jazeera.com. >> this is aljazeera. ♪ theme >> hello, welcome to the news hour. the clamor for military action over the suspected chemical attack in syria gross. british politicians gather to debate intervening. there are signs of preparations, british jets have arrived in cypress. >> one of the most wanted men in india was arrested after five years on the run. >> i'm in new orleans. it's a city struggling to recover from hurricane katrina, now a new generation of

entrepreneurs is helping it stage a comeback. ♪ theme >> in just half an hour, british prime minister david cameron will lead a debate in particlement on military action in syria in a responsibility to a chemical attack. whatever vote parliament takes, they won't be making a binding decision for a few days yet. they want to hear what the u.n. weapons inspectors inside syria say and they won't be finished with their work until saturday. simon mcgregor wood is in london. this is a vote, simon, which is a difference motion than cameron had hoped to approve. what do we expect to see in parliament? >> he's been knocked back from

the original motion specifically tailored toward this fast track, if you like, forwarded military action. he's had to because of oppositions from the labor party, main opposition party and significant -- we're very skeptical about the time table to strikes against syria. tonight's vote, it will be much later this afternoon after what we expect to be a heated debate, will simply be -- >> all right, that was simon speaking to us from just outside the houses of parliament in london where members of parliament are convening in just about a half hour's time. i do apologize for that technical glitch with i'm son. >> in the united states, b. gave

an interview to u.s. television. he said that he hadn't decided on whether to take military action. >> if in fact we can take limited, tailored approaches, not getting drawn into a long conflict, not a repetition of iraq, which i know a lot of people are worried about, but if we are saying in a clear and decisive, but very limited way, we send a shot across the bow saying stop doing this, that can have a positive impact on our national security over the long term and may have a positive impact in the sense that chemical weapons are not used again on innocent civilians. >> barack obama speaking. we are joined out of washington. kimberly, looking over at what's happening in the u.k., will the

potential slowdown there affect the u.s.'s decisions on syria? when can we expect obama to make a decision on what to do? >> the president still has a number of steps before he is to make any final decision, the president saying he is still consulting with senior pentagon military officials, but the bashar al-assad regime should be held responsible. a senior official telling aljazeera that that decision will be made in close consultation with the u.s.'s friend andological we, the united kingdom. president obama, as you heard there in that interview with the public broadcast network wednesday saying he is not interested in an open-ended conflict. still, the president is preparing for any sort of potential counter strike that may be launched by assad's forces, syrian forces. again, the president has not supplied any evidence or proof, something the american people

are very keen to hear from their president. they are not open to any sort of long, open-ended war. in fact, the president is still gathering intelligence, said to be waiting for human intelligence being gathered by the c.i.a., as well as top military leaders. that intelligence will then be supplied to members of congress. now, we're told that that should happen stimulater today. it will be happening between a teleconference between the white house and on capitol hill. then we are told that that declassified version of that intelligence will be made public to the american people stimulater in the week. we expect a decision could come sometime after that. >> kimberly, let me ask you one more thing about how americans are feeling about a possible strike and the involvement of their country in syria. >> americans are very war weary. they have had 10 years of watching u.s. soldiers coming

back maimed and wounded, off feeling like the purpose of the war got lost in the mix, whether it be iraq and accusizations of false intelligence and later proof of false intelligence or long open-we understanded conflict in afghanistan, americans are not prepared for seeing that happen again. with the discussion of syria, most polls show americans are not in support of that. one other point is that the top general joint chief of staff dempsey testified before congress in july that in fact there woul would be a very costy endeavor, something the american people do not want to support. there is not the appetite in the united states for the kind of conflict that many are fearful the u.s. could be drawn into in syria. >> all right, thanks. that's kimberly reportedding for us from washington. >> the french penalty said that a political solution is needed in syria, but that can happen

only if the international community can stop killings. >> we must do all we can to find a political solution. we'll only get there if the international community is able to put an end to this escalation of violence of which the chemical massacre is merely an illustration. >> we've had discussions with the president over this issue, and we thank the republic of france for its stand on syria and the people for their solidarity standing against this inhumane crime. >> let's look at other news now. in at least 15 afghan policeman have been killed and 10 wounded in a taliban action bush. the attack happened wednesday evening. fighters have frequently ambushed vehicles on the road in a main trade route through the province. >> while aljazeera has gained access to a military hospital, that's where medics are working

