported conflicts across sub—saharan africa and this hail, tensions and risks around taiwan, other issues in the middle east. —— the sahel. the biggest crisis facing

the sahel. the biggest crisis facing the international community is to handle all of that, deal with climate change, regulate ai, handle all of that, deal with climate change, regulate al, to deal with all the issues we are facing, we need the international community to be able to cooperate and we are at a time of most acute geopolitical tension. ., , , tension. our leaders will find this difficult, tension. our leaders will find this difficult. you. _ tension. our leaders will find this difficult, you, valley, _ tension. our leaders will find this difficult, you, valley, where - tension. our leaders will find this difficult, you, valley, where the l tension. our leaders will find this l difficult, you, valley, where the un humanitarian chief as well as being labour cabinet minister in 2014 when there was another crisis in gaza. david cameron is warning of mass starvation, there is a royal navy ship on the way. do you think our leaders are anywhere near grappling with this? that leaders are anywhere near grappling with this? ., , ., ., ., ., with this? that is one of the ma'or challenaes with this? that is one of the ma'or challenges we d with this? that is one of the ma'or challenges we face. i with this? that is one of the ma'or challenges we face. i i with this? that is one of the major challenges we face. i completely l challenges we face. i completely agree _ challenges we face. i completely agree with mark about the challenges facing _ agree with mark about the challenges facing us _ agree with mark about the challenges facing us and the complexity of it, i think_ facing us and the complexity of it, i think that — facing us and the complexity of it, i think that the kind of global leadership that we are seeing right now doesn't really feel as if it is ”p now doesn't really feel as if it is up to— now doesn't really feel as if it is up to tackling those crises, partly because _ up to tackling those crises, partly because there are so many

differences between the countries that are _ differences between the countries that are members of the un security council. _ that are members of the un security council. for— that are members of the un security council, for example. but it is also about— council, for example. but it is also about sheer— council, for example. but it is also about sheer scale. 2024 is very different— about sheer scale. 2024 is very different to 2014. if you look at the middle east for example, what we saw then— the middle east for example, what we saw then when you had the crisis in gaza, _ saw then when you had the crisis in gaza, of— saw then when you had the crisis in gaza, of course it was appalling at the time, — gaza, of course it was appalling at the time, but in sheer numbers turns and the _ the time, but in sheer numbers turns and the length of time it lasted, nothing — and the length of time it lasted, nothing compared to what we are dealing _ nothing compared to what we are dealing with now. that nothing compared to what we are dealing with now.— dealing with now. that is very interesting. — dealing with now. that is very interesting, the _ dealing with now. that is very interesting, the scale - dealing with now. that is very interesting, the scale of - dealing with now. that is very interesting, the scale of the l interesting, the scale of the challenges dwarfed what was happening previously. as a citizen, a lot of people watching this, watching the news day after day, what goes through your mind, do you find it overwhelming? a, lot what goes through your mind, do you find it overwhelming?— find it overwhelming? a lot of --eole find it overwhelming? a lot of peeple find — find it overwhelming? a lot of peeple find it _ find it overwhelming? a lot of people find it overwhelming. l find it overwhelming? a lot of. people find it overwhelming. you find it overwhelming? a lot of - people find it overwhelming. you can never _ people find it overwhelming. you can never come _ people find it overwhelming. you can never come this _ people find it overwhelming. you can never come this close, _

people find it overwhelming. you can never come this close, and _ people find it overwhelming. you can never come this close, and the - never come this close, and the images — never come this close, and the images growing _ never come this close, and the images growing up. _ never come this close, and the images growing up, you - never come this close, and the images growing up, you get. never come this close, and the images growing up, you get iti never come this close, and the . images growing up, you get it on television. — images growing up, you get it on television, but _ images growing up, you get it on television, but the _ images growing up, you get it on television, but the flashing - images growing up, you get it on i television, but the flashing horror, constantly. — television, but the flashing horror, constantly. the _ television, but the flashing horror, constantly, the close—ups, - television, but the flashing horror, constantly, the close—ups, they. television, but the flashing horror, i constantly, the close—ups, they are doing _ constantly, the close—ups, they are doing it _ constantly, the close—ups, they are doing it intentionally— constantly, the close—ups, they are doing it intentionally so _ constantly, the close—ups, they are doing it intentionally so that - constantly, the close—ups, they are doing it intentionally so that we - doing it intentionally so that we are riled — doing it intentionally so that we are riled up _ doing it intentionally so that we are riled up into— doing it intentionally so that we are riled up into the _ doing it intentionally so that we are riled up into the state - doing it intentionally so that we are riled up into the state of. doing it intentionally so that we i are riled up into the state of being frazzled. _ are riled up into the state of being frazzled. and — are riled up into the state of being frazzled, and once _ are riled up into the state of being frazzled, and once we _ are riled up into the state of being frazzled, and once we are - are riled up into the state of being frazzled, and once we are in- are riled up into the state of being frazzled, and once we are in this l frazzled, and once we are in this fight _ frazzled, and once we are in this fight or— frazzled, and once we are in this fight or flight _ frazzled, and once we are in this fight or flight state _ frazzled, and once we are in this fight or flight state we _ frazzled, and once we are in this fight or flight state we cannot i fight or flight state we cannot think— fight or flight state we cannot think clearly— fight or flight state we cannot think clearly any— fight or flight state we cannot think clearly any more - fight or flight state we cannot think clearly any more so - fight or flight state we cannot think clearly any more so wel fight or flight state we cannot - think clearly any more so we hear this and _ think clearly any more so we hear this and you're _ think clearly any more so we hear this and you're not _ think clearly any more so we hear this and you're not even - think clearly any more so we hearl this and you're not even listening. we just— this and you're not even listening. we just deny— this and you're not even listening. we just deny it. _ this and you're not even listening. we just deny it. and _ this and you're not even listening. we just deny it. and if— this and you're not even listening. we just deny it. and if you - this and you're not even listening. we just deny it. and if you come l we just deny it. and if you come from _ we just deny it. and if you come from that— we just deny it. and if you come from that background _ we just deny it. and if you come from that background or- we just deny it. and if you come from that background or your. from that background or your relatives _ from that background or your relatives didn't _ from that background or your relatives didn't quite - from that background or youri relatives didn't quite survive, from that background or your. relatives didn't quite survive, it is too _ relatives didn't quite survive, it is too powerful, _ relatives didn't quite survive, it is too powerful, it _ relatives didn't quite survive, it is too powerful, it is— relatives didn't quite survive, it is too powerful, it is too - is too powerful, it is too overwhelming, - is too powerful, it is too overwhelming, so - is too powerful, it is too overwhelming, so i- is too powerful, it is tool overwhelming, so i think is too powerful, it is too - overwhelming, so i think we can, is too powerful, it is too _ overwhelming, so i think we can, you can think— overwhelming, so i think we can, you can think clearer— overwhelming, so i think we can, you can think clearer about _ overwhelming, so i think we can, you can think clearer about ukraine - overwhelming, so i think we can, you can think clearer about ukraine and l can think clearer about ukraine and your family— can think clearer about ukraine and your family is — can think clearer about ukraine and your family is there, _ can think clearer about ukraine and your family is there, but _ can think clearer about ukraine and your family is there, but this - can think clearer about ukraine and your family is there, but this closel your family is there, but this close to so— your family is there, but this close to so many— your family is there, but this close to so manyjews. _ your family is there, but this close to so manyjews, it— your family is there, but this close to so manyjews, it is, _ your family is there, but this close to so manyjews, it is, i— your family is there, but this close to so manyjews, it is, i won't- to so manyjews, it is, i won't even talk to so manyjews, it is, iwon't even talk about— to so manyjews, it is, i won't even talk about it — to so manyjews, it is, i won't even talk about it because _ to so manyjews, it is, i won't even talk about it because i am - to so manyjews, it is, i won't even talk about it because i am terrifiedl talk about it because i am terrified of somebody— talk about it because i am terrified of somebody saying, _ talk about it because i am terrified of somebody saying, the - talk about it because i am terrified of somebody saying, the whole . talk about it because i am terrified . of somebody saying, the whole thing is an atrocity. — of somebody saying, the whole thing is an atrocity, what _ of somebody saying, the whole thing is an atrocity, what side _ of somebody saying, the whole thing is an atrocity, what side are - of somebody saying, the whole thing is an atrocity, what side are you - is an atrocity, what side are you won't _ is an atrocity, what side are you won't need _ is an atrocity, what side are you won't need to _ is an atrocity, what side are you won't need to be _ is an atrocity, what side are you won't need to be on? _ is an atrocity, what side are you won't need to be on?— is an atrocity, what side are you won't need to be on? that is the challenae won't need to be on? that is the challenge for _ won't need to be on? that is the challenge for our _ won't need to be on? that is the challenge for our leaders, - won't need to be on? that is the challenge for our leaders, they l won't need to be on? that is the l challenge for our leaders, they are trying to balance these competing

agendas. i trying to balance these competing arendas. ., ., _, ., , agendas. i want to come in on this oint, agendas. i want to come in on this point. even _ agendas. i want to come in on this point. even for _ agendas. i want to come in on this point, even for somebody - agendas. i want to come in on this point, even for somebody like - agendas. i want to come in on this point, even for somebody like me | agendas. i want to come in on this - point, even for somebody like me who has worked _ point, even for somebody like me who has worked in this, it is frustrating and it makes me angry. it is frustrating and it makes me angry. it is about— frustrating and it makes me angry. it is about what can you do? you sit and watch _ it is about what can you do? you sit and watch day after day people being killed. _ and watch day after day people being killed. we _ and watch day after day people being killed, we know the hostages are still there, killed, we know the hostages are stillthere, in killed, we know the hostages are still there, in the killed, we know the hostages are stillthere, in the most unimaginable conditions, and you think— unimaginable conditions, and you think to _ unimaginable conditions, and you think to yourself, what can you do to make _ think to yourself, what can you do to make a — think to yourself, what can you do to make a difference? and there is nothing _ to make a difference? and there is nothing to— to make a difference? and there is nothing to grasp onto, and itjust goes _ nothing to grasp onto, and itjust goes on — nothing to grasp onto, and itjust goes on and on. we are now on the brink— goes on and on. we are now on the brink of— goes on and on. we are now on the brink of famine in gaza. how did we -et brink of famine in gaza. how did we get here. _ brink of famine in gaza. how did we get here, is the question that keep going _ get here, is the question that keep going through my mind?— going through my mind? mark, before we talk to the — going through my mind? mark, before we talk to the politicians, _ going through my mind? mark, before we talk to the politicians, are - going through my mind? mark, before we talk to the politicians, are they - we talk to the politicians, are they powerless or do we have to say that there are things they can do, because it is easy to just feel despair and to think there is nothing you can do. we despair and to think there is nothing you can do.- despair and to think there is nothing you can do. we saw the clips at the to- nothing you can do. we saw the clips at the ten of — nothing you can do. we saw the clips at the ten of the _ nothing you can do. we saw the clips at the top of the programme, - nothing you can do. we saw the clips at the top of the programme, we - nothing you can do. we saw the clips| at the top of the programme, we saw david cameron as we know from washington, the frustration that

