♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ announcer: funding for presentation of this program

is provided by... woman: a law partner rediscovers her grandmother's artistry and creates a trust to keep the craft alive. a raymond james financial advisor gets to know you, your passions and the way you enrich your community. life well planned. announcer: funding was also provided by, the freeman foundation. and by judy and peter blum kovler foundation, puuing solutions for america's neglected needs. announcer: and now, "bbc news" >> hello, i'm ben brown and this is "the context" on bbc news. ben: and kamala harris has launched her plan to make what she calls and opportunity economy in the united states if she wins the election in november. president biden says we're not

there yet but closer as three countries trying to negotiate a cease-fire in gaza and a hostage release deal present a new proposal to israel and to hamas. ukraine claims the aim of its cross border offensive inside russia is to force moscow into what it calls fair peace tks. ♪ ben: hello. well, we'll start the program tonight in the united states where the vice president kamala harris has been laying out her economic plans at a rally in north carolina. her first major policy speech since becoming the presidential nominee in what is seen as more of a reboot of president joe biden's economic policies than a radically fresh start. she launched her plan to what she called an opportunity

economy. kamala: still, we know many americandon't yet feel that progress in their daily lives. cost are still too high. and on a deeper level, for too many people, no matter how much they work, it feels so hard to just be able to get ahead. as president, i will be laser focused on creating opportunities for the middle class that advance their economic security, stability, and dignity. together we will build what i call an opportunity economy. ben: let's get some analysis from our north american correspondent who was watching that speech from washington. while it has been said she's vulnerable on the economy, especially on the cost of living, on inflation which is high at the moment, and she addressed that head-on, didn't she, promising to lower the cost

of living. >> she did. these been accused by her republican opponents of being all-star and no substance. they wanted her major policy platform and she's unveiling that today. i think what struck me about her speech, she has a much easier way of talking about these challenges perhaps than president biden did because he would talk about the fact that unemployment was low, that inflation was getting better, that also the economy was growing fast, which is all true, by the way, but people don't feel like that. people don't feel that's the case. so kamala harris really went there and said look, i know you're working all the time with all these bills piling up and it feels like you're not getting anywhere. i know that feeling. she sort of struck that empathy a lot of critics said president biden was not able to do. 's note a radical reversioning of anything he's done. she was with him when he

unveiled his economic policy as president as she was v.p. but she's packaging it in a different way because the democratic party base and other voters are much more enthused by her. the other thing i think is notable is she drew on her own personal experiences what it was like for her to try and get a house when she worked at fast food places and what have you. president biden did that a lot as well, something donald trump hasn't been able to do. she was obviously there to draw a stark contrast between herself and mr. trump. ben: let's talk about the poll racing we've seen in the front line battleground states because they do show kamala harris seems to be nudging ahead, actually. is she still going through a honeymoon period? she's quite early on in this candidacy for the white house. reporter: there are so many polls at the moment that it's hard to keep track of them but they do generally show she is

giving donald trump a run for his money. and for instance, she was in north rolina which is a key battleground state and has had four decades of republican victories only interrupted by obama in 2008 and president biden lost it by 8%. and a recent poll by cook political reports, show harris and trump are statistically tied at the moment. in terms of the honeymoon period, of course, there is an argument to say this is a honeymoon period now she's unveiling her policy plans an people can get a sense of what president harris would look like, what would her first 100 days look like. i think there's an argument to say we're so close to the election, especially as far as the u.s. goes, there might be a case of the democrats think they can ride this wave right to election day.