to treat wounded soldiers, as well as taliban fighters. again i have glass has the story from afghanistan. >> the lieutenant has lost a leg, another is pinned together. a month ago, his army truck ran over a land mine. >> i had four soldiers with me. we were going toward a check point to check on my boys. the blast killed three of my men. >> he says there was no question the i.e.d. was planted by the taliban. in a nearby ward, local civilians are recovering from wounds in flicked by bombs hidden in the ground. >> most of our patients are victims of road side bombs, land mines, suicide attacks, but mostly i.e.d.'s. >> the afghan government has stopped giving out army casualty physician. a nato official said 1,000 soldiers were killed and 3,000 wounded in four months of

fighting. about a quarter come here. >> they don't just treat soldiers and civilians here. hospital officials won't let us in, but behind this door are four injured taliban fighters. >> doctors treat the taliban like any other patients. >> we talk to them every day, because the taliban think people who work with the army are in fidels. we want to prove we are all muslims, not in if he did he also. we try to win hearts and minds by educating them. >> doctors will turn them over to afghan intelligence officials. a double amputee is awake and talking 24 asker after being admitted. doctors say it shows the high quality of care here. like the army, military medical personnel are also working to become independent, but say they still need training, financing and logistics help from nato and international donors. the most important thing for now is getting patients to the hospital quickly to give them the best chance of survival.

jennifer glass, aljazeera, at, southern afghanistan. >> in egypt, the national alliance called on all egyptians to come out on friday to protest. while during the press conference, alliance members welcomed any initiatives to calm the current situation but refused to support the military coup. >> we welcome any initiative, but will go with our activities, all peaceful as it is the full right of the citizens to express their viewpoints. we welcome any dialogue, but we will continue with other activities. >> >> what was the atmosphere like at that press conference? >> well, during the atmosphere, there was a lot of anticipation, because this press conference

was significant. people here basically are wondering the strategy is going to be in the days ahead. many people wanted to see who are the leaders spearheading this movement now that may not have been arrested. it was very interesting. they laid out their strategy for the days ahead for tomorrow, friday, which you is a very important day for prosecutor tests here but for the coming days. they're saying that the strategy has shifted, although the methods used is the same, taking to the streets from the mosques in small numbers. they are going to have mobile protests and retreat for withdraw that their neighborhoods afterward because they are scared of the military and of the current crack down. they are going to concentrate of the youth. members are calling on other young people to boycott several companies associated with the regime. they have the black list, telling them basically not to

buy products from them and not to show up at work during. >> monica, you mentioned that given the state of emergency that's taking place in egypt right now and given the curfew, as well that's in place, do they fear any sort of consequences from the military and is the military actually going to allow these protests to come out on the streets on friday? >> well, that's a great question, and of course, it's hard to tell. what they seem to think is that if they have small in connection and short protests, they will be ok. a lot of people that i talked to personally said they're very motivated and they're still going to take it to the streets. they fear, of course, but said they were going to do it anyway. very importantly, they wanted to send the international community a clear message, which is they want to show that a lot of people are against what they call the coup and the toppling of mohamed morsi and want to take to the streets to voice

this message. >> thank you. aljazeera correspondent and cameraman, producer and local producer in fact are being detained by egyptian authorities, just to let you know and have been held since tuesday. they were in cairo covering events there for our global audience and they're just journalists and we urge our colleagues to be released uncondition ally. >> still to come, u.s. defense secretary is in the phillipines where military cooperation is being discussed. there is more rain on the way for flooded areas of china. we have a report. >> after a lengthy rain delay, was murray in a hurry to get the job done from new york? coming up in sports.