western leaders will add wrestling with all of this, they are struggling given the closeness with the relationship of israel and the scale of the issue, to make an impact and try to navigate their way through this. israel has three tasks in this campaign. one is, of course, to ensure that hamas can never carry out an attack like that again, any government in any country would have to do that after an atrocity of that scale, they have to extricate hostages without worsening the humanitarian catastrophe, and they are failing to notice that once and firth basin in western capitals is how to try to navigate all of that —— the frustrations. i how to try to navigate all of that -- the frustrations.— -- the frustrations. i know that david cameron _ -- the frustrations. i know that david cameron is _ -- the frustrations. i know that david cameron is trying - -- the frustrations. i know that david cameron is trying to - -- the frustrations. i know that david cameron is trying to turn | -- the frustrations. i know that - david cameron is trying to turn the pages _ david cameron is trying to turn the pages but — david cameron is trying to turn the pages but who's— david cameron is trying to turn the pages but who's doing _ david cameron is trying to turn the | pages but who's doing negotiations and who— pages but who's doing negotiations and who is— pages but who's doing negotiations and who is going _ pages but who's doing negotiations and who is going to— pages but who's doing negotiations and who is going to run— pages but who's doing negotiations and who is going to run israel? - pages but who's doing negotiations. and who is going to run israel? what is the _ and who is going to run israel? what is the ideal. — and who is going to run israel? what is the ideal. i— and who is going to run israel? what is the ideal, i don't— and who is going to run israel? what is the ideal, idon't know— and who is going to run israel? what is the ideal, i don't know what - is the ideal, i don't know what the point _ is the ideal, i don't know what the point is. _ is the ideal, idon't know what the point is. except— is the ideal, i don't know what the point is, except tearing _ is the ideal, idon't know what the point is, except tearing your- is the ideal, i don't know what the point is, except tearing your hair. point is, except tearing your hair out. _

point is, except tearing your hair out. . . point is, except tearing your hair out. ., , ., , out. that is an interesting point, and valerie _ out. that is an interesting point, and valerie were _ out. that is an interesting point, and valerie were suggesting - out. that is an interesting point, | and valerie were suggesting that out. that is an interesting point, - and valerie were suggesting that the quality of leadership we have right now perhaps isn't up to the challenge. let's talk to some of them now. we will talk about what is happening ukraine but will begin with dreadful in gaza. —— dreadful events in gaza. yesterday the israeli military recovered the body of elad katzir, one of the hostages snatched by hamas six months ago when more than a thousand people were killed. nearly 130 people taken hostage are still unaccounted for. since then, more than 33,000 people have been killed in gaza — according to hamas, who the uk government says is a terrorist group. we are seeing terrible images day after day on our tv screens. the uk and us say israel has the right to defend itself, but there's been increasing alarm at its tactics. the deaths last week of seven aid workers, including three brits, in israeli air strikes has seemingly changed the dynamics. president biden had warned israel it must do more to address

the suffering of civilians or lose support. the attacks upped the pressure on the uk government to reveal more about its legal advice on how israel is waging this war and to stop selling arms to the country. the deputy prime minister, oliver dowden, is here. always good to have you with us. welcome. let's start with the legal questions. under international law, aid workers must be protected. the united nations says almost 200 have been killed in gaza. do you think israel is acting within the law in that regard? figs israel is acting within the law in that regard?— israel is acting within the law in that retard? a ., ,, .., that regard? as you will appreciate, laura, i that regard? as you will appreciate, laura. i am — that regard? as you will appreciate, laura. lam not _ that regard? as you will appreciate, laura, i am not going _ that regard? as you will appreciate, laura, i am not going to _ that regard? as you will appreciate, laura, i am not going to pre-empt,| laura, i am not going to pre—empt, or if it is the case that the government is not publishing legal advice in respect of international humanitarian law. the starting point for all of this, you said at the top, it is quite easy to forget, six months ago israel was subject to the most appalling attack, we know all

the details, but israel is still facing this existential threat from hamas. it is a nation in trauma, and it is prosecuting a legitimate war of self—defence. in the conduct of that war, we are holding israel to very high standards. higher standards than we would have of the terrorist organisation, hamas. in the context of that we are engaging with israel on several issues. this point about the conflicting, to make sure that they are not targeting aid workers and they have a process for doing that. we have had robust conversations, the prime minister has had conversations with prime minister netanyahu, the foreign secretary david cameron has had these conversations, and we are trying to get aid into gaza to try and alleviate human suffering, the people of gaza have suffered under hamas and they are suffering now, we have made announcements about opening that aid corridor so we are engaging in a wide range of issues

with israel in the context of a country that is fighting to defend itself in its biggest challenge since its foundation. brute itself in its biggest challenge since its foundation. we have made those points — since its foundation. we have made those points already, _ since its foundation. we have made those points already, but _ since its foundation. we have made those points already, but on - since its foundation. we have made those points already, but on this i those points already, but on this very important question, do you believe that israel is acting within the law? i believe that israel is acting within the law? ~ ., , ., , the law? i think that israel is conducting — the law? i think that israel is conducting a _ the law? i think that israel is conducting a legitimate - the law? i think that israel is - conducting a legitimate campaign and it is doing so in a very, very difficult environment where it is facing hamas, a terrorist organisation that hides amongst civilian population. in terms of the united kingdom government assessment of that, the way that we undertake this, and we are required by law, to periodically review compliance with arms export controls, and that happens to all nations. the way that we do that is for the foreign secretary to take advice. he then advises the business secretary about whether we should be able to continue arms exports. the foreign

secretary's advice in respect of that has not changed. currently you believe israel _ that has not changed. currently you believe israel is _ that has not changed. currently you believe israel is acting _ that has not changed. currently you believe israel is acting within - that has not changed. currently you believe israel is acting within the i believe israel is acting within the law, you say the advice has not changed so it is your belief israel is acting within international law. the position of the government is that we do not publish... the point is, one essentially gets to that point, the key thing is, is it legitimate, can we lawfully sell arms to israel, and yes that is the case and that is the basis, on that basis, the foreign secretary has given advice to the business secretary... has given advice to the business secretary- - -_ given advice to the business secretary... given advice to the business secreta a , , ., ., secretary... as things stand, i want to emphasise _ secretary... as things stand, i want to emphasise this _ secretary... as things stand, i want to emphasise this for _ secretary... as things stand, i want to emphasise this for our _ secretary... as things stand, i want to emphasise this for our viewers, i to emphasise this for our viewers, whether or not you publish the advice is a row about the process, whether you believe right now israel is acting within the law is a question of principle, you have said yes as things stand you believe

israel is acting within the law. except i want to ask this question. the chair of the foreign affairs select committee... we the chair of the foreign affairs select committee. . ._ the chair of the foreign affairs select committee... we need be absolutely _ select committee... we need be absolutely clear _ select committee... we need be absolutely clear about _ select committee... we need be absolutely clear about this. - select committee... we need be| absolutely clear about this. israel is legitimately able to receive arms exports. of course we have concerns about the way in which israel is conducting itself. that is why we have raised issues in relation to aid, and getting more aid in, we have raised issues in relation to the conflicting, but in the conflict of a legitimate conflict that israel is pursuing. of a legitimate conflict that israel is pursuing-— is pursuing. alyssa kearns, a prominent — is pursuing. alyssa kearns, a prominent conservative - is pursuing. alyssa kearns, a prominent conservative mp, | is pursuing. alyssa kearns, a - prominent conservative mp, said more than three weeks ago, that the government had received advice which said that israel had broken international humanitarian law but the government has not announced it. is that true?

iam going i am going to sound pedantic. we are not publishing the legal advice, a precedent from previous governments. i'm cautious about getting into details. it is the case we have concerns we have raised with israel and remember this is multifaceted, areas about the way in which they areas about the way in which they are conducting the campaign, areas about the way in which aid has delivered. i about the way in which aid has delivered-— about the way in which aid has delivered. ., ., ., . ., delivered. i am asking you a clear ruestion. delivered. i am asking you a clear question- it _ delivered. i am asking you a clear question. it feeds _ delivered. i am asking you a clear question. it feeds through - delivered. i am asking you a clear question. it feeds through from i delivered. i am asking you a clear i question. it feeds through from the forei . n question. it feeds through from the foreign secretary... _ question. it feeds through from the foreign secretary... but _ question. it feeds through from the foreign secretary... but i _ question. it feeds through from the foreign secretary... but i am - question. it feeds through from the | foreign secretary... but i am asking ou. .. foreign secretary... but i am asking you- -- can — foreign secretary... but i am asking you- -- can we _ foreign secretary... but i am asking you... can we legitimately _ foreign secretary... but i am asking you... can we legitimately export i you... can we legitimately export arms? i you... can we legitimately export arms? i am _ you... can we legitimately export arms? i am asking _ you... can we legitimately export arms? i am asking you _ you... can we legitimately export arms? i am asking you a - you. .. can we legitimately export arms? i am asking you a clear- arms? i am asking you a clear question _ arms? i am asking you a clear question here, _ arms? i am asking you a clear question here, i _ arms? i am asking you a clear question here, i am _ arms? i am asking you a clear question here, i am not - arms? i am asking you a clear| question here, i am not asking whether you will publish the legal advice, we know you will not publish the legal advice, a long—standing convention. i am asking you if it is true that the government's legal advice that they have received says that israel has broken international humanitarian law. we that israel has broken international humanitarian law.— humanitarian law. we have specific concerns about _ humanitarian law. we have specific concerns about different _ humanitarian law. we have specific concerns about different areas - humanitarian law. we have specific concerns about different areas of. concerns about different areas of israel's conduct, we are raising

