activists say 500 people have been killed by syrian government forces bombarding eastern ghouta — nearly a quarter of them children. the un is due to vote on a resolution but it is not known if this will go ahead. the red cross becomes the latest aid charity to become embroiled in scandal after revealing that 21 staff paid for sexual services whilst working for them a man and a woman have been charged with causing death by dangerous driving following a crash which killed two young brothers in coventry. the actress emma chambers has died aged 53. she was perhaps best known for playing alice tinker in the vicar of dibley, alongside dawn french — as well as her role as honey thacker in the film notting hill. britain's women's curling team have lost to japan in the bronze medal

match at the winter olympics in south korea. now on bbc news, it's time for dateline london with carrie gracie. hello and a very warm welcome to dateline london. i'm carrie gracie. this week we look at the continuing carnage in syria, and discuss the latest twists in the brexit debate. my guests this week: the political commentator alex deane, marc roche of le point, the american writer and broadcaster jeffrey kofman, and the columnist for the gulf based newspaper the national, and arab weekly rashmee roshann lall. welcome to you all. barrel bombs, air strikes and shelling by syrian government forces have killed nearly 500 people this week, many of them children.

eastern ghouta the beseiged area on the edge of the syrian capital damascus, has been described as "hell on earth". the un has called for a ceasefire. rashmee, you've been following this nightmare, do you see an end to the suffering of people in syria? i think the response to that question should certainly not to be along the lines of what the united nations children's fund issued. its institutional heart was so heavy that it could not describe the suffering of the people of eastern ghouta, and it simply issued a blank statement, saying the truth is beyond language, there is nothing further to say. so you describe it then. i would say, one has to recognise words can have the quality of deeds. let's look at the facts, let's use words to do that. the facts on the ground are, syrian‘s president bashar al—assad, as long as he checks in with moscow, he can pretty much do what ever he wants in the country.

as long as he has robust foreign support. there has been a stand—off with the un with much of the world trying desperately to get this very small concession, which is a humanitarian halt to the siege and starve and strike strategies that assad is using. they can't do it because the russians are stopping it. the facts on the ground are that the syrian regime is there, it's not going away, and one finds it's very hard to understand the rational basis of what some trump administration officials describe as a return of the syrian state, not return of the syrian regime, kind of approach. they are not going anywhere, it can end if we recognise the facts on the ground. you are a north american, jeffrey, what's your view on the trump administration recognising facts on the ground? we saw a year ago in april when the sarin gas was used,

that was the red line in the sand, and to trump's credit he actually responded. the air strikes destroyed 20% of the syrian air force. he has calculated that is a red line, assad, i can do chlorine, these huge bombs, all sorts of carnage. but if i don't do chemical warfare per se, i can get away with it. that is what has happened. this will not be solved with american leadership. america is in the midst of a nervous breakdown, it is too internal—looking right now to care about this. i despair because i don't see how this will work. russia is playing chess, the rest of the world is playing checkers. of course we can hope and in some way there must be a solution, i struggle to see where it is. france, long experienced in the middle east, the french pushing hard for that un security council resolution. is there a game of chess that can be

turned into checkers or vice versa? the problem is that in the security council, russia who has a veto and is a prominent member, who knows very well the un because of the court, is making the situation impossible. the only hope with america out of the game is france. and britain. they have one armament they can use against the assad regime. it's russia. it's hardening the sanctions, and if you think that there are lots of putin's friends who have property in britain, property in france and on the cote d'azur, here the chelsea football club, the owner is close, they could seize all this. but britain and france love russian money so they won't be any help. i am at least on a moral issue, france and britain,

they are showing the way. it's no accident all of us have mentioned russia and its involvement in the assad regime. long gone are the days when president obama mocked mitt romney for calling russia the threat of the future. we blame russia for everything from hacking to the beast from the east in the weather. here i think criticism of russia is very well founded. as well as russia's formal forces on the ground in syria, which are significant, we see the operation of companies like wagner pmc, private military companies, mercenaries, on the ground embedded in assad's forces, fighting the kurdish anti—assad forces. why this matters so much, fighting against the americans directly, we are seeing russians albeit not in russian uniform but it seems with the blessing of the kremlin,

in operation up to 2500 of them, fighting alongside assad's forces directly against americans. it's an incredibly dangerous situation, so it's notjust about what happens in syria to solve it, it's also the potential risk of americans and russians facing off directly. earlier this month we saw a confrontation between russian and american forces in which the western side claims 100 russians died, the kremlin admits several dozen did. more of that and we get dragged into a conflict in a way we saw for much of the 20th century, bad news. i think we must understand that for russia there is a lot at stake here. this is syria, strategically so important. the only russian mediterranean base is there, they want to keep their foothold geopolitically in this area. the us is focused elsewhere. presumably for the russians it stands to reason that they want to give their syrian allies time to finish off the rebels on the edge of damascus?