>> these are defensive assets. two arrived within the last our, another four are due presumably any minute, actually. the runway begins at the tower over my left shoulder. the official statement from the british said this is purely a prudent and precautionary measure to make sure the u.k. interests and defense of our sovereign base areas, a movement of defense assets operating in air to air role only, not deploying to take any military action against syria. the military at pains to offer reassurance that these are protected assets, rather than

the beefing up of military hardware in a deeply sensitive reason at a deeply sensitive time. >> what about reports we are hearing about russia sending two war ships to the east mediterranean? is that a direct response to the beefing up of the u.k. and french? >> well again, there is a difference between what military analysts believe the motives for that are and what the official explanations for these military movements are. certainly the official russian agency quoting a military official saying this is not a new group, but a planned rotation. it seems almost in conceivable that the increased tension here in the eastern mediterranean is not in some part responsible for that decision to move these particular russian ships to this particular area. look at the ships that they are, one is missile cruiser, another

large anti military ship. consider the type of attack which is being speculated possibly against syria, a missile attack perhaps from a ship, perhaps a tomahawk attack from a submarine. you can see that the bringing in of russian missile ships and anti submarine ships, well that really does heighten the tension. >> ok, paul, thank you. that's paul brennan reporting from air base in cypress. let's speak to lowered brown, a former u.k. minister and former secretary general of the united nations joining us out of london. good to have you with us. a lot of sort of various developments to consider when it comes to the syrian situation, but let's look at what's happening in the u.k. right now. the prime minister david cameron is expected to lead a debate in parliament on military action in syria, however no binding action will be taken today. it seems that the u.k. is

slowing down somewhat from an immediate military strike. you must be happy about that. >> yeah, i think there's great relief across most of the british public. there has been a race to do something over the weekend, and frankly, they were getting ahead of themselves, the government was getting ahead of itself. i think there's a general view here in the u.k. that if there is to be even limited and proportionate military action, it needs to follow and not proceed full airing of the issues and the intelligence about the chemical weapon strikes in the security council, and that it's far preferable, although perhaps not likely that action be indoorsed and approved by the security council, but that even if it isn't to have tried to get that international

unanimoty. >> the british legal officers have today published an opinion, which says that on the grounds of humanitarian intervention and protecting civilians from further chemical weapons strikes there is a basis to do this. i think it borrows heavily from the justification used in the case of kosovo, but it is by any standards legally weaker than a security council approval, and more importantly, politically less legitimate. it risks being seen again as a narrow coalition of nations taking its own punishment on syria rather than the international community acting as a whole. >> the intelligence committee, british intelligence committee says there is some intelligence to suggest and this coming just about a half an hour ago, this information, there is some

intelligence to suggest the regime in the attack last week. if there was conclusive evidence that the government of assad had used the chemical weapons against its civilians, would you be in favor of military intervention by the u.k., u.s. and others. >> i would be, but i would hope the whole security council even if it didn't support it, critics like russia and china would action with wee as he is ocean that it would clearly be a breach of international principles and international law. let me just say that the j.i.c. document that you refer to, which has been published just in the last hour or saw actually falls far short of providing that conclusive evidence. it's very much a white haul civil servant document, heavily

edited. british politics lives under the shot dough of the faulty dose yea, the sexed up dose yea as it was called at the time of intelligence about weapons of mass destruction in iraq, so there's a sort of allergy amongst british officials about producing convincing intelligence in a way that sort of pushes the drive towards. that's why i think the u.n. inspectors material they gather remains the right way to go on this. >> do you think that david cameron is just hungry for war right now? >> i this i that would be a very unfair characterization of it, but i do think that he's gotten ahead of himself. he's sort of in a sort of sporting analogy we like to use, falling over his ski tips a bit. he's rushed back from holiday,

demanded quick action and frankly to try to, there's a suggestion on the u.s. side they want to do it ahead of the g-20 meeting in st. petersburg next week, so it's off the agenda before that meeting happens. this is the wrong way to proceed. you don't try to do it quickly before public opinion is formed. any decision to take military action is an enormously important one for any country as well as for all the members of the security council. it should follow a deliberative process, not preemptively precede it. >> already, lord brown, thank you for which for talking to aljazeera. >> two algerian prisoners at the u.s. military detention center at guantanamo bay were sent home, handed over to the algerian government. the transfers are part of a deal announced last month and represent u.s. efforts to close the military prison. >> u.n. peacekeepers have been

fired on in the darfur region by armed men near the chad border. there were no casualties. this is the third attack this month. hundreds have died in tribal fighting in darfur this year. violence against the u.n. missioned has worsened. >> pakistan ordered the retrial of a doctor who helped the c.i.a. find osama bin laden. he worked for u.s. intelligence collecting d.n.a. to verify bin laden's presence. he was sentenced to prison in may of 2012. >> india has arrested its most wanted criminal, held on wednesday on the eastern border with nepal. the group has been linked to a group claiming responsibility for attacks in india. we are joined live from new delhi with more on that story.

what can you tell us about the arrest? >> he was arrested on the indian-nipal border. it was a secret operation, he was arrested along with three other people. what we should say, though is it's unclear where the process goes from here or which stage it is at following his arrest. it will be watched with extreme interest across the country and region particularly for a country that certainly wanted a glimpse into the indian mujahedeen for sometime. >> all right. thanks very much for joining us out of new delhi. >> employee's teams in china are struggling with surging water levels after 33,000 people she cram waited. the military have been along the river. we have more.

>> i know everyone's tired, but we must keep morale high and fight to the end for final victory. it's a battle against a relentless enemy, the massive waters of the river. these are the worst floods in this area for more than 100 years. today is the first day in weeks that the water level has held even rather than rising. with rain on the way and the fear of more water flowing downstream, the work is non-stop. >> the big evident challenge now is that the soldiers are so tired. we've been working 12 days and nights, but we must succeed. >> it's an outdoor sandbag factory. the finished products are ferried to where they are needed, hundreds of meters from the true river bank. >> despite the tremendous scale of this effort, authorities here are splitting resources, just in

case this gets overtopped and the water rushes inland. >> so several kilometers away, a huge earthen wall is being built, the last line of defense for the town. in between, village have been evacuated, apart from this one where people are relying on their local knowledge. >> my father told me that a great flood 80 years ago flooded over there and over there, but the bridge wasn't completely flooded. >> at first the government told us to evacuate, but later said because this place is higher than other villages, we can stay. >> in a sports hall in town, 30,000 in this region who had to be moved, some because of flooding, others because they remain at risk. just outside, work continues on the emergency embankment. the hope is it won't be needed. aljazeera, china. >> let's get a check on the weather.

>> much of what the issue we have at the moment with the flooding in northeastern parts of china arises from rainfall that occurred about the 15t 15th and 16th of the month. what you've got at the moment are relatively quiteetter conditions. once the rainfall, it takes quite a while to respond in terms of the river. that's not to say the situation is entirely fine across northeastern parts of china. indeed, lets not forget the for east of russia where the river has reached record levels, too. we have areas of low pressure there, affects eastern parts of russia. in terms of the scale of the rain, we're probably over the worst of it as it stands at the moment. across japan, the rainfall situation will likely deteriorate heading into the weekend. we've got tropical storm conray moving up from the south as it hits the early morning hours

saturday, they will likely see gusts of wind over 100k.p.h. it looks as though it's going to be very wet across the eastern parts of china for the next day or so, but will get somewhat better. >> still you to come on the aljazeera news hour, bouncing back after the floods. it's been eight years since hurting cat devastated new orleans. we look at how the city is attract the new talent. >> the sheep slaughter ritual. did their luck run out? we'll have all the details in sports. arabia for that. ♪ ç]

♪ theme >> british prime minister david cameron is about to begin a debate in british parliament about syria. a binding agreement won't be made until the u.n. investigators have finished their investigation in syria. u.n. weapons inspectors are still investigating a suspected poison gas attack in syria, expected to finish their work on saturday. >> simon mcgregorwood is outside the houses of parliament in london for us. when do we expect the debate to begin and what are we expecting to see? >> any minute now is the short

answer there, the bells of big ben have just signaled 2:30 london time when the parliamentary debate on the government's motion will tart. it will get underway very shortly. this is a crucial afternoon for prime minister david cameron. it's not the debate he wanted. it won't be the vote he was first looking for. he's had to fall back several paces fromle first motion that he tabled just 48 hours ago, which was very much in tune with this fast track approach to military strikes against syria. he has met far more political opposition than he expected. it was demanding take the u.s. process get underway and be allowed to make decisions on the u.n. inspectors report. they don't leave until saturday.

he has been forced into a climb down, promising that there will be a second vote authorizing military action if we get that far once that u.n. body has had time to analyze results. that will not be until the early part of the week. he's lost some credibility, in a sense lost control of had foreign policy issue. that's something british prime ministers don't like to do. this afternoon's debate will be simply a vote on the principle of using military force if necessary. that's not what he wanted and it's not clear he's going to get a vote in fave that have, either. >> simon, you mentioned the work of the u.n. chemical weapons team currently in syria, not due to finish until saturday, but it seems that the u.k. intelligence committee have now come up with their own findings, tying the regime to that chemical weapons attack in syria. >> the government was very quick this afternoon to put those out and make those views public, but they fall far short of proof.

proof is what a lot of people, both inside particlement and outside in the country more generally are demanding, it seems. the joint intelligence committee reports that it was highly likely it was the regime, highly unlikely that the resistance had the wherewithal to launch a strike. it mentioned that the regime that used chemical weapons in 14 previous occasions. iit falls far short of proof and will not convince many people voting later this evening. >> there have been a lot of questions over the legality of any strike on syria should it happen. what is the u.k. saying on that issue? >> the government has also rushed out its legal advice from the attorney general. it's using the doctrine of

humanitarian intervention saying yes, a u.n. security council resolution authorizing military force would be great, but it's not likely to happen. if it doesn't happen, voled down by the russians and chinese as we all expect it to, then it's still ok, we have legal justification under what they describe as the doctrine of humanitarian intervention, allowing you to go in to stop an unfolding humanitarian tragedy to force whoever is doing it, in this case the government believes the assad regime to stop doing it and force is allowed under those circumstances, the government argues. it will have a tough time convincing that that is the case. >> we'll speak to you later on. thank you. sir alan west was security advisor to the former prime minute at her brown and agrees with the decision by british politicians to hold off on a vote on military intervention in

syria. >> i think sanity has prevailed. it would have been ludicrous to march into attacks on siria before we'd seen the formal report from the u.n. teams. we ought to expose clearly the intelligence and information that clearly the americans and ourselves have which just about implicate the syrian regime and should approach the russians with that in a very public way, make them look at it with us and go through it with us, because we clearly see they will all have to say this is very sound or we don't like it and the world will see they are playing silly games. if we put that pressure on, they might agree to a u.n. security council resolution, not signing up to it, but actually abstaining, which of course rather like the libyan case would allow things to be done. i have no doubt some 36 hours ago, we were marching with the momentum to actually doing attacks, and we should not do that lightly.

we have to think very carefully before these things are done. >> police in the value african re. cleared thousands of civilians protesting at the airports. they had fled to the main international airport to escape rebel fighters and camped out on the runway for 18 hours, blocking some flights from landing. the central african republic have been in turmoil since march when the president was toppled. >> we're taking you live to london now. that i also the scene in parliament, where they are debating m.p.'s or depay thing -- about to begin a debate, rather on military action in syria. we do expect the prime minister david cameron to speak. let's just dip into that and listen. >> i have selected manuscript amendment b. submitted this morning in the leader of the opposition. the text of the manuscript amendment is available from the vote office.

i should also inform the house that i have set a five minute limit on back bench speeches in the debate to move the motion i call the prime minister. >> thank you, mr. speaker. i thank you mr. speaker for agreeing to our request to recall the house of commons for this important debate. the question before the house today is how to respond to one of the most abhor rent uses of chemical weapons in a century, slaughtering innocent men, women and children in syria. it is not about taking sides in the syrian conflict. it is not about invading. it is not about regime change, or even working more closely with the opposition. it is about the large scale use of chemical women and our response to a war crime, nothing else. in reaching our conclusions, let me set out what the house has in

front of it today. we have a summary of the government's legal position, making explicit that military axled have a clear legal basis. in a moment. we have the key independent judgments of the joint intelligence committee, making clear their view of what happened and who is responsible. we have a motion from the government that sets out a very careful path of 10s that need to be taken before britain could participate in any direct military action. these include the weapons inspector's reporting, further action at the united nations and another vote in this house of commons. the motion also makes clear that even if all these sten are taken, anything we do would have to be legal, proportionate and specifically focused on deterring and preventing further use of chemical women. let me give way to the honorable lady. >> i'm grateful to the prime minister forgiving way but could he tell the house why he has refused to publish the full

attorney general advice, instead just a one and a half page summary of it especially saying without explicit security council reinforcement, that simply is not legal under international law. >> there's been a long standing convention backed by attorney generals of all parties and governments not to publish any legal advice at all. this government has changed that and with the libya conflict published a summary and with this a very clear summary of the legal advice. i would urge all right honorable members to read it. mr. speaker, i am of course deeply mindful of the lessons of previous conflicts. i am going to make some progress and then i will take a huge number of incident everyventions. in particular the deep concerns in the country caused by what went wrong with the iraq conflict in 2003, but this is not like iraq. what we are seeing in syria is fundamentally different.

we are not invading a country. we are not searching for chemical or biological weapons. the case for ultimately and i say ultimately, because there would have to be another vote in this house, the case for ultimately supporting action is not based on a specific piece or pieces of intelligence. the fact the syrian government has hand has used chemical weapons is beyond doubt. the fact that the most recent attack took plagues is not seriously doubted p.m. the syrian government said it took place, even the iranian president said it took place. the evidence that the syrian regime used these weapons in the early hours of the 21 of august is right in front of our eyes. we have multiple eyewitness accounts of chemical filled rockets used against opposition controlled areas. we have thousands of social media reports and 95 different horrific videos documenting the evidence. the difference is with 2003 and the situation with iraq go wider. then europe was divided over what should be done.

now, europe is united in the view that we should not let this chemical weapons use stand. then nato was divided. today, nato has made a very clear statement that those responsible should be held accountable. back in 2003, the arab league was oh poled to action. now they are calling for it. they've issued a statement, holding the syrian regime fully responsible and asking the international community to overcome internal disagreements and to take action against those who committed this crime. i give way to my right honorable friend. >> as he knows, a couple of days ago, i was expecting to oppose the government tonight, but is my right honorable friend aware that his determination to go down the route of the united nations and his willingness to hold a further vote in this house will be extremely helpful in making up my mind tonight. >> i'm grateful to my friend. i want to unite as much of the

house at possible. it is right on these vital issues of national and international importance to seek the greatest possible consensus. i this i that is the right thing for the government to do and we will continue to do that. let me make some more progress. mr. speaker, the president of the united states, barack obama is a man who opposed the action in iraq. no one could in any way describe him as a president who wants to involve america in more wars in the middle east but he believes that an important red line has been crossed in an appalling way and that's why he supports action in this case. when he spoke to president obama last weekend i said we shared his view and that we must not stand aside, but i also explained, let me major point, i also explained to him that because of the damage done to public confidence because of iraq, we would have to follow steps including at the united

nations to build public confidence and insure the maximum possible legitimacy for any action. these steps are all set out in the motion before the house today. i remember in 2003, i was sitting there two rose from the back on the opposition benches. it was just after my son had been born and he was not well, but i was determined to be here. i wanted to listen to the man standing right here, and believe everything that he told me. we are not here to debate those issues today, but one thing is indisputable, the well of public opinion was well and truly poisoned by the iraq episode and we need to understand the public skepticism. i give way to the lady. >> i'm most grateful to the prime minister forgiving way. my reading of his motion tells me that everything within it could have been debated on monday. >> hear hear. >> this house has been recalled and i believe it was recalled in order to give cover for possible

military action this weekend. has the prime minister made it clear to president obama that in no way does this country support any attack that could come before the u.n. inspectors have done their job? >> i wanted to recall this house to debate these national and international issues but would answer her question directly. it is this house that will decide what steps we next take. if you agree to the motion i've set down, no action can be taken until we have heard from the u.n. weapons inspectors, until there's been further action at the united nations and another vote in this house. those are the conditions that we, the british government, the british parliament are setting and i think it's absolutely right that we do so. let me make a little bit more progress and i will take interventions from across the house. this deep public 166 imposes particular responsibilities on me as prime minister to try and

carry people in the country and people in this house with me. that is why i wanted parliament recalled and i wanted this debate to bring the country together and not divide it. i've included in my motion, the government motion all the issues that i could that were raised with me by the leader of the opposition, and in deed by many colleagues on all sides of the house because i want us to try to have the greatest possible unity on this issue. the need for the u.n. investigators to report, quite right, the importance of the process at the united nations, quite right, and the commitment to another vote in this house before any participation in direct action is in our motion, too, but i believe that the opposition motion is deficient in two vital respects. first it refer to the deaths on the 21 of august but does not refer to the fact that they were

caused by chemical weapons. this fact is accepted by almost every across the world. for the house to ignore it would send a very bad message to the world. second, i'll just make this point, i'll just make this point. in no way does the opposition motion begin to point the finger have blame at penalty assad. that is add odds what has been said by nato, president obama and every region alleyeder, governments of canada, turkey and india and the whole of the arab league. it's add odds with the joint intelligence committee and i think the opposition amendment will be the wrong message for this house to send to the world. i'll be recommending that my friends vote against it. i give way to my honorable friend. >> i'm grateful forgiving way. in welcoming his decision to go through the u.n. process, could he confirm to the house that

were we to define overwhelming opposition in the assembly and security council as occurred 10 years ago, we wouldn't then just motor on. >> i think it would be unthinkable to proceed if there were overwhelming opposition in the security council. the very best route to follow is to have a chapter seven resolution, take it to the u.n. security council, have it passed, and then think about taking action. that is the path we followed with libya. now, this is a very -- i want to make this point, it is very important. it cannot be the case that that is the only way to have a legal basis for action and we should consider for a moment what the consequences would be if that were the case. you could have a situation in a country where its government was literally annihilating half the people in that country but because of one veto on the security council you would be hampered from taking any action. i can't think of any member in any party of this house who

would sign up to that. that's why it's important we do have the doctrine of humanitarian intervention which is set out in the attorney general's excellent legal advice to this house. let me give way to my honorable friend. >> i'm very grateful to my right honorable friend and grateful for him to take the time to listen to the concerns of various residents about yet further british military intervention in the middle east. can i ask him why is it that our allies in the middle east, saudi, emirates, qatar, and others cannot take military action. why does it fall on us again? >> no decision about military action has been taken. it would require another vote of this house, but if we wanted to see action that was purely about deterring and degrading future chemical weaponles use by syria and that is the only base on which i would support action, you need the countries to have

the exhibits are doing that of which the united states and united kingdom are two. i will take interventions. >> on the matter of international law, did not the world leaders and the u.n. in 2005 sign up unanimously to the doctrine of the responsibility to protect which means that if countries default in their responsibility to defend their own citizens that the international community has a responsibility as a whole to defend those citizens, syria has defaulted on its responsibility to protect its own citizens. surely now the international community and ourselves have a responsibility to undertake to what we greed to do in 2005. >> it relates to what happened in kosovo and elsewhere. let me be clear what we are talking about today. it is about that doctrine and chemical weapons. it's about a treaty the whole world gradually to after the horrors of the world war.

is britain a country that wants to uphold that international taboo against the use of chemical weapons and my argument is yes it should be that sorted of country. >> such the issues of iraq and the impact they have on the decisions of today, but the deception, of his own preparedness to get involved in this conflict long before the current incident, surely has an impact on the decisions of today. >> what i would say to the right honorable gentleman is the case i'm making i guess that the house of commons needs to consider purely and simply this issue of a massive chemical weapons use by this regime. i am not arguing we should get more involved in this conflict or we should arm the rebels. i'm not making any of those arguments. the question before us is a government as a how else of commons, as a world is that this