those concerns with israel. by the way, so important to remember this, we have come from the horrors of six months ago to holding israel to extraordinary high standards, it is right we do so and raise concerns, saying, look, what you are doing in respect of not getting aid in, in respect of not getting aid in, in respect of not getting aid in, in respect of your targeting, it raises concerns for us, we need you to engage. eitherway, as concerns for us, we need you to engage. either way, as well has engaged with those issues, we have two crossings opened, we want to get the aid to continue to flow, we are getting progress in terms of understanding what happened with the horrific attack and for example we have seen two officers suspended. the kind of relish with which people are rushing towards this question without understanding the broader context, it is right to raise individual issues, but you have to see it in the wider context, the challenge israel faces. challenge israelfaces. interesting ou sa

challenge israelfaces. interesting you say that. _ challenge israelfaces. interesting you say that. you _ challenge israelfaces. interesting you say that, you have _ challenge israelfaces. interesting you say that, you have said - challenge israelfaces. interesting you say that, you have said twice | you say that, you have said twice israel is being held to extremely high standards and you have just said you said you think some people are relishing putting as well on the spot over whether they are acting legally, who do you think is relishing that? do you think people are asking questions based on what they see as appalling suffering in gaza? who you do you think is relishing? i gaza? who you do you think is relishing?— relishing? i think this is an important _ relishing? i think this is an important point _ relishing? i think this is an important point which - relishing? i think this is an important point which is i relishing? i think this is an l important point which is that relishing? i think this is an i important point which is that i think it is all too easy for the world to forget the horrors that israel faced and rushed back to attacking israel and holding israel to standards that we wouldn't remotely hold other countries too. it is right we hold as well to those... �* it is right we hold as well to those- - -_ it is right we hold as well to those- - -— it is right we hold as well to i those- - -— no. those... are they too high? no, because those. .. are they too high? no, because israel— those... are they too high? no, because israel is _ those... are they too high? no, because israel is a _ those... are they too high? no, because israel is a democratic. because israel is a democratic country, it is a rules —based country, it is a rules —based country, it is part of our broader western family of nations. we should expect the high standards of it.

what i would say is in response to legitimate concerns, and i am not pulling punches about my concerns about the way in which israel has conducted some of this conflict, they have responded to that, that is they have responded to that, that is the way in which i think the uk government should use its relationship to address broader concerns, not least the humanitarian suffering we are seeing in gaza. band suffering we are seeing in gaza. and has israel responded enough? interesting your colleague david cameron has said very clearly this morning uk support is not unconditional, president biden was my attitude has shifted somewhat in recent weeks, have they responded enough? —— president biden's attitude. enough? -- president biden's attitude. ~ ., , ,, attitude. welcome initial steps, very welcome — attitude. welcome initial steps, very welcome the _ attitude. welcome initial steps, very welcome the fact - attitude. welcome initial steps, very welcome the fact they i attitude. welcome initial steps, | very welcome the fact they have opened up new crossings. but we would like to have as the reassurance that aid continues to flow, notjust enough to open them, the aid has to flow through. we have had initial assurances about the way in which they are deconflicting, we

want to see it turn into practice. that is the kind of mature relationship we can have with israel in the context of this conflict. band in the context of this conflict. and in the context of this conflict. and in the context of this conflict. and in the context _ in the context of this conflict. and in the context of— in the context of this conflict. and in the context of this conflict. and in the context of this conflict, i would like to ask a very specific question to get this on the record, if the uk government receives legal advice that says israel is in breach of international law, will arms sales stop?— of international law, will arms salessto? ., , sales stop? we will of course act in accordance — sales stop? we will of course act in accordance with _ sales stop? we will of course act in accordance with our— sales stop? we will of course act in accordance with our obligations i accordance with our obligations under law in respect of arms sales in the way that works is that is legal advice, the foreign secretary gives advice to the business secretary, if it is the case that we cannot lawfully in accordance... we will not supply the arms. it is precisely the position for example evenin precisely the position for example even in respect of the us or any other country around the world. we rightly hold ourselves to a high standard and we hold the country to whom we export arms to a high

standard and i think that is what we would expect. it contrasts so strongly in our adherence to very high values, with the appalling atrocities that have been committed by terrorist organisations against israel. israel is not perfect, long way from it, difficult conflict, we are holding to high standards. it is also a conflict _ are holding to high standards. it is also a conflictjust are holding to high standards. it is also a conflict just one are holding to high standards. it is also a conflictjust one of are holding to high standards. it is also a conflict just one of many also a conflictjust one of many around the world and one of your former colleagues, two, recent former colleagues, two, recent former defence secretary ben wallace and very resigned defence minister have both said in hard terms this morning in one of the newspapers that the uk is not prepared enough to deal with the challenges and potential conflicts we face, are they wrong?— potential conflicts we face, are the wronu? , ~ , ., they wrong? yes, i think they are wronu. they wrong? yes, i think they are wrong- they _ they wrong? yes, i think they are wrong- they are _ they wrong? yes, i think they are wrong. they are absolutely i they wrong? yes, i think they are wrong. they are absolutely rightl they wrong? yes, i think they are i wrong. they are absolutely right and indeed some of your panellists including mark sedwill made this point, we are in a more hostile situation and we have been certain since the end of the cold war, possibly even before that, and we

have seen threats rise across a range of... notjust conventional armed forces, cybersecurity and indeed recent incidents in respect of that, economic security, the prime minister has established an economic security committee of the national security council which i chair. we are taking action, we have set up a national cybersecurity centre. i take decisions, dozens, daily about investment to protect our economic security. this is going to get more dangerous as time goes on. we see a combination of hostile states, not least russia, iran, north korea, china. we need to take action across those areas. of course, there is always more to do, but i believe we are making good progress against rising threats. interesting you link those countries together, we will hear more on that chain of danger, if you like, from the nato chiefjens stoltenberg. just before we close, i want a raise something different with you and important. ourviewers something different with you and important. our viewers might

remember you were with us in november, the morning the mail on sunday published a story about a rape allegation against a conservative mp being covered up, you said you did not recognise the notion of a cover—up taking place while you are chair of the party. a report in the guardian in february suggested you had been aware of allegations but a source close to you denied it. i have seen evidence suggesting you and two former party chairman did know about the allegations, did you know? ida. chairman did know about the allegations, did you know? no, i would challenge _ allegations, did you know? no, i would challenge anyone - allegations, did you know? iirr, i would challenge anyone saying that to make that public. you would challenge anyone saying that to make that public.— would challenge anyone saying that to make that public. you are adamant ou did not to make that public. you are adamant you did not know? _ to make that public. you are adamant you did not know? at _ to make that public. you are adamant you did not know? at the _ to make that public. you are adamant you did not know? at the time... i i you did not know? at the time... i have been — you did not know? at the time... i have been always _ you did not know? at the time. .. i have been always clear— you did not know? at the time... i have been always clear that i you did not know? at the time... i have been always clear that any i have been always clear that any allegations of rape or sexual misconduct should be investigated by the police. we have absolutely zero tolerance for that. that the police. we have absolutely zero tolerance for that.— tolerance for that. at the time, you said ou tolerance for that. at the time, you said you did — tolerance for that. at the time, you said you did not _ tolerance for that. at the time, you said you did not recognise - tolerance for that. at the time, you said you did not recognise the i said you did not recognise the notion of a cover—up. i'm asking you a different question today, you are saying you have no knowledge of the

allegations? i saying you have no knowledge of the alleaations? ., ., allegations? i have said that repeatedly _ allegations? i have said that repeatedly and _ allegations? i have said that repeatedly and i _ allegations? i have said that repeatedly and i would i allegations? i have said that i repeatedly and i would challenge anyone that says that is the case to bring forward the evidence of that. 0k, bring forward the evidence of that. ok, oliver dowden, thank you for being with us, always great to have you in the studio. thank you for your time. the deputy prime minister, oliver dowden. on this big issue of security around the world, lots of you have been getting in touch about arms sales from the uk touch about arms sales from the uk to israel. peter says, "arms to israel must continue! "if we stopped giving arms to israel, it would send a message "to all terrorists that democratic countries are on the "ready to capitulate." rodney disagrees, "destroying homes and hospitals and not allowing aid support in just confirms netanyahu's intentions. "the uk and usa should stop giving all arms to israel." david says, "no amount of finger—wagging is going to work without a cessation in the supply of weaponry. "any words from the un or other international courts "are completely toothless."