there are a lots of arguments that say we should prevent the collapse of the syrian state. libya is not a shining template, nobody wants to go there. this is not about rewarding bad behaviour or giving carte blanche to callous leaders, it is about if we care about the suffering of the syrian people, we want it to stop. the trouble is, mark's point was the french and british responsibility applies. we were for and against assad, now we are not sure. 0ur foreign policy seems to be that he should go but on balance we would rather the state did not collapse. a contradiction. the sanctions are a weak point, they cannot put up with more sanctions. the economy is doing badly. surely her point is we need to let the syrian people out of this misery and do i understand correctly, you are basically saying at some

point, the syrian government should be assisted in finishing this in as civil a way as possible? exactly. basically what we are understanding is there maybe a arrangement with mr assad, we may talk about that at some point, he has mentioned it. maybe because the russians have him by the short and curlies, let the situation get to there. if people can help, help. if not, get the message and get out. you bring up libya and i covered libya for abc news. the failed state solution is one we all fear now. and iraq very much is like that as well. what i worry about that is it's easier to let things bump along and let the people of syria suffer so horrendously than to find a long—term solution. particularly in today's world where you can talk about this concept of empathy, we as consumers of media in the west

are so beaten down by the imagery, as i was preparing for this and reviewing some of the footage last night — it's really hard to watch. if you go to the bbc website, it's much easier to go to some list article on buzz feed than to look at these children suffering. assad is a war criminal. he should not be allowed to do what he is doing. he should be in the hague. who is taking the leadership to say that? we are sitting in london, where is the outrage from westminster, where is borisjohnson on this? fatigue. more to the point, who can enforce that? the russians. can i bring up another country — iran? what about their role? that is another question. that is in a way balanced

because israel and iran balance each other, they are not really the main proponent, it's russia. without the russian air force, assad is dead. so it is russia we should target, iran in a way hezbollah, a side to the story. what do you think about the question of borisjohnson. much distracted about events with brexit. is there a role for leadership? i think there is a significant role for our country in this discussion, a moral responsibility given our history and heritage in that region. i do think we should not overstep our bounds. if we are going to act in this environment, if you break it, you own it. if we intervene significantly and if assad were to go as a result, two big ifs, who goes in his place? what is our responsibility for popping up that regime? the pragmatic answer is that this terrible person running his country

is better rather than propping up a new regime for which we bear the responsibility that cannot go well. war criminals sometimes have to be tolerated? yes. bad leaders sometimes had to stay in office. he is a war criminal, not a bad leader. he is president of the country. what about the un? we had the french ambassador talking about this being a key credibility moment, notjust the graveyard for many syrians but it also should notjust be the graveyard for the un security council. is it is now 11 times russia has blocked the resolutions on this? there is a paralysis here, the russian agenda and the rest of the world's agenda are in conflict. the structure of the un is now paralysed and the credibility very much at stake. basically every major international issue like this has failed to be resolved because of the kinds

of power imbalances. in the end we form these so—called coalitions of the willing and if something will happen here, that's where it would be. but the un is doing a terrific job, a very good job with the 5 million refugees. it's good for other things. we must move on but a yes, no answer. if there were listeners or viewers to this programme in eastern ghouta today, yes or no, is there any hope for them in the nearfuture to an end of the air strikes and the siege they are living under? no. there is always hope. i refuse to say there isn't. i don't see it but i want to believe it. there we have to move on. one of the biggest questions is brexit. ambitious managed divergence. that is the expression the british

prime minister theresa may and her senior ministers came up with at a summit this week to describe their vision of britain's future relationship with the european union. the president of the european council called it pure illusion. on monday the labour leader jeremy corbyn will set out his alternative. alex, where does this ambitious managed divergence stand today? 0ur prime minister with the office comes a very nice country manor house, and she went with ten of her senior ministers, her brexit war cabinet, to discuss what happens next. there was some agreement amongst those people, not least in mutual recognition of goods between us and the eu. that matters because the conservative party has not been entirely united on questions about future relationships with the eu. you are right, the next step is what happens domestically in the uk between the government and the opposition. jeremy corbyn‘s position on this,

perversely, given that he's not in government will be quite decisive for the mid—stage we are now looking at. he must decide, i'm amazed he has pulled off this trick of not really showing his hand so far, is he going to come out in favour of us remaining in the customs union or a customs union, and if so, will he take the labour party with him to vote against the government? and the answer? i think he won't. putting your colours to the mast like that undermines him with many labour voters who voted to leave the european union, and makes a stark position between him and the government with the government saying we are trying to implement the largest vote we ever had in our country and you are seeking to stymie it. putting aside principles, the practical political question is, could he defeat the government? that i don't know. if he stood up for the customs union, some conservative mps would vote with him.

we will come back to that. i want to go back to that chequers moments, the kind of, some called it a fudge, others called it ambitious, the prime minister playing a blinder. as someone not in the entrails of brexit everyday, do you feel you watched that episode and you now understood where the government stands on brexit? i am a politicaljunkie so i do understand it but for much of the world, if you compile the definitive brexit dictionary after all this is over much after march 2019, there will be these key phrases, manage divergences, the vassal state, cake and eat it philosophy. the three baskets approach. all of it goes on and on. basically, as one can understand it, clearly, the eu keeps expressing great surprise and bewilderment at the british position. it's always been clear. it's posture.

the british want everything. they have said it over and over. which part of that event not understand ? whether it is unattainable or not. we have already heard the president of the european council say pure illusion, is there a route by which the uk can win all gain no pain? no, because you cannot cherry pick the single market or the custom union, you are in or you are out. the chequers compromise is purely for internal, because as far as the 27 are concerned, they will refuse it. so it's a fudge for domestic consumption? yes, a domestic fudge. you have on one side a very divided uk government, who is coming now with this cherry picking of what they want. 0n the other side, which you forget, the 27 are all united. they all know what they want to do, britain is isolated,

britain has absolutely no cards. let's just check... i just want a reality check. this is now more than a year and a half into this discussion, we are now approaching a year before the divorce, whatever you want to call it, that's the polite word. an open marriage! maybe. we are still talking about general terms and concepts. we have moved from brexit means brexit to these new terms that you rhyme off, yet we are not getting into specifics. it just shows that theresa may as you say had this impossible balancing act within her party. the country does not know where it's going. we should be concerned about the lack of leadership. there was an agreement in phase one. good. there will be an agreement on phase two, which will be bad for britain. it is moving on.

the trade now is the most important thing. again, britain is isolated in trade, the illusions of grandeur that they can get there on their own, it's a medium—sized country facing 27. this is a negotiation in which people are taking postures. the peculiar thing, i am not saying you were doing this, but the peculiar thing in our country, we look at what the government does and pick it apart, then we look at what the eu says, equally posturing on their side, and say here is the gospel handed down to us by these leaders of the eu. actually a lot of what's being said publicly is hot air in preparation for real hard negotiation, bad news for viewers who want to get this over and done with. it won't be concluded until 01 next year. i wanted to point out the eu, the united position is likely to splinter and has already. why?

it hasn't. 27... because the first post brexit budget of 2021 is starting to be discussed. we will see it in may, there are significant differences emerging and more will emerge over trying to plug that big hole, 10 billion euros. that is something the uk can take advantage of? indeed, one hopes they can, especially in the security cooperation field. the europeans must spend more on security. no one knows what it will look like, perhaps not even alex. the important thing is not the security, we all agreed. the brits need europe. the canada thing, this delusion that the uk will get canada plus, plus, plus. the canada deal took seven years. alex is saying that's a posture. you know very well it does not include service, financial service. yes, but the canadian

deal is not useless. more over, the average trade deal takes two or less and you must bear in mind the importance attached to a trade deal between us and the eu if there is to be one, given we are each other‘s largest trading partners. this is not like forming a deal with another standard third nation, it's not like forming a deal with another third nation, the day we leave we will be europe's largest trading partner with whom the eu operate a massive trading surplus. that point about splintering is fair, some countries will want things more than others and the closer you get to the finish line, the more... this is a particularly interesting week. monday, we have jeremy corbyn speaking. where alex began, it's critical we watch what happens monday. corbyn who has been defined as an ideologue has the potential to pivot to being a pragmatist on monday, and potentially we talk

about chess and checkers, he could play a really interesting chess game with teresa may. if he could force the government's hand there is a scenario that is not outrageous that says he could force an election sometime this year. walk us through these steps, by peeling off government rebels? by peeling off government rebels, by saying labour is now pro—customs union, or for a soft brexit. that would potentially bring it more to where the lib dems fit in. do you think corbyn will do that? i put my crystal ball away, i have been so wrong at this desk so many times. i think we should watch and see. then you have theresa may scheduled to speak friday to give her position, tusk has already said she is delusional. this is a critical week. what kind of partner pre—emptively slags off the thing being said

by the person they are supposed to be negotiating with? you want to cherry pick again. you two have been round that argument. i want to hear what you have to say about the corbyn dilemma. i hope he comes down to stay in the customs union and that this government, useless government, very useless government, as far as negotiation is concerned, will fall because at the end of the day the eu is faced with a government which is not knowing what it wants, it is divided, you need a strong... that is your hope but do you think that will happen? i think that corbyn will go for the customs union. i think the labour leader will go for a customs union. i think it's all aboutjobs and the shadow foreign secretary saying, it's the right thing to think. if he does, not only does it put the debate in a near existential one

for the challenge to the government in the house in a real way, then tory rebels must think, what do i do now, do i vote with the labour party in favour of a customs union, but i could bring down the government? they must decide whether they are a remainer before they are a tory. correct. i think many will decide they are a tory before they are a remainer. if corbyn does that, the other domestic thing to think about is he crushes the liberal democrats, which is a long—term labour party aim and with which i don't entirely lack sympathy. he crushes them because? they have been the pro—european party but if labour is pro—european enough and has the potential of getting into government, they hoover up lots of those lib dem votes. the lib dems have been fishing for a long time in the politics of the left—wing, so if labour is both left wing and pro—eu... they must watch what happens on monday.

they do not have an opportunity, they are not in the equation. i think that corbyn can really change the course of this debate. the question is whether he has the stomach to do it. you ask what is the lib dem possibilities, i think constructive dispersal. laughter. i am coming up with more terms! more brexit vocab. it does not matter what happens to the lib dems. it matters that europe is going forward. there is the budget but also this emmanuel macron idea and phenomenon. for me, british policy looks stilted, there is no leader, there is no macron, while europe has this macron who wants to create a several speed europe. if you are right and things are so unlikely to work out

in a dialogue with the eu, which may be the case, then all the more do we need to look to our relationships with the rest of the world and build trade deals with them. like it or not, we are leaving the eu. we must accept that reality. with canada and no strings?! we must close, i'm sorry to all of you. thank you all for coming in. that's all we have time for. dojoin us again, same time same place, but for now, goodbye. it feels cold crisp and quite wintry out there right now but believe or not,

it is nowhere near as cold at the moment compared to what we are in for. for the next few days. a lot of sunshine around today. this is where the cold air has reached central and eastern parts of europe. just about germany. it certainly hasn't reached us. the leading edge of this cold air mass will not arrive until monday night and into tuesday and hopefully wednesday. the winds are from the east so we feel the cold wind blowing out across is right now. by early sunday morning, in big towns and cities temperatures will be below freezing, minus five at the rural areas. we do it all again on sunday. some areas will notice a bit of cold creeping in, newcastle,

edinburgh and aberdeen possibly. these temperatures are around one, two or three. with the wind, it will feel cold. most of the time there will be more than that. looks like the first snow showers will reach eastern seaboard of the uk on monday morning so anywhere from east anglia, through lincolnshire, the north—east, the north—east of scotland. basically through the afternoon you will see a trail of snow showers, the wind will push them further inland. daytime temperatures barely above freezing across most of the uk. so a wintry start today for some of us but not for everybody. progressively, later on tuesday, into wednesday, though snow showers across the uk will become more widespread and temperatures will drop away. the wind will strengthen and that is when it will start to feel bitterly cold. sometime in the middle of next week, that cold air from russia will sweep out into the atlantic and we are in the middle

of that cold air mass with snow showers to come. for some of us the snow showers could be disruptive and for some areas, there could be quite a lot of snow. this is bbc news. the headlines at 5pm: the un security council is voting around now on a resolution calling for a humanitarian ceasefire in syria. more than 500 people have been killed in a week in the rebel—held enclave of eastern ghouta. the red cross becomes the latest aid charity to become embroiled in scandal after revealing that 21 staff paid for sexual services whilst working for them. the actress emma chambers — best known for playing alice in the vicar of dibley — has died aged 53. a man and woman appear in court charged with causing the death of two young brothers by dangerous driving in coventry. also in the next hour: britain

is set for the coldest february week in five years, as freezing air arrives from russia. britain's women's curling team lose to japan in the bronze medal match