welcome to bbc news, broadcasting to viewers in north america on pbs and around the globe. my name is nkem ifejika. our top stories: the united states says it has clear proof the syrian government was to blame for last week's gas attack. as the us, france and britain discuss a military response — the un boss warns that the cold war is "back with a vengeance". the situation in the middle east is in chaos. to such an extent, it has become a threat to international peace and security. with the former head of the fbi about to publish his memoirs — president trump calls him "an untruthful slimeball". another reason to lose weight — new research shows one in eight britons could be suffering from fatty liver disease. the un secretary general has warned that the cold war is ‘back

with a vengeance‘ — and he gave a dire warning about military escalation in syria. antonio guterres‘s comments were made at a heated session of the un security council in new york — as relations between the west and russia plummeted further. our diplomatic correspondent james robbins reports. the white house is expected to give a statement soon and it is the view there, we will bring you live that there, we will bring you live that the sins of happens. douma is firmly back under syrian government control. this is the ruined town where it is alleged president assad's forces used chemical weapons a week ago. these are the pictures of children and babies overcome, and the desperate attempts to wash them. a short time ago i ordered the

united states armed forces to launch position strikes on target associated with the chemical weapons capabilities of syrian dictator bashar al—assad. capabilities of syrian dictator bashar al-assad. a combined operation with the armed forces of france and the united kingdom, is now under way. we thank them both. tonight i want to speak with you about why we have taken this action. one year ago assad launched a savage chemical weapons attack against his own innocent people. the united states responded with 58 missile strikes that destroyed 20% of the syrian airforce. strikes that destroyed 20% of the syrian air force. last saturday the assad regime again deployed chemical weapons to slaughter innocent civilians, this town —— —— this time in the town of douma near the syrian

capital of damascus. this massacre was a significant escalation in a pattern of chemical weapons use by that very terrible regime. the evil and the despicable attack left mothers and fathers, infants and children thrashing in pain and gus being the air. —— gasping for air. these are not the actions of a man, they are crimes of a monster in stead. following the horrors of world war i, as century ago, civilised nationsjoined world war i, as century ago, civilised nations joined together to ban chemical warfare, chemical weapons are uniquely dangerous, not only because they inflict gruesome suffering, but because even small amounts can unleash widespread devastation. the purpose of our action site is to —— actions to is

to establish a strong deterrent against the spread and use of chemical weapons. establishing this deterrent is a vital national security interest of the united states, the combined american british and french response to these atrocities will integrate all instruments of our national power, military, economic and diplomatic. we are prepared to sustain this response until the syrian regime stops its use of prohibited chemical agents. i also have a message tonight for the two governments most responsible for supporting, equipping and financing the criminal assad regime. to iran and to russia. i ask, what kind of a nation wants to be associated with a massmurderer

of innocent men, women and children. the nations of the world can be judged by the friends they keep. no nation can succeed in the long run by promoting road states, brutal tyra nt by promoting road states, brutal tyrant ‘s and murderous dictators. in 2013 president putin and his government are honest the world that they would guarantee the elimination of syria's chemical weapons. assad's recent attack and today's response are the direct result of russia's failure to keep that promise. russia must decide if it will continue down this dark path, or if it willjoin with civilised nations as a force for stability and peace. hopefully someday we will get along with russia, and maybe even iran but

maybe not. i will say this. the united states has a lot to offer. with the greatest and most powerful economy in the history of the world, in syria the united states, with but a small force being used to eliminate what is left of isis, is doing what is necessary to protect the american people. over the last year nearly 100% of the territory once controlled by the so—called isis caliphate in syria and iraq has been liberated and eliminated. the united states has also rebuilt our friendships across the middle east. we have asked our partners to take greater responsibility for securing their home region, including contributing large amounts of money for the resources, equipment and all

of the ante isis effort. —— anti— isis. increased engagement from our friends including saudi arabia, the united our remembrance —— arab emirates, egypt and qatar and others, can ensure that... america does not seek an indefinite presence in syria. under no circumstances. as other nations step up their contributions, we look forward to the day when we can bring our warriors home. and great warriors they are. looking around our very troubled world, americans have no illusions. we cannot purge the world of evil, or act everywhere there is tyranny. no amount of american blood or treasure can reduced —— produce

lasting peace and security in the middle east. it is a troubled place. we will try to make it better but it isa we will try to make it better but it is a troubled place. the united states will be a partner and a friend, but the fate of the region lies in the hands of its own people. in the last century we look straight into the darkest places of the human soul, we saw the anguish that can be unleashed, and the evil that can ta ke unleashed, and the evil that can take hold. by the end of world war i. take hold. by the end of world war i, more than1 million people had been killed or injured by chemical weapons. we never want to see that ghastly spectre return. so today the nations of britain, france and the united states of america have marshalled their righteous power

against barbarism and brutality. tonight i ask all americans to say a prayerfor tