this is bbc news, i'm shaun ley. the headlines at 11:00pm: cabinet ministers agree that the use of chemical weapons by the assad regime cannot go unchallenged. president trump says no decision has been made on syria. the president will speak with theresa may and emmanuel macron later. the international chemical weapons watchdog backs the uk's assessment of the nerve agent used in the salisbury nerve gas attack. and a newsnight, the emergency cabinet today agreed on the need to ta ke cabinet today agreed on the need to take action over the use of chemical weapons in syria. but are we any the wiser about what that might be, and when it might come? good evening and welcome to bbc news.

there have been mixed signals from the us today as donald trump appeared to take a step back from military action in syria. his defence secretary, jim mattis, called for more evidence on the chemical weapon attack, and tonight the white house says no final decision has been made on a military assault. france's president macron said that france had proof it was the syrian government which carried out the chemical attack near damascus at the weekend, and syria has said independent inspectors are due to arrive in the affected area over the next day or two. here, theresa may held a cabinet meeting to discuss possible military action. more on that in a moment. first, here is our north america editorjon sopel. weapons locked and loaded, sailors ready for action, this us carrier battle group left its home port in norfolk, virginia, destination the eastern mediterranean, still 5000

miles away. and the senior officer awaiting orders to attack from the president. i'm so pleased and proud of the harry s truman carrier team, 6000 of the finest americans you could ever sail with or serve with. we are trained, we are ready. any mission, any time, anywhere, we are ready to go. although this powerful flotilla might be full steam ahead, you get the sense in washington of rowing back. from the commander in chief today, the talk was a lot less bellicose. no more a big price to pay, no more decisions in 2a to 48 hours, pay, no more decisions in 24 to 48 hours, no more nice, new, and smart missiles raining down. instead, this. were looking very, very seriously, very closely at that whole situation, and we'll see what happens, folks, we'll see what happens. it too bad that the world puts us in a position like that. and from that defence secretary, an insistence that no decision to strike had been taken. all options

we re strike had been taken. all options were on the table, and what sounded like uncertainty over who was responsible for the attack.” believe there was a chemical attack, and we are looking for the actual evidence. the 0pcw, this is the organisation for the chemical weapons convention, we are trying to get those expect to see and, probably within the week. but the allies are not speaking with one voice. listen to how much more definitive the french president is. translation: we have proof that last week, now nearly ten days ago, that chemical weapons were used, at least chlorine, and that they were used by bashar al—assad ‘s regime. chlorine, and that they were used by bashar al-assad 's regime. us action a year ago amounted to little more than crater in a runway. it is still likely that this time multinational action will be more expensive and will come sooner rather than later. but, with chemical weapons is due to arrive in douma at the weekend, the window for a quick response would appear to be closing fast. the russians, though, still insist there

is no justification for any action. translation: washington continues to make militaristic statements that risk causing a dangerous escalation. there are accusations not only against damascus, but also against the russian federation. donald trump tweeted this morning that a military strike may come soon, or maybe not so strike may come soon, or maybe not so soon. now, if you are being generous, you could say this is the fog of war. keep the enemy guessing. 0r fog of war. keep the enemy guessing. or it may be that there is still some confusion and indecision over what to do next. the white house said that president trump will be speaking to president macron and theresa may this evening. it comes after an emergency meeting of the cabinet, and they agreed chemical weapons attacks cannot go unchallenged. from westminster, here is our deputy political editorjohn pienaar. secretary of state, is the military ready? things to do, bombing raids to support. the defence secretary, the whole cabinet, called in today

to discuss and approve britain's part in any air strikes in syria. is bombing the answer? iamjust i am just going to go straight in. ministers met to see the intelligence showing the assad regime was behind the chemical attack that killed dozens. a lone protester tried to get in the way, and failed. inside the cabinet, one who had opposed air strikes five years ago had changed his mind. why? for two reasons. one was because we hadn't provided the evidence and intelligence that we knew who it was. and secondly, because there was not a proper plan. those two things, i'm sure, we're gonna answer today. no sight or word from the prime minister yet, so a former tory leader passed on the message. action was justified — swift action. these are a real and genuine threat to everybody. they cannot be used. they've been used in salisbury against british citizens.

we need to put our foot down, strike their ability to use them, stop their manufacture and delivery. that is the key action to be taken. so no obvious problem with cabinet approval. mrs may sought urgent action to prevent another chemical attack. and remember, the military need clearjustification for offensive operations. the labour leader believes he speaks for people who want peace, and a bigger role for parliament. more bombing, more killing, more war, will not save life. we elect members of parliament. they should have a voice in this. the cabinet on its own should not be making this decision. ministers agreed to confront and deter chemical weapons, along with allies. no details were given. mps on all parties argued for and against action and many wanted parliament to have its say first. you always need parliamentary approval if you are planning the use of significant military force for policy reasons. we are a modern

parliamentary democracy. we know about the consequences of intervening. serious stands as a test case about the consequences of not intervening. i am not convinced that a retaliation that has been suggested by washington, by paris, is the kind of thing that the uk government should be engaging. it is not clear how it will bring the war to an end. the last tory prime minister lost a vote on syria in 2014. will parliament backed mrs may? well, if military action goes according to plan, some tories may swallow a ny according to plan, some tories may swallow any doubt and mps on both sides may hesitate before denying british forces political colour. but mrs may will be accused by critics of bypassing parliament and dancing to donald trump's tune. with national influence at stake, the prime minister was keen to back up her american ally. but the final plan still looks like a work in progress. the timing anyone's gas. —— guess. as john mentioned there, downing street said ministers

were agreed that it was highly likely the syrian government was responsible for last weekend's chemical attack. and that phone call has now taken place. two bits of information to bring you. the first is president trump and theresa may agreed to keep working closely on the international response to the use of chemical weapons in syria, so it looks like conversations are continuing, rather than necessarily decisions yet being reached. and they did, however, agree it was vital to deter further used of chemical weapons by the syrian government. they clearly both believe it is syria who was responsible for what happened in douma, and that a chemical weapon was exploded there. so the key question really is how do you deter it? do you deter it life—threatening action or by specific action? judging by the statement that phone call between president and prime minister, further action is on the cards. but maybe further consultations before that action is taken. here is our middle east

editorjeremy bowen. in the streets of douma, supporters of president assad paraded. the town has been a no—go area for them for more than six years. thousands who used to live there have been bussed out. these were arriving in idlib, province held by rebel groups. they didn't bring much more than they can carry, and the camps were what they experience. for many, this was their parting memory of douma before they left. it has been condemned by the west as a chemical attack carried out by the assad regime. its ally russia says this wasn't caused by chemical

weapons. this medical technician who says he the wounded arrived in idlib with some bad memories. translation: they came in, they had suffocated. there were entire families, children, women and babies. it was very difficult. we hope the regime ta kes a very difficult. we hope the regime takes a hit. we don't care who strikes. we don't feel sorry for it. this man is a criminal. he is a war criminal. he means president assad. looking relaxed with an iranian visitor. he has always denied using chemical weapons. douma's former residents don't believe him. this doctor was sheltering in a basement during the attack, and he heard about it when he emerged. regime forces had entered douma. translation: the doctors had been warned against saying anything about casualties, because if they talked, the patient, his family and douma

would be put in harm's way. so no one dared speaking out, because they we re one dared speaking out, because they were afraid. people who were in douma saw how ferocious the bombing was. no one dared say anything. the timing ofa was. no one dared say anything. the timing of a military response isn't clear. the potential consequences are. if the west attacks syria, its neighbours will feel the heat. the us, britain and france, and saudi arabia has offered to join us, britain and france, and saudi arabia has offered tojoin in, face a difficult military challenge. they wa nt to a difficult military challenge. they want to punish the syrian regime, but not go to war with syria's allies, russia and iran. the western powers wa nt allies, russia and iran. the western powers want to deter the use of chemical weapons. but how do they do it without killing and maiming the syrian civilians they say they are protecting. russian soldiers are in douma, alongside their syrian allies. they have been winning. changing that would take a bigger war than the west is contemplating.

the international chemical weapons watchdog, the 0pcw, has confirmed the uk's assessment of the nerve agent used against a former russian spy and his daughter in salisbury. the government has said it was novichok, a poison developed in the soviet era, and that the russian state must have been behind last month's attack. moscow has denied any involvement, and said today's report is part of an operation to discredit russia. 0ur security correspondent frank gardner reports. investigating every possible site of last month's nerve agent attack in salisbury has been exhausted, now britain's findings have been backed up britain's findings have been backed up the chemical weapons watchdog, the opcw. up the chemical weapons watchdog, the 0pcw. today it published its report confirming the findings of the uk relating to the toxic chemical used in salisbury. britain's nickel defence laboratories at porton down quickly

identified that chemical as novichok. today's report doesn't mention that word but a second classified 0pcw report has been given to governments, identifying the name and structure of the nerve agent, which it said was a high at purity. by itself this is not going to be determinative, but if you look at the contextual facts of what we know about novichok, they were invented by russia largely to avoid classification under the chemical weapons convention. today, russia's spokeswoman dismissed the report as being part of an operation to discredit russia. yulia skripal, seen discredit russia. yulia skripal, seen here before the attack, is now in hiding with police protection. russia has suggested she is being held against her will. her father is still seriously ill in hospital. tonight, britain has called for a un security council debate on the 0pcw

report. 0fficials security council debate on the 0pcw report. officials say russia has some hard questions to answer. that is a summary of the news. newsday is coming up at midnight. now on bbc news, it is time for newsnight with kirsty wark. tonight, after an emergency meeting, the cabinet agrees on the need to take action against the use of chemical weapons in syria. france's president hardens his rhetoric on the assad regime. translation: we have the proof that last week, days ago, chemical weapons, at least chlorine, were used, and they were used by the regime of bashar al—assad. but is america rowing back? we're looking very, very seriously at the whole situation and we will see what happens, folks. we'll have in depth analysis and the latest thinking from washington and westminster. also tonight: "daddy!" "love from daddy and mummy" and all that crap! disgusting! one week on, residents

still furiously divided over a memorial to a burglar who died after being stabbed in the course of robbing a home. we discuss the morality of remembering. thousands of children in iraq, orphaned, lost or abandoned, now the battle for mosul is long over. this woman is on a mission to reunite them with whatever family is left. good evening. we are no clearer tonight precisely what action america — and by extension britain — is prepared to take after the apparent chemical attack on douma in syria, but the cogs are continuing to grind.