1925 agreement post the first world war, these weapons are morally reprehensible and do we want to try and maintain that law. put simply, it is in britain says national interest to maintain a national taboo about the use of chemical weapons on the battle field. my arguments it is. britain was a part of drawling up that protocol, which syria itself signed. i think we have an interest in maintaining it. let me take an intervention. >> thank you forgiving way. i don't think many people in this house do not believe this today to be a prelude to involvement in syria. could he explain to us that if as the briefing says today there have already been 14 instances of use of chemical weapons, 100,000 people dead, 1.2 million people, why is it only now that the prime minister thinks this is the time for greater

intervention. >> i think the point for considering this tougher approach is that we know there are the 14 uses of chemical weapons on a smaller scale, at least 14, amounted now we have this much larger use. this does seem to me and to president obama, and to president olon and others an appropriate moment to ask whether it is time to do something, to stand up for the prohibition against the use of chemical weapons. you can't accuse me of rushing into something and on the other hand say why have you waited for 14 chemical attacks before doing something. in my speech, i want to do thee things. i want as to explain what we know, set out the path that we will follow and try and answer all of the difficult questions put to me. i promise i'll take. >>erventions as i go along. what we know happened, it was reported that in just three hours on the morning of the 21 of august, three hospitals in the damascus area received approximately 3,600 patients with symptoms consistent with

chemical weapons attacks. at least 350 of those innocent people died. the video footage illustrates some of the most sickening human suffering imaginable. an expert video analysis can find no way that this wide array of footage could have been fabricated, particularly the behavior of small children in those shocking videos. there are pictures of bodies with as i am temperatures consistent with that of nerve agent exposure including muffle spasms and foaming at the nose and mouth. mr. speaker, anyone in this chamber moo have not seen these votes i believe should force themselves to watch them. you can nerve forget the site of children's bodies stored in ice, young men and women gasping for air and suffer agonizing deaths inflicted by weapons outlawed for nearly a century. the regime admitted they were conducting a military practice

at that time that time. rocket level reached a level four times higher than the preceding 10 days. there is intelligence that regime forces took precautions normal with chemical weapons use. examining all this evidence together with the available intelligence, the joint intelligence committee has made its judgment, and did you so in lines with the reforms put in place put in law. we are today publishes these --

>> i am saying this is a judgment. we all have to reach a judgment about what happened and who was responsible, but i would put it to you that from all the evidence we have, the fact that opposition don't have chemical weapons, the fact the regime do, the fact they've used it, were attacking the area at the time and that intelligence i

reported, that is enough to conclude the regime is responsible and should be held accountable. let me take the right honorable lady and then the gentleman. >> what has convinced, where is the evidence that an action by the international community would cease the use of chemical weapons within syria, a country where 100,000 dead, millions of reef gees and the continuing action which is destroying totally that country, where is the evidence that convinces him that the external world can prevent this? >> honorable lady makes a serious point. there is no 100% certainty who is responsible. you to have make a judgment. there is no 100% certainty about what path of action might succeed or fail but let me sage. i think we can be as certain as possible that when we have a regime that has used chemical weapons on 14 occasions that is most likely responsible for this

large scale attack that if nothing is done, it will conclude that it can use these weapons again and again and on a larger scale and with i am punty and when we'll talk about escalation, to me the biggest danger is if the world community, not just britain, tanned back and do nothing. i think assad will draw very clear conclusions from that. >> the prime minister is making a powerful and heartfelt speech. could i explain why he thinks president assad did this. there seems to be no logic for this attack. >> it's a very good question. if he reads the conclusions, this is where they find the greatest difficulty of ascribing motives. lots have been ascribed. i think he has been testing the boundaries, 14 uses and no response, at least 14 uses, and he wants to know whether the world will respond to the use of

these weapons, which actually, i suspect tragically and repulsively are proving quite effective.

♪ theme >> welcome to aljazeera, i'm richelle care. the british government says that legal conditions have been met for taking action against syria for launching a chemical weapons attack against its people last week. mean time, the german government said the russian president agreed that the united nations must deal with the situation in jair. the obama administration will brief congress today on the chemical attacks. anticipation is growing over whether the president will decide to launch an attack. yesterday, obama told pbs the united can take a stance against syria that does not result in