a lively debate about this already. glynne thinks, "ok, stop arms to israel. "consequence — all the radical islamist armed groups "will have a field day." a flavour of your views and the divisions on the subject. the shadow foreign secretary david lammy is with us. thank you for coming in. on this very fraught issue, there are pretty different views on the labour party, the leader of scottish labour and the mayor of london both now say that government should immediately halt sales of arms to israel, are they wrong? six. halt sales of arms to israel, are they wrong?— halt sales of arms to israel, are the wronu? ,, ., , , . they wrong? six months since the 7th of october, they wrong? six months since the 7th of october. i — they wrong? six months since the 7th of october, i have _ they wrong? six months since the 7th of october, i have got _ they wrong? six months since the 7th of october, i have got to _ they wrong? six months since the 7th of october, i have got to begin i they wrong? six months since the 7th of october, i have got to begin by i of october, i have got to begin by recognising the hostages that are still in gaza, many people on the streets of israel last night protesting that they are still there and the fat hamas still have them. of course elad katzir who we now

know as dipesh mackay and the fact that hamas still have them. —— and we now know elad katzir has died. for those reasons, i do have very real concerns that our obligations in relation to international humanitarian law and the clear risk that our export and licensing regime requires government lawyers to assess and ministers to act as a consequence might have been breached. forthose consequence might have been breached. for those reasons, consequence might have been breached. forthose reasons, i consequence might have been breached. for those reasons, iam being very, very clear, publish the advice. government says they cannot publish the advice. they published the advice bombing the houthis. if

you cannot publish it, at least come to the house of commons and take questions. the to the house of commons and take ruestions. ., , ., ., ., , questions. the house of commons has been in recess. — questions. the house of commons has been in recess, so _ questions. the house of commons has been in recess, so that _ questions. the house of commons has been in recess, so that would - questions. the house of commons has been in recess, so that would not i been in recess, so that would not have been the case in the last couple of weeks. on the issue, however, and we will contact legal advice and a second, some of your colleagues say arms sales should be stopped now. they believe, as do many lawyers and academics and many viewers watching, dating, we have seen enough, you don't need to wait for the legal advice. why are people like sadiq khan wrong?— for the legal advice. why are people like sadiq khan wrong? because they are concerned — like sadiq khan wrong? because they are concerned like _ like sadiq khan wrong? because they are concerned like us, _ like sadiq khan wrong? because they are concerned like us, like _ like sadiq khan wrong? because they are concerned like us, like i- like sadiq khan wrong? because they are concerned like us, like i am, i are concerned like us, like i am, they have very real doubts, the former head of m16 has very real doubts, four of our supreme court judges have very real doubts, they look at the scenes, 33,000 people dead, many of them women and children, of course they have concerns about proportionality. but the only person who can answer that is david cameron because he is the only person who has received advice, apparently he said he was about to

receive advice at the beginning of march, it is weeks later he was dodging questions from journalists this week. come to the bar of the house of commons when we return, answer the questions, but publish a summary of advice because it is hugely important that the uk is not complicit at all in a breach of international humanitarian law. oliver dowden said the advice had not changed. if he says the advice has not changed, isn't that good enough for you? i has not changed, isn't that good enough for you?— has not changed, isn't that good enough for you? i remain concerned until i enough for you? i remain concerned until i have — enough for you? i remain concerned until i have seen _ enough for you? i remain concerned until i have seen that _ enough for you? i remain concerned until i have seen that advice. - enough for you? i remain concerned until i have seen that advice. and i i until i have seen that advice. and i say that not just as a until i have seen that advice. and i say that notjust as a member of until i have seen that advice. and i say that not just as a member of the opposition or a labour mp, say that not just as a member of the opposition ora labour mp, but because i don't want to be complicit in any loss of life and because i value the labour party, surely we must still value life equally, whichever side of this awful conflict it is.— whichever side of this awful conflict it is. you clearly are sa in: conflict it is. you clearly are saying you _ conflict it is. you clearly are saying you want _ conflict it is. you clearly are saying you want to - conflict it is. you clearly are saying you want to see i conflict it is. you clearly are saying you want to see the l conflict it is. you clearly are i saying you want to see the legal advice to make that decision, even though, you are a lawyer yourself, you want to be the foreign

secretary, some of our viewers might think you can come to your own conclusion, you want to wait to see the advice, if labour wins the election, as a point of principle, would always publish legal advice on contentious issues if asked to do so? i contentious issues if asked to do so? ~' ., , , , contentious issues if asked to do so? ~ ., , , , ., contentious issues if asked to do so? «a, ,, ,., ., so? i think on issues of war, actually. _ so? i think on issues of war, actually. a — so? i think on issues of war, actually, a summary - so? i think on issues of war, actually, a summary of- so? i think on issues of war, actually, a summary of the l so? i think on issues of war, - actually, a summary of the advice... that is a different thing, a summary is not the full advice, which is it? i said as the government did a few weeks ago when british troops were involved in bombing the houthis because of their actions on the red sea, they published a summary of that advice. i remember in the commons previous conflicts in libya and syria, again, many, many parliamentarians were briefed on privy council terms as a result... hang on, i want to be really clear. of hang on, i want to be really clear. of course in government we would act as we are saying in a position. by, as we are saying in a position. a labour government would always publish legal advice on issues of

war? i publish legal advice on issues of war? .. war? i sat in the circumstances... i cannot foresee _ war? i sat in the circumstances... i cannot foresee every _ war? i sat in the circumstances... i cannot foresee every circumstance | cannot foresee every circumstance for the next decade. i do believe on this issue where there is so much public discussion and debate, and quite rightly british citizens are asking, i hope we are not complicit in that? you should publish a summary of that advice. by, in that? you should publish a summary of that advice. a summary, not the full — summary of that advice. a summary, not the full legal _ summary of that advice. a summary, not the full legal advice, _ summary of that advice. a summary, not the full legal advice, forgive i not the full legal advice, forgive me if it sounds like i am dancing on the hair of the ten, important difference, if that government says the advice from lawyers will be published in full, a completely different thing to saying, yes, here is a summary of the advice? i haven't got the advice. i do recognise there may be circumstances where not all of the advice can be published, there will be things of sensitivity in relation to how we obtain the advice, there may be commercial sensitivity, but a summary of the advice that pertains to exporter and licensing, i think

that can be published and should be published. david cameron should come to the bar of the house of commons and answer questions. the procedure committee asked him to do so and he has not and that is why in serious times like that, we have a war in ukraine the in middle east, you should not have a foreign secretary in the house of lords are not able to receive questions from members of parliament. i to receive questions from members of parliament. ., ., ., , ., parliament. 1 want to ask you something — parliament. 1 want to ask you something else. _ parliament. 1 want to ask you something else. back - parliament. 1 want to ask you something else. back in i parliament. i want to ask you something else. back in the l parliament. i want to ask you - something else. back in the day, the labour government in the early 2000 is found itself in a similar position under enormous pressure to publish legal advice over the iraq war and they refused for a long time. you yourself as a young mp voted against the legal advice being published. isn't that a double standard you are trying to get the conservatives to do? you said as a young mp, i am not so young any more, this is 2a years later. and one learns that experience. let mejust

later. and one learns that experience. let me just say this, laura. margaret thatcher suspended sales of arms to israel. tony blair suspended sales of arms to israel. gordon brown suspended sales of arms to israel. all during previous conflicts. this has been done before. this is a very serious issue. it has now gone on for six months, on issues of proportionality, caution and distinction there are real concerns not just from distinction there are real concerns notjust from judges and the intelligence community but from the broader public and for that reason let us be sure that we are not in breach of international law. the war in ira: was breach of international law. the war in iraq was also _ breach of international law. the war in iraq was also a _ breach of international law. the war in iraq was also a nick— breach of international law. the war in iraq was also a nick serious - in iraq was also a nick serious situation which many viewers and many members of the public at usually strong views about, at the time, and at the time he voted against legal advice been published when labour was in government. isn't that a double standard that you are calling on the conservatives to do it, when it suits you? you

calling on the conservatives to do it, when it suits you?— it, when it suits you? you are askin: it, when it suits you? you are asking me — it, when it suits you? you are asking me about _ it, when it suits you? you are asking me about something l it, when it suits you? you are i asking me about something that happened over 20 years ago. i am sitting here, drawing on that experience and reflecting on six months on in the conflict in which 33,000 have lost their lives. it is the now that matters, and for all those reasons, publish that advice but at least come to the bar of the house of commons and take questions from elected members of parliament about issues that their constituents feel very strongly about. we about issues that their constituents feel very strongly about.— feel very strongly about. we have been speaking — feel very strongly about. we have been speaking about _ feel very strongly about. we have | been speaking about transparency feel very strongly about. we have - been speaking about transparency and legal advice, the newspapers have new allegations about your colleague, the labour deputy leader, angela rayner, and the sale of her home some years ago, whether the proper tax was paid. this has been rumbling along for a while. she has refused to publish the advice she said she was given and says she did nothing wrong, why doesn't she just publish it, if he is so sure that she did nothing wrong and clear all of this up? she did nothing wrong and clear all of this u - ? , ., of this up? there is nothing new in this story this _

of this up? there is nothing new in this story this morning. _ of this up? there is nothing new in this story this morning. let - of this up? there is nothing new in this story this morning. let me - of this up? there is nothing new in i this story this morning. let me make the point. angela rayner has a blended family, effectively, like millions of people in britain. she did spend time in her husband's home and they would have balanced childcare across two homes. that is perfectly understandable. she took appropriate accountancy advice, she took appropriate legal advice, she has not broken any rules or laws, this is a nonstory. why is it in the news? because we have the may election shortly, we want to avoid talking about the fact that we have the highest tax burden in this country, that people are £870 worse off as a result of this tory chaos, thatis off as a result of this tory chaos, that is why we are talking about angela rayner, she has a blended family, like lots of other pool and a balanced childcare across different places.— a balanced childcare across different places. some of your critics might — different places. some of your critics might say _ different places. some of your critics might say that - different places. some of your critics might say that people l different places. some of your. critics might say that people are talking about it because you will not publish the full advice and if there is nothing to see that she

could move on. we there is nothing to see that she could move on.— there is nothing to see that she could move on. ~ ., ., ., ., , could move on. we have not got any kind of constitutional _ could move on. we have not got any kind of constitutional advice - could move on. we have not got any kind of constitutional advice i'm - kind of constitutional advice i'm aware of other than for prime ministers and leaders of the opposition but they publish tax affairs, that is the situation, why do we [and on this northern woman who had an arrangement with her husband, a blended family, why do we focus on her, and say that she should be the exception? she shouldn't be. she has not broken any rules. this is because of the may elections and the tories not wanting to concentrate on their actions, and rising inflation, cost of living, rising inflation, cost of living, rising utility bills, those are the issues we should be focused on, and those are the issues they want us to obscure. ., , ., ~ , ., those are the issues they want us to obscure. ., , ., ~ _, ., obscure. david lammy, thank you for cominu in, obscure. david lammy, thank you for coming in. always— obscure. david lammy, thank you for coming in, always great _ obscure. david lammy, thank you for coming in, always great to _ obscure. david lammy, thank you for coming in, always great to have - obscure. david lammy, thank you for coming in, always great to have you | coming in, always great to have you in the studio. what do you think? let us know at kuenssberg@bbc.co.uk or you can follow us on x or instagram — @bbclaurak.