we've got the democratic national convention next week where she'll officially accept the nomination. that will of course be a big event, and we can expect to see probably an uptick of more support for her in the polls. but of course, you can't trust polls necessarily in this country. ben: no. but it's going to be a really fascinating race over the next few months. thank you very much, indeed, for that analysis of that speech from kamala harris. we also can speak to eric gordon who is a professor at the university of michigan's ross school of business. thank for you being with us. do you see this very much as an election that is going to focus on the economy, with donald trump with the press conference in new jersey where he had a whole array of grocery goods on the table talking about inflation and we had kamala harris talk about her fight of how she's going to reduce the cost of living and fight inflation. eric: when you look at the

voters rather than what the candidates are saying, the voters say the economy is the number one factor they'll take into account when they decide who to vote for. and they say the thing that concerns them most about the economy is inflation. whoever wins on the economy issue, whoever the voters trust most on the economy wins the election. ben: is that a vulnerability for kamala harris in that she's been associated with and ad administration where prices have been rising quite high? her explanation was a lot of the food companies have is really been profiteering actually post covid. eric: i don't think that explanation will work a lot. sort of saying don't blame us, we've been in power but blame somebody else because big corporations are a target. in fact, voters are unhappy with big corporations. it's a huge liability that she's been part of the biden

administration, and she doesn't have a lot of wiggle room. she can't come out and say we really did a lot of things wrong and we're going to change them. but what she has done is something quite different. biden said to the public, look, you're just wrong, and i have the numbers to prove it. well, i hate to be wrong and i think most of the public hates to be wrong. harris has said -- she's gone back to sort of the clinton line. i feel your pain. ben: she talked a lot about helping the middle class, creating an opportunity economy and so is on. is that a bit vague for voters or do you think that will hit home, too? eric: it's very vague. what does an opportunity economy mean? voters aren't saying we feel like we lack opportunity, they're saying we're getting killed by inflation. but, you know, elections are won on all kinds of sakuous --

vacuous promises that can't be fulfilled. ben: does the biden administration not get credit with other voters for other perceived economic achievements on job growth and so on? eric: the biden administration get little credit for things they might well deserve credit for. but they're not getting it because people's lives -- people go to buy groceries and are much more expensive. i go to buy gasoline, and it's much more expensive. and you say that's factually not correct. it's not what they think. so you can talk about grand macrothings and talk about numbers, but when somebody goes to the grocery store and pays the bill, they think they're hurting. ben: eric gordon, very good talk with you. thank you for your analysis of kamala harris' speech there

about the economy. professor at the university of michigan's ross school of business. thank you. we are closer than we have ever been to a cease-fire deal in gaza. that was president joe biden's pretty optimistic verdict on the latest round of peace talks in doha. he said it is much, much closer than it was three days ago. so keep your fingers crossed. those are the words of joe biden, but is that optimism from the president, is it justified? well, hamas doesn't seem quite as hopeful and says the united states is actually trying to create what they call a false atmosphere and accused israel of laying down what it called unacceptable new conditions at the talk that include keeping israeli troops inside gaza along its border with egypt. israel's prime minister, benjamin netanyahu called for

the mediators to pressurize hamas to accept the new negotiations. the negotiators will switch from talks from doha where they've been in cairo and american negotiators have offered fresh proposals aimed at bridging the gap between hamas and israel. meanwhile, the u.s. secretary of state antony blinken is traveling to the middle east and is expected to meet mr. netanyahu on monday. well, we can assess all of this now with dr. sultan barracut, a senior fellow at russi. a lot of optimism coming out of the white house and joe biden. are you at all optimistic? guest: i'm not as optimistic as joe biden. joe biden needs to be optimistic in the last few weeks before his election to help his side of the campaign.

but i think a lot lies on the fundamental change in the israeli position. israel needs to come out and publicly accept the framework for this agreement that was announced on may 31 by biden. when it was announced then, hamas accepted it. they had some questions about it, some of the details we can go into later on. but the israelis came out june 1 denying any knowledge of the plan and accused biden of having to work it out on his own. and then we had a couple of disastrous attacks and then the assassinatn of ania and so on and they have not reached an agreement. the only hope for optimism now is really the fact that iran is now threatening a retaliation to israel. the israeli position has changed in three measured ways.