and lots of you have been doing this — sign up to our newsletter at bbc. co. uk/lauraknewsletter. a quick reminder that, in a few minutes, we'll hear from the boss of nate and we'll talk about ukraine, but first... back to our panel and their views on what we have heard this morning from our politicians. valerie, as somebody who has sat in that chair and been a frontbencher, cabinet minister, what did you make of what oliver dowden and david lammy had to say? i oliver dowden and david lammy had to sa ? ., ., _, oliver dowden and david lammy had to sa ? ., ., ., oliver dowden and david lammy had to sa? ., ., say? i want to come back on two oints say? i want to come back on two points oliver _ say? i want to come back on two points oliver dowden _ say? i want to come back on two points oliver dowden may, - say? i want to come back on two points oliver dowden may, one i say? i want to come back on two | points oliver dowden may, one in relation to the publication of legal advice. the public want to see legal advice. the public want to see legal advice because they have lost confidence in what the government is saying, we have seen that in the past. of course you want to keep that private, and confidential, but the reality is that this is about trust and confidence, not about the legal advice per se. and they're happy lots of examples where

governments have been forced to publish that legal advice. i would say publish it and get it out of the way. and there have been lots of examples where governments have been forced to publish that legal advice. i would say publish it and get it out of the way. you were part of a government that watered publish legal advice. government that watered publish legaladvice. in government that watered publish legal advice. in the end we have you published. because the public had lost trust and confidence in thus it on iraq. and this is the situation we are living in now. get over it and publish it, rather than keep hanging on and dragging back is what i would say. hanging on and dragging back is what i would sa . a ~ hanging on and dragging back is what i would sa. ~ .,, ., hanging on and dragging back is what iwould sa. ~ ., ., hanging on and dragging back is what iwouldsa. ~ ., i would say. mark, as a former boss ofthe i would say. mark, as a former boss of the civil— i would say. mark, as a former boss of the civil service _ i would say. mark, as a former boss of the civil service does _ i would say. mark, as a former boss of the civil service does that - i would say. mark, as a former boss of the civil service does that bring l of the civil service does that bring you out in hives, putting that stuff into the public domain, or have things change? in into the public domain, or have things change?— things change? in this case we should not _ things change? in this case we should not obsessed _ things change? in this case we should not obsessed with - things change? in this case we should not obsessed with the l should not obsessed with the process _ should not obsessed with the process. what is important is whether— process. what is important is whether it is the full legal advice the summary as david lammy says, whether_ the summary as david lammy says, whether it _ the summary as david lammy says, whether it is — the summary as david lammy says, whether it is a minister in parliament explaining the legal basis _ parliament explaining the legal basis the decisions they are making, we have _ basis the decisions they are making, we have to _ basis the decisions they are making, we have to focus on the substance. we have _ we have to focus on the substance. we have a — we have to focus on the substance. we have a rigorous arms control,

arms _ we have a rigorous arms control, arms export control regime in this countrx _ arms export control regime in this countrx it— arms export control regime in this countrx it is— arms export control regime in this country. it is complex but what it really _ country. it is complex but what it really boils — country. it is complex but what it really boils down to is that it is unlawful— really boils down to is that it is unlawful in british law to export arms_ unlawful in british law to export arms that — unlawful in british law to export arms that will be used in breach of international law. that is fundamentally what people need to understand is, as the government assessment that they are being used in compliance with or in breach of international law.— in compliance with or in breach of international law. right now, do you think that the _ international law. right now, do you think that the government _ international law. right now, do you think that the government is - international law. right now, do you think that the government is doing l think that the government is doing the right thing, do you think? i the right thing, do you think? i find it difficult to judge the right thing, do you think? i find it difficult tojudge because i don't _ find it difficult tojudge because i don't have all of the facts that the government have at their fingertips which _ government have at their fingertips which is _ government have at their fingertips which is why it is important that they— which is why it is important that they set— which is why it is important that they set out the basis on which they are making — they set out the basis on which they are making thatjudgment. we have seen the _ are making thatjudgment. we have seen the last few days some distinguished lawyers including two former_ distinguished lawyers including two former supreme court justices who said they— former supreme court justices who said they believe that legal threshold has been reached. we have an article _ threshold has been reached. we have an article from the former attorney general_ an article from the former attorney general saying that it hasn't. that needs— general saying that it hasn't. that needs to — general saying that it hasn't. that needs to be clarified. it isn'tjust about— needs to be clarified. it isn'tjust about the — needs to be clarified. it isn'tjust about the legal question. of course there _ about the legal question. of course there is— about the legal question. of course there is that legal question and as

both politician said, if it is unlawful, then the arm sales must stop _ unlawful, then the arm sales must stop a— unlawful, then the arm sales must stop. a separate question is even if it is lawful. — stop. a separate question is even if it is lawful, is it right to continue _ it is lawful, is it right to continue these arms sales, can they be used _ continue these arms sales, can they be used to— continue these arms sales, can they be used to exert some kind of leverage — be used to exert some kind of leverage over israel about the way they are _ leverage over israel about the way they are conducting this campaign, and david — they are conducting this campaign, and david cameron talks about support— and david cameron talks about support being not unconditional, hints _ support being not unconditional, hints that— support being not unconditional, hints that he is thinking in those terms. — hints that he is thinking in those terms. and _ hints that he is thinking in those terms, and those are the questions i would _ terms, and those are the questions i would he _ terms, and those are the questions i would be asking if i was still doing my old _ would be asking if i was still doing my old job. would be asking if i was still doing m old 'ob. ., . would be asking if i was still doing my old job-— would be asking if i was still doing m old'ob. ., ., ., ., my old 'ob. you are saying, one of the my old job. you are saying, one of the “obs my old job. you are saying, one of the jobs that _ my old job. you are saying, one of the jobs that you _ my old job. you are saying, one of the jobs that you now _ my old job. you are saying, one of the jobs that you now do _ my old job. you are saying, one of the jobs that you now do is - my old job. you are saying, one of the jobs that you now do is be - the jobs that you now do is be on the jobs that you now do is be on the boards of bae, you think i have come for politicians to take different decisions? shall come for politicians to take different decisions?- come for politicians to take different decisions? all of the defence companies _ different decisions? all of the defence companies comply i different decisions? all of the l defence companies comply with different decisions? all of the - defence companies comply with the law and _ defence companies comply with the law and these are decisions for the government whether sales can continue. _ government whether sales can continue, bae does not sell directly to israel. _ continue, bae does not sell directly to israel. it— continue, bae does not sell directly to israel, it is part of a consortium led by an american company _ consortium led by an american company. but these are policy decisions _ company. but these are policy decisions for government. they need to get—

decisions for government. they need to get the _ decisions for government. they need to get the legal advice clear, explained it clearly in parliament, whether— explained it clearly in parliament, whether publishing the full advice or the _ whether publishing the full advice or the summary or whatever but they also need _ or the summary or whatever but they also need to— or the summary or whatever but they also need to explain the policy issue — also need to explain the policy issue which is why they are taking the position they are taking, and is there _ the position they are taking, and is there any— the position they are taking, and is there any leverage that can be exercised _ there any leverage that can be exercised to try and get israel to conduct — exercised to try and get israel to conduct the campaign in a way that minimises— conduct the campaign in a way that minimises the humanitarian catastrophe we are seeing. perhaps, rub , this catastrophe we are seeing. perhaps, ruby. this legal— catastrophe we are seeing. perhaps, ruby, this legal advice _ catastrophe we are seeing. perhaps, ruby, this legal advice is _ catastrophe we are seeing. perhaps, ruby, this legal advice is a _ catastrophe we are seeing. perhaps, ruby, this legal advice is a bit - catastrophe we are seeing. perhaps, ruby, this legal advice is a bit of- ruby, this legal advice is a bit of a smoke screen for the decisions... i see, the government have made the decision, _ i see, the government have made the decision, they— i see, the government have made the decision, they will— i see, the government have made the decision, they will stick _ i see, the government have made the decision, they will stick on _ i see, the government have made the decision, they will stick on one - decision, they will stick on one side _ decision, they will stick on one side or— decision, they will stick on one side or another. _ decision, they will stick on one side or another. the _ decision, they will stick on one side or another. the labour. decision, they will stick on one i side or another. the labour and tories _ side or another. the labour and tories are — side or another. the labour and tories are just _ side or another. the labour and tories are just mudslinging, - side or another. the labour and l tories are just mudslinging, when you listen— tories are just mudslinging, when you listen to — tories are just mudslinging, when you listen to them, _ tories are just mudslinging, when you listen to them, what - tories are just mudslinging, when you listen to them, what is - tories are just mudslinging, when you listen to them, what is it, - tories are just mudslinging, when l you listen to them, what is it, when they are _ you listen to them, what is it, when they are in — you listen to them, what is it, when theyare in them _ you listen to them, what is it, when they are in the. . ._ they are in the... prime minister's questions- — they are in the. .. prime minister's questions- i— they are in the... prime minister's questions. i don't _ they are in the... prime minister's questions. i don't know _ they are in the... prime minister's questions. i don't know but - they are in the... prime minister's questions. i don't know but it - questions. i don't know but it sounds like _ questions. i don't know but it sounds like animals _ questions. i don't know but it sounds like animals being - sounds like animals being slaughtered. _ sounds like animals being slaughtered. if— sounds like animals being slaughtered. if the - sounds like animals being - slaughtered. if the government decide — slaughtered. if the government decide that, _ slaughtered. if the government decide that, the _ slaughtered. if the government decide that, the other- slaughtered. if the government i decide that, the other government are larger— decide that, the other government are larger than— decide that, the other government are larger than it. _ decide that, the other government are larger than it. this _ decide that, the other government are larger than it. this is _ decide that, the other government are larger than it. this isjust- are larger than it. this isjust going — are larger than it. this isjust going on— are larger than it. this isjust going on and _

are larger than it. this isjust going on and on— are larger than it. this isjust going on and on and - are larger than it. this isjust going on and on and my- are larger than it. this isjust| going on and on and my brain are larger than it. this isjust- going on and on and my brain are scrambled — going on and on and my brain are scrambled. they— going on and on and my brain are scrambled. they are _ going on and on and my brain are scrambled. they are leaving i going on and on and my brain are scrambled. they are leaving the i scrambled. they are leaving the elephant — scrambled. they are leaving the elephant out _ scrambled. they are leaving the elephant out of— scrambled. they are leaving the elephant out of the _ scrambled. they are leaving the elephant out of the room, i scrambled. they are leaving the elephant out of the room, if- scrambled. they are leaving the i elephant out of the room, if trump wins, _ elephant out of the room, if trump wins, these — elephant out of the room, if trump wins, these conversations- elephant out of the room, if trump wins, these conversations are i elephant out of the room, if trump wins, these conversations are a i wins, these conversations are a no-brainer, _ wins, these conversations are a no—brainer, this _ wins, these conversations are a no—brainer, this guy— wins, these conversations are a no—brainer, this guy says - wins, these conversations are a no—brainer, this guy says he i no—brainer, this guy says he encourages— no—brainer, this guy says he encourages russia - no—brainer, this guy says he encourages russia to - no—brainer, this guy says he encourages russia to attack| no—brainer, this guy says he i encourages russia to attack any no—brainer, this guy says he - encourages russia to attack any of the us— encourages russia to attack any of the us nato— encourages russia to attack any of the us nato allies _ encourages russia to attack any of the us nato allies who _ encourages russia to attack any of the us nato allies who reconsiderl encourages russia to attack any of. the us nato allies who reconsider is not up _ the us nato allies who reconsider is not up to— the us nato allies who reconsider is not up to date — the us nato allies who reconsider is not up to date with _ the us nato allies who reconsider is not up to date with her _ the us nato allies who reconsider is not up to date with her financial. i not up to date with her financial. it is about — not up to date with her financial. it is about money, _ not up to date with her financial. it is about money, like _ not up to date with her financial. it is about money, like the - it is about money, like the americans— it is about money, like the americans have _ it is about money, like the americans have to - it is about money, like the americans have to dig i it is about money, like the . americans have to dig deep, it is about money, like the - americans have to dig deep, they're going _ americans have to dig deep, they're going out— americans have to dig deep, they're going out for— americans have to dig deep, they're going out for dinner— americans have to dig deep, they're going out for dinner with _ americans have to dig deep, they're going out for dinner with these i going out for dinner with these countries — going out for dinner with these countries aren't— going out for dinner with these countries aren't always - going out for dinner with these countries aren't always gettingj going out for dinner with these i countries aren't always getting out their wallets _ countries aren't always getting out their wallets. figure _ countries aren't always getting out their wallets. figure it _ countries aren't always getting out their wallets. figure it out, - countries aren't always getting out their wallets. figure it out, this. their wallets. figure it out, this is air— their wallets. figure it out, this is air time — their wallets. figure it out, this is air time wasted, _ their wallets. figure it out, this is air time wasted, what - their wallets. figure it out, this. is air time wasted, what happens if this guy— is air time wasted, what happens if this guy gets — is air time wasted, what happens if this guy gets in? _ is air time wasted, what happens if this guy gets in? this _ is air time wasted, what happens if this guy gets in?— this guy gets in? this is one of the unpredictable _ this guy gets in? this is one of the unpredictable factors _ this guy gets in? this is one of the unpredictable factors in _ this guy gets in? this is one of the unpredictable factors in all- this guy gets in? this is one of the unpredictable factors in all of- unpredictable factors in all of this. ., . be unpredictable factors in all of this._ be very i unpredictable factors in all of. this._ be very scared. this. you are... be very scared. peole this. you are... be very scared. people are _ this. you are... be very scared. people are leaving _ this. you are... be very scared. people are leaving the - this. you are... be very scared. j people are leaving the elephant this. you are... be very scared. i people are leaving the elephant out of the _ people are leaving the elephant out of the room. — people are leaving the elephant out ofthe room. he _ people are leaving the elephant out of the room, he is _ people are leaving the elephant out of the room, he is a _ people are leaving the elephant out of the room, he is a narcissist i people are leaving the elephant out of the room, he is a narcissist and i of the room, he is a narcissist and sociopath — of the room, he is a narcissist and sociopath can— of the room, he is a narcissist and sociopath can i _ of the room, he is a narcissist and sociopath. can i say— of the room, he is a narcissist and sociopath. can i say that? - of the room, he is a narcissist and sociopath. can i say that?- sociopath. can i say that? other --eole sociopath. can i say that? other people have _ sociopath. can i say that? other people have different _ sociopath. can i say that? other people have different views, i sociopath. can i say that? otherj people have different views, but sociopath. can i say that? other i people have different views, but you have spent time with him. he is terrifying. _ have spent time with him. he is terrifying. and _ have spent time with him. he is terrifying, and he _ have spent time with him. he is terrifying, and he is— have spent time with him. he is terrifying, and he is igniting i have spent time with him. he is terrifying, and he is igniting fear,

and that— terrifying, and he is igniting fear, and that is— terrifying, and he is igniting fear, and that is what _ terrifying, and he is igniting fear, and that is what dictators - terrifying, and he is igniting fear, and that is what dictators do. i terrifying, and he is igniting fear, and that is what dictators do. hel terrifying, and he is igniting fear, i and that is what dictators do. he is working _ and that is what dictators do. he is working for— and that is what dictators do. he is working for this _ and that is what dictators do. he is working for this class _ and that is what dictators do. he is working for this class that - and that is what dictators do. he is working for this class that he i and that is what dictators do. he is working for this class that he is i working for this class that he is not even — working for this class that he is not even part— working for this class that he is not even part of, _ working for this class that he is not even part of, the _ working for this class that he isi not even part of, the underdog, working for this class that he is i not even part of, the underdog, and this will— not even part of, the underdog, and this will take — not even part of, the underdog, and this will take everybody _ not even part of, the underdog, and this will take everybody down - this will take everybody down because — this will take everybody down because these _ this will take everybody down because these conversationsl this will take everybody down i because these conversations of the intelligentsia, _ because these conversations of the intelligentsia, he _ because these conversations of the intelligentsia, hejust_ because these conversations of the intelligentsia, he just wants - because these conversations of the intelligentsia, he just wants to - intelligentsia, he just wants to kick somem _ intelligentsia, he just wants to kick some... you _ intelligentsia, he just wants to kick some... you know, - intelligentsia, he just wants to kick some... you know, rear. intelligentsia, he just wants to i kick some... you know, rear end. intelligentsia, he just wants to - kick some... you know, rear end. and we don't _ kick some... you know, rear end. and we don't even — kick some... you know, rear end. and we don't even know— kick some... you know, rear end. and we don't even know about _ kick some... you know, rear end. and we don't even know about this. - kick some... you know, rear end. and we don't even know about this. our. we don't even know about this. our eyes _ we don't even know about this. our eyes are _ we don't even know about this. our eyes are open— we don't even know about this. our eyes are open on— we don't even know about this. our eyes are open on what _ we don't even know about this. our eyes are open on what is _ we don't even know about this. our eyes are open on what is coming. l we don't even know about this. our. eyes are open on what is coming. do ou eyes are open on what is coming. you think that is fair? eyes are open on what is coming. do you think that is fair? brother - eyes are open on what is coming. do you think that is fair? brother gets i you think that is fair? brother gets into the white — you think that is fair? brother gets into the white house _ you think that is fair? brother gets into the white house at _ you think that is fair? brother gets into the white house at the - you think that is fair? brother gets into the white house at the end i you think that is fair? brother gets into the white house at the end ofj into the white house at the end of this year, we are going to have to work with them. —— whoever gets in. we care about —— what, who they are, what they care about, there is an issue with donald trump in that he says things, to shock, it is not necessarily what he then does. 50, we will have to do a lot more listening but also watching in terms of what the actions actually are. israel and hamas, the are two different— israel and hamas, the are two different breeds, _ israel and hamas, the are two different breeds, but - israel and hamas, the are two different breeds, but you - israel and hamas, the are two different breeds, but you willi israel and hamas, the are two -

different breeds, but you will never understand — different breeds, but you will never understand donald _ different breeds, but you will never understand donald trump. - different breeds, but you will never understand donald trump. i- different breeds, but you will never understand donald trump. i was i different breeds, but you will neverj understand donald trump. i was on different breeds, but you will never. understand donald trump. i was on an aeroplane _ understand donald trump. i was on an aeroplane with — understand donald trump. i was on an aeroplane with him, _ understand donald trump. i was on an aeroplane with him, he _ understand donald trump. i was on an aeroplane with him, he scrambled - understand donald trump. i was on an aeroplane with him, he scrambled my| aeroplane with him, he scrambled my head~ _ aeroplane with him, he scrambled my head~ he _ aeroplane with him, he scrambled my head~ he told — aeroplane with him, he scrambled my head. he told me _ aeroplane with him, he scrambled my head. he told me he _ aeroplane with him, he scrambled my head. he told me he was _ aeroplane with him, he scrambled my head. he told me he was going - aeroplane with him, he scrambled my head. he told me he was going to - aeroplane with him, he scrambled my head. he told me he was going to be| head. he told me he was going to be the next _ head. he told me he was going to be the next president— head. he told me he was going to be the next president and _ head. he told me he was going to be the next president and i— the next president and i laughed, and he _ the next president and i laughed, and he said — the next president and i laughed, and he said land _ the next president and i laughed, and he said land the _ the next president and i laughed, and he said land the plane. - the next president and i laughed, and he said land the plane. i'm . the next president and i laughed, and he said land the plane. i'm in the middle— and he said land the plane. i'm in the middle of— and he said land the plane. i'm in the middle of 33,000 _ and he said land the plane. i'm in the middle of 33,000 feet- and he said land the plane. i'm in the middle of 33,000 feet and i and he said land the plane. i'm in. the middle of 33,000 feet and this luy the middle of 33,000 feet and this guy suddenly — the middle of 33,000 feet and this guy suddenly decides _ the middle of 33,000 feet and this guy suddenly decides to _ the middle of 33,000 feet and this guy suddenly decides to dump i the middle of 33,000 feet and this guy suddenly decides to dump me, the middle of 33,000 feet and this i guy suddenly decides to dump me, and there is_ guy suddenly decides to dump me, and there is a _ guy suddenly decides to dump me, and there is a television _ guy suddenly decides to dump me, and there is a television channel. _ guy suddenly decides to dump me, and there is a television channel. he - there is a television channel. he does _ there is a television channel. he does not — there is a television channel. he does not care _ there is a television channel. he does not care. he _ there is a television channel. he does not care. he is— there is a television channel. he does not care. he is a _ there is a television channel. he does not care. he is a liar, i there is a television channel. he does not care. he is a liar, he i there is a television channel. he i does not care. he is a liar, he even lies about — does not care. he is a liar, he even lies about gott— does not care. he is a liar, he even lies about golf games! _ does not care. he is a liar, he even lies about golf games! i— does not care. he is a liar, he even lies about golf games! i know i does not care. he is a liar, he even lies about golf games! i know this. lies about golf games! i know this is irrelevant— lies about golf games! i know this is irrelevant but— lies about golf games! i know this is irrelevant but watch _ lies about golf games! i know this is irrelevant but watch out, - lies about golf games! i know thisj is irrelevant but watch out, trump is irrelevant but watch out, trump is another — is irrelevant but watch out, trump is another beast. _ is irrelevant but watch out, trump is another beast. you _ is irrelevant but watch out, trump is another beast.— is irrelevant but watch out, trump is another beast. you are one of the few peeple — is another beast. you are one of the few peeple in _ is another beast. you are one of the few people in this _ is another beast. you are one of the few people in this country _ is another beast. you are one of the few people in this country who i is another beast. you are one of the few people in this country who has l few people in this country who has had an encounter with him. we will touch on that in a minute. we will talk about ukraine and we will discuss that with you again after the next interview. the conflict in gaza is sadly not the only one. there is no sign of an end to the war in ukraine, on the edge of our continent. just yesterday at least seven people were killed by russian strikes near the border. the boss of nato, the defence