one, in terms of the potential retaliation from iran and the hope of particularly the united states, if we were to tie the retaliation with a cease-fire, iran would climb down if there is a cease-fire in gaza and would help everybody to save face. the second factor is in fact the increased threat to the israeli hostages. three days ago we had the incident when the palestinian guards, members of hamas, who had the task of looking after the hostages and have been looking after the hostages for such a long time, feeding them and looking after their health and so on, one of them shot the hostage and he had received the news about his own family having been massacred by the israelis. even hamas is losing control to some degree over the safety of those hostages. so they're really under a major threat at this moment.

and the third factor, i think, is the general change in international mood. the last security council meeting where the israeli ambassador acted in such a great degree of arrogance, dismissing the whole world, accusing the security council of being immoral, saying the israelis are the most immoral country in the world and is the vanguard of civilization and so on. and you saw even the reaction from the united kingdom. this is the first time the united kingdom lashes out on israel, calling the attack on the school that turned into a shelter as unacceptable. and in fact was in the words of war crime. this is the first time there was an important change in a position of an important nation. and i suspect more will follow. france yesterday denied any possibility of participating in an attack against iran if israel

were attacked by the iranians. so there are changes taking place around, and we hope that those will bear on the talks in doha and egypt and will leado the israelis to fundamentally change their position to look for a permanent cease-fire. if the israelis continue to play games to try and reach a temporary cease-fire, take out the hostages, and then continue to finish off hamas or push the palestinians out of gaza, now that the whole area is uninhabitable, that i think would be problematic. ben: we will see what happens in which are scheduled, as i say, for cairo next week. thank you, doctor, very much, indeed, a professor at the university. around the world and across the u.k., you're watching bbc news.

♪

ben: the head of ukraine's army says his forces are advancing between one and three kilometers inside russia after their surprising incursion last week. ukraine's military claims to have destroyed a strategic river bridge in the kursk region, crushing a russian supply route. why did ukraine launch this bold offensive, seeing a slice of territory around kursk and infuriating vladimir putin. a senior partner to president zelenskyy gave his answer to the question, and he said the idea is to force russia into fair peace talks. he insisted there are no plans to occupy the 100 square kilometers ukraine captureed. on the 11th day so far, this is the country taken. but in the donetsk region,

russia makes gains of themselves moving to the key pacific hub. james waterhouse sent us this report from near the ukrainian frontlines. james: it was an attack that surprised just about everyone, apart from the ukrainian paratroopers who released this footage, complete with dramatic music and muscular western armor from when they first overwhelmed a russian border crossing. after a blistering land grab in the kursk region, ukraine's gains are starting to slow. russia is diverting resources like these artillery units to stem the tide. nevertheless, ukraine is bringing in more troops to consolidate what it's taken. this is the main route from ukraine's sunni region into russia itself. you have to imagine it as an

artery. and as advances start to slow, the question becomes what next? they took this relatively with an element of surprise and elite forces. but you wonder if they can hold it as russia deploys thousands of troops. that could be very different. and this man signed up to support ukraine with a full-scale invasion. >> no one like war. we want to finish it. i'm not keen to fight but for our ukraine and for our people, we'll stand till the end. james: anatoli just returned from russian soil and noticed a difference in progress. >> we're still advancing. it's slowed down a bit, but we're moving forward. as long as we have orders and instructions, we'll keep on moving. james: anatoli hopes his efforts will relieve pressure on other parts of the front line.

but that's not happening.s goals to be shifting from liberation to producing bargaining chips to a future peace deal, whenever that might be. james waterhouse, bbc news, sunni region. ben: we're going to discuss the situation in ukraine now and why it has launched that offensive, that extraordinary incursion into russia in the last few days. i'm joined by the ambassador john herbst, senior director of the eurasia center and former ambassador to ukraine. and peter dickinson who also is a part of the atlantic council as the editor of ukraine alerts. thanks very much for being with us. john, if i could come to you first of all. the ukrainians are saying this is all about future peace negotiations and achieving a fair peace agreement. but to be honest, it doesn't look like there are any kind of peace talks on the horizon at

all. john: what you need to understand is the six or eight or even 10 weeks, there has been a fair amount of talk about a cease-fire in place or peace negotiations partly fueled by statements coming from moscow but also having some -- you might say reacceptivity among i.e., westerners, who have always been willing to throw ukraine under the bus to russian aggression and pressure was mounting. i think this startling and successful offensive has changed the conversation to what ukraine has done. and point of fact, now you have on russian media, the russian media controlled by the kremlin, people talking about maybe they have to put up with having occupied russia for some period of time. so in fact, these games could be a serious bargaining chip for a negotiation to come so that the westerners are now forcing ukraine into an unjust peace.

so from that point of view, this has been a very successful campaign, though it's far from over. ben: peter dickinson, can i ask you, do you think this was a good idea for ukraine to invade russian territory? and actually, do you think they might do it again if they see somewhere else where russian offenses are vulnerable, might they go for another incursion? peter: well, they certainly achieved the initial success of surpse out of changing the narrative around the war and forcing the russians on the back foot. ukraine has been on the defensive for the best part of the last year. russia has been edging forward steadily, especially in the east of ukraine, so ukraine, by doing this and pulling this very dramatic surprise, has been able to change the whole complexion of the war and suddenly regain the initiative and put putin on the backboard. in that sense it's been successful. would they do it else where?

well, i think the invasion has already demonstrated that russia's borders are relatively undefended and are very vulnerable. so certainly i think that's a threat russia would have to consider and is maybe part of the operation. ukraine wants russia to consider that because what ukraine wants more than anything in the short term is to force the russians to pull some of their troops out of ukraine and to defend russia itself. russia has deployed almost its entire army in ukraine and ukraine is looking to exploit that by striking into areas that are largely undefended. ben: john, can i ask you, do you not think there are risks attached to this incursion for the west, actually, because we're seeing a lot of western hardware being used by the ukrainians on russian soil, british challenger tanks, for example. doesn't that embroil western nations in this conflict even more? john: they've committed a savage

act of aggression with war crimes in ukraine. the west has provided support to ukraine to defend itself. ukraine has demonstrated that part of a good defense is a successful offense. so with a we're doing with our weapon is helping ukraine defend itself. and of course, it's only natural ukraine should be able to strike into russia. we've seen the west, especially the united states and germany, be intimidated by constant russian nuclear threats which have all proved to be bluff. and we've encouraged moscow's aggression by being willing to be intimidated. there is now talk in washington -- well, let's just say i think the odds of the united states removing all of its restrictions on the weapons to ukraine are going up and i expect to see those changes at some point, although it could be next week or a year from now. ben: peter, just a last thought

to you. sooner or later, putin is going to have to send some pretty heavy reinforcements to try to retake that whole area ukraine has captured. he cannot let this stand, can he? peter: presumably not, you're quite right. that's the dilemma putin finds himself in. he understands very well ukraine wants to withdraw his troops from ukraine to russia. he's reluctant to do that. and the initial reports we're hearing this past week or so is he's turning to russia's conscripts who aren't necessarily supposed to be used in combat zones to fill the gap. but ultimately you're quite right, he will need to make that decision and it's hugely embarrassing for putin to be the first russian leader since world war ii to suffer an invasion. i think he will have to make that decision and probably pull out some of his troops if ukraine is able to establish a firm foothold and fortify his position, which looks like what

ukraine is doing. important decisions for putin in the next few weeks. ben: thank you, john herbst and peter dickinson, both part of the atlantic council. many thanks, indeed, for both of you for your analysis of what's going on in ukraine with their incursion into russia. you're watching the bbc news. do stay with us. announcer: funding for presentation of this program is provided by... financial services firm, raymond james. announcer: funding was also provided by, the freeman foundation. and by judy and peter blum kovler foundation, pursuing solutions for america's neglected needs. ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪

announcer: "usa day" calls it, "arguably the best bargain in streaming." that's because the free pbs app lets you watch the best of pbs anytime, anywhere.

♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ announcer: funding for presentation of this program