alliance, was touting for extra pounds, dollars and euros at a summit this week to help urkaine keep the fight going on the battlefield. but as he prepares to step down, jens stoltenberg told me what's happening there is part of a dangerous chain of events around the world with russia working with other countries like iran, and china, in a new "authoritarian alliance" — part of the reason why more cash for ukraine is so vital now. well, it will be new and extra money, but it will also be a commitment for the long term because i strongly believe that we need to demonstrate that we are ready to support ukraine for the long term and to ensure that we have predictable support to ukraine and something that ensures the highest possible degree of burden—sharing among allies. are you confident all the nato countries will sign up to this long—term and expensive plan? i'm confident, partly because all of us agree that we should start planning for a stronger nato role.

but second, there is no way to avoid these costs. it has a cost to have russia as a neighbour. it has a cost to ensure that ukraine prevails as a sovereign, independent nation. so, what we are discussing is not whether to pay — there is no way to run away from that cost — but how to pay. doesn't a five—year support plan imply the war will go on that long? of course, we all hope to end this war as soon as possible. at the same time, we need to be prepared for the long haul because now president putin believes that he can win on the battlefield. we need to convey to him that he will not win on the battlefield, that we are ready to stand by ukraine for as long as it takes. and the clearer we convey that message in words and in actions, the more likely it is that president putin realises they will not win, he has to sit down and negotiate a peace that ensures that ukraine prevails as a sovereign, independent nation. then when the war ends, then it's important to ensure that it stops there, that russia doesn't attack again.

and therefore, we need to build a future force. we need to have guarantees in place that ukraine can defend itself, deter further aggression. you say putin must realise he has to negotiate and give up his goals. but its president zelensky�*s current position he won't cede one inch of ukrainian territory. perhaps to end the violence and the conflict, ukraine might have to be willing to negotiate too. 50, most wars end at the negotiating table. but what we know is that what happens around the negotiating table is very closely linked to the situation on the battlefield. so, now russia believes they can achieve their goals on the battlefield by continuing to push militarily against ukraine, so the way to convince russia that they have to sit down and accept a solution where ukraine prevails as a sovereign, independent, democratic nation in europe is to give

military support to ukraine. then, of course, at the end of the day, it has to be ukraine that decides what kind of compromises they're willing to do. we need to enable them to be in a position where they can actually achieve an acceptable result around the negotiating table. there's political fatigue in america. and you said recently donald trump's remarks, suggesting the us wouldn't necessarily protect nato's members who are not spending enough, would undermine everyone's security. what's your fear? i expect that, regardless of the outcome of the us elections, the us will remain a loyal nato ally because it is in the us security interest to have a strong nato. the criticism from former president trump and others in the united states is not primarily against nato. it is against nato allies not paying enough for nato. and that has changed. we expect around 20 allies to spend 2% of gdp on defence.

it is a huge difference and therefore there's fair burden sharing and that's something which really matters also for the us commitment to nato. you're also sounding the alarm about the connections between different conflicts. you name checked iran helping russia, china, north korea. do you think we're in a new era of instability? yes, and the challenge is that nato remains a regional alliance, north america and europe, it will remain that. but the threats and the challenges we face, they are global. security is not regional. security is global. and the war in ukraine demonstrates that very clearly. russia is receiving support from its friends and partners in asia. china is propping up the russian war economy, delivering key parts of the defence industry. and in return, moscow

is mortgaging its future to beijing. iran delivers drones and other military equipment to russia. in return, russia is delivering technology to the iranian missile and nuclear programmes. the same with north korea. enormous amounts, hundreds of thousands of rounds of ammunition from north korea to russia, straight into the conflict, the war against ukraine. in return, russia is delivering technology to north korea. so, this is very much the same. what happens in asia matters for europe, and what happens in europe matters for asia. and that makes it even more important like—minded countries, nato allies, but also our partners in the asia—pacific, that we also work more closely together. and that's exactly what we do to stand up against this stronger alliance of authoritarian powers. so, you describe a sort of chain of danger, and we see that playing out in ukraine, we see it playing out in the middle east. you've condemned the strikes on aid

workers in gaza this week and you've said what's happening is a humanitarian catastrophe. do you believe israel has gone too far? i strongly believe that it's very important that nato allies, including the united states, are now conveying a very clear message to israel that they have to do more, significantly more, to protect civilians, to protect aid workers. and i also welcome the efforts by the united states and the united kingdom and others to facilitate some kind of agreement on a ceasefire to end the human suffering and the humanitarian catastrophe we see unfolding in gaza. with all the rising threats, some leaders are starting to encourage countries to consider military service, forms of conscription again. do you think more countries, maybe even the uk, should think about that? well, as secretary general of nato, i don't have any recommendations on whether allies should have

conscription or not. nato is asking for specific capabilities, for a number of brigades, for planes and ships manned with qualified personnel. and then how different allies provide these capabilities, these forces, is up to allies themselves to decide, whether they're professional or conscripted armed forces. then, as a former norwegian prime minister, i can say that in norway we have had conscription for decades. i served myself back in 1979 and we still have conscription. and actually when i was prime minister, we introduced conscription not only for men but also for women because by having conscription, we actually get access to the best and the most qualified, educated part of the young population. are you frightened for the future? we live in a more dangerous world. and we have to be prepared

for crisis conflicts. and it's extremely hard to foresee the unforeseen. very few people were able to foresee the war in ukraine, at least in 2014, or the rise of isis, or 9/11, or many other crises we have been confronted with. but again, in a more uncertain and a more dangerous world, it's even more important that we have strong international institutions, and in particular that we have a strong defence alliance because together, north america and europe, we are 50% of the world's military might, so as long as we stand together, promise to protect each other, no nato allies will be attacked, we will be safe. secretary, thank you so much for speaking to us. a sobering message from the nato chief. the new authority and an alliance, countries coordinating to

try to undermine democracies, and also as we were touching on before, the possibility of trump back in the white house, what effect would that have on what is happening in ukraine? , , . , ukraine? first, start with the very last oint ukraine? first, start with the very last point jens _ ukraine? first, start with the very last point jens stoltenberg - ukraine? first, start with the very last point jens stoltenberg made, | ukraine? first, start with the very | last point jens stoltenberg made, a last pointjens stoltenberg made, a true alliance, half of the world's military might, even more in spending terms, with specific allies, 40% of the world economy, the bulk of the world's international aid. that us not be obsessed with our adversaries, it has transaction we, their alliance. the russians are needing to go to iran and north korea to get the weapons they need. it is essentially more... not really an alliance, an arrangement of convenience. as he says, china is probably the main beneficiary. on trump, as we have discussed, he is unpredictable, i have dealt with him when he was last president, he is extremely challenging. there are some things we know he will do, as valerie says, he does not do everything he says he

will do but some things i am pretty sure he will do, take america out of the climate change agreement. will they unravel? considerably more protectionism, tariffs, nontariff measures, including leinster allies. who knows what with the us. —— including against allies. he has already deleted the american security degree. the lesson for us is europe should not wait on the result of the presidential election, we need to step up ourselves, as jens stoltenberg was suggesting, and take more responsibility for our own defence and for supporting ukraine. of course trump might not win but it is a real prospect. i of course trump might not win but it is a real prospect.— is a real prospect. i think that we ma leaving _ is a real prospect. i think that we ma leaving out _ is a real prospect. i think that we ma leaving out another— is a real prospect. i think that we ma leaving out another elephant | is a real prospect. i think that we l ma leaving out another elephant in the roonr. — ma leaving out another elephant in the room, we are mentally unstable -- we _ the room, we are mentally unstable -- we are _ the room, we are mentally unstable —— we are leaving out. we are living in a country— —— we are leaving out. we are living in a country now where almost everything comes down to the mental health— everything comes down to the mental health of— everything comes down to the mental health of the country. one in four, one in— health of the country. one in four,

one in three. — health of the country. one in four, one in three, living on... creating their— one in three, living on... creating their own — one in three, living on... creating their own brand. everybody is out of control _ their own brand. everybody is out of control the — their own brand. everybody is out of control. the people that really run the country — control. the people that really run the country are the population. i wrote _ the country are the population. i wrote a — the country are the population. i wrote a book, if you don't mind me saying. _ wrote a book, if you don't mind me saying, which is out in paperback called _ saying, which is out in paperback called i_ saying, which is out in paperback called i am — saying, which is out in paperback called i am not as well as i thought it called i am not as well as i thought it was _ called i am not as well as i thought it was i_ called i am not as well as i thought it was. i use myself as an example. it was. i use myself as an example. i have _ it was. i use myself as an example. i have depression. i cannot think straight — i have depression. i cannot think straight it— i have depression. i cannot think straight. it doesn't help that the world _ straight. it doesn't help that the world is— straight. it doesn't help that the world is for hassling me. it is not my fault, — world is for hassling me. it is not nty fault, in— world is for hassling me. it is not my fault, in a way. —— the world is frazzlind — my fault, in a way. —— the world is frazzling. there is not enough anything~ _ frazzling. there is not enough anything. it is getting exasperating. the news is coming at us. exasperating. the news is coming at us there _ exasperating. the news is coming at us there is — exasperating. the news is coming at us. there is no airtime, we exasperating. the news is coming at us. there is no air time, we cannot think— us. there is no air time, we cannot think clearly — us. there is no air time, we cannot think clearly. we have to get out of fi-ht think clearly. we have to get out of fight or— think clearly. we have to get out of fight or flight mode. give us an answer — fight or flight mode. give us an answer. tell us what is going to happen — answer. tell us what is going to happen it — answer. tell us what is going to happen. it is terrifying what trump will do _ happen. it is terrifying what trump will do. does he have his finger on the button? —

will do. does he have his finger on the button? we have enough ear. couldnt— the button? we have enough ear. couldn't one personjust be a spokesman instead of giving us... —— we have _ spokesman instead of giving us... —— we have enough fear. spokesman instead of giving us... -- we have enough fear.— we have enough fear. living in an ace of we have enough fear. living in an age of anxiety. — we have enough fear. living in an age of anxiety, valerie, - we have enough fear. living in an age of anxiety, valerie, how- we have enough fear. living in an age of anxiety, valerie, how do l age of anxiety, valerie, how do leaders and politicians confront that? ~ ., , ., , leaders and politicians confront that? ., , ., y that? what should they do? let me ick u- on that? what should they do? let me pick up on one _ that? what should they do? let me pick up on one of— that? what should they do? let me pick up on one of ruby's _ that? what should they do? let me pick up on one of ruby's points. i that? what should they do? let me | pick up on one of ruby's points. the general— pick up on one of ruby's points. the general anxiety— pick up on one of ruby's points. the general anxiety we _ pick up on one of ruby's points. the general anxiety we are _ pick up on one of ruby's points. the general anxiety we are seeing - pick up on one of ruby's points. the| general anxiety we are seeing across people _ general anxiety we are seeing across people in— general anxiety we are seeing across people in the — general anxiety we are seeing across people in the country— general anxiety we are seeing across people in the country and _ general anxiety we are seeing across people in the country and i— general anxiety we are seeing across people in the country and i think- people in the country and i think across— people in the country and i think across the — people in the country and i think across the world. _ people in the country and i think across the world. i— people in the country and i think across the world. i see - people in the country and i think across the world. i see it- people in the country and i think. across the world. i see it everyday as someone — across the world. i see it everyday as someone who _ across the world. i see it everyday as someone who working - across the world. i see it everyday as someone who working with i across the world. i see it everyday. as someone who working with young people _ as someone who working with young people in— as someone who working with young people in a _ as someone who working with young people in a university— as someone who working with young people in a university setting. - people in a university setting. well-being _ people in a university setting. well-being is _ people in a university setting. well—being is a _ people in a university setting. well—being is a major- people in a university setting. well—being is a major issue i people in a university setting. l well—being is a major issue for people in a university setting. i well—being is a major issue for all of them, — well—being is a major issue for all of them, it— well—being is a major issue for all ofthem. it is— well—being is a major issue for all of them, it is about _ well—being is a major issue for all of them, it is about the _ well—being is a major issue for all of them, it is about the now- well—being is a major issue for all of them, it is about the now but l of them, it is about the now but also _ of them, it is about the now but also the — of them, it is about the now but also the future. _ of them, it is about the now but also the future. they _ of them, it is about the now but also the future. they are - also the future. they are contemplating... - also the future. they are contemplating. . .- also the future. they are contemplating... also the future. they are contemlatin: . .. ~ , ., , contemplating... where is the money from the government? _ contemplating... where is the money from the government? they - contemplating... where is the money from the government? they are i from the government? they are contemplating _ from the government? they are contemplating a _ from the government? they are contemplating a future - from the government? they are contemplating a future they i from the government? they are contemplating a future they do | from the government? they are i contemplating a future they do not know _ contemplating a future they do not know and _ contemplating a future they do not know and understand _ contemplating a future they do not know and understand because i contemplating a future they do not know and understand because it i contemplating a future they do not know and understand because it is| know and understand because it is rapidly— know and understand because it is rapidly changing _ know and understand because it is rapidly changing. ruby, _ know and understand because it is rapidly changing. ruby, you - know and understand because it is rapidly changing. ruby, you are i rapidly changing. ruby, you are right _ rapidly changing. ruby, you are riuht. ., ., rapidly changing. ruby, you are riht. ., ., ,., rapidly changing. ruby, you are riuht. ., ., . right. how do you deal with the mental issue _ right. how do you deal with the mental issue exasperating i mental issue exasperating everything? mentalas mental issue exasperating everything? mental as physical. everybody wants security. we want to han- everybody wants security. we want to hang onto _ everybody wants security. we want to hang onto things. _ everybody wants security. we want to hang onto things, we _

everybody wants security. we want to hang onto things, we want— everybody wants security. we want to hang onto things, we want a - everybody wants security. we want to hang onto things, we want a world i everybody wants security. we want toj hang onto things, we want a world we understand _ hang onto things, we want a world we understand. ~ . , , , hang onto things, we want a world we understand-— understand. mental illness is total terror. understand. mental illness is total terror- there _ understand. mental illness is total terror. there is _ understand. mental illness is total terror. there is well-being - understand. mental illness is total terror. there is well-being and i terror. there is well-being and there is mental— terror. there is well-being and there is mental illness - terror. there is well-being and there is mental illness and i terror. there is well-being and | there is mental illness and how terror. there is well-being and i there is mental illness and how can you get— there is mental illness and how can you get something _ there is mental illness and how can you get something that _ there is mental illness and how can you get something that feels - there is mental illness and how can| you get something that feels stable and secure? — you get something that feels stable and secure? the _ you get something that feels stable and secure?— you get something that feels stable and secure? ., , , ., ., ., and secure? the money should go to research into — and secure? the money should go to research into neuroscience, - and secure? the money should go to research into neuroscience, to i research into neuroscience, to giving — research into neuroscience, to giving people more beds, they need security, _ giving people more beds, they need security, forget the rest of the world, — security, forget the rest of the world, this isjust the outcome of our mental— world, this isjust the outcome of our mental state. the madness is all over the _ our mental state. the madness is all over the world.— over the world. funding for mental health is something... _ over the world. funding for mental health is something... part - over the world. funding for mental health is something... part of- over the world. funding for mental health is something... part of that | health is something... part of that is that we have _ health is something... part of that is that we have to _ health is something... part of that is that we have to prepare - health is something... part of that is that we have to prepare people | is that we have to prepare people for a _ is that we have to prepare people for a world — is that we have to prepare people for a world of— is that we have to prepare people for a world of greater _ is that we have to prepare people for a world of greater instability. i for a world of greater instability. we are _ for a world of greater instability. we are not— for a world of greater instability. we are not going _ for a world of greater instability. we are not going to— for a world of greater instability. we are not going to be - for a world of greater instability. we are not going to be able i for a world of greater instability. we are not going to be able to l for a world of greater instability. i we are not going to be able to give them _ we are not going to be able to give them the _ we are not going to be able to give them the stability... _ we are not going to be able to give them the stability. . ._ them the stability... mark, final word, them the stability... mark, final word. you _ them the stability... mark, final word, you were _ them the stability. .. mark, final word, you were of— them the stability... mark, final word, you were of the _ them the stability. .. mark, final word, you were of the silver- them the stability... mark, final i word, you were of the silver service at a very difficult time for the country and the pandemic. —— the civil service. we know that not everything was very well in government, we know that from the inquiry. do you think government is

fit to cope with the challenges? the fit to cope with the challenges? tie: government fit to cope with the challenges? tte: government needs fit to cope with the challenges? t“t9: government needs to fit to cope with the challenges? tt9: government needs to make fit to cope with the challenges? t“t9 government needs to make big changes to make sure it is fit to deal with the challenges of the next 25 years. ruby is right to point to the mental health question. it has wider issues. it is to run the home office, many of the people we dealt with in crime and terrorism had thoseissues with in crime and terrorism had those issues too. government needs to get itself into the right shape for the future.— to get itself into the right shape for the future. huge challenges all around, thank _ for the future. huge challenges all around, thank you _ for the future. huge challenges all around, thank you all— for the future. huge challenges all around, thank you all so _ for the future. huge challenges all around, thank you all so much i for the future. huge challenges all around, thank you all so much for| around, thank you all so much for giving us your insights this morning, great to have you all. thank you forjoining us. thank you forjoining us from home. on a day when we really have tried to get to the bottom of some of the doubts and dangers around the world today. there are elections coming in this country scene, local elections in england and wales, you have a vote on a police and crime commissioner if not your local council too and the deadline to sign up is coming fast on the 16th of april. you don't need me to tell you how important it

is to have your voices heard. and i will look forward to seeing you next sunday, same time, same place.

you're watching bbc news. i'm lyse doucet, live from southern israel as the israel/gaza war reaches its six—month mark. tens of thousands of israelis rally in tel aviv demanding a gaza hostage deal. in cairo, indirect talks between israel and hamas have resumed. i'm azadeh moshiri in london. the other headlines this hour: slovakia's elected a new president — peter pellegrini is a nationalist who's sceptical of sending military aid to ukraine. events are being held across rwanda to mark three decades since the beginning of the genocide against ethnic tutsis and as millions prepare for the solar eclipse in north america, we look at how to safely watch the total blackout. hello, i'm lyse doucet, live in southern israel. it was here in the early hours of viktor bout the seventh six months ago that hamas men carried out a monstrous slaughter. it was described by israel as its darkest

day. by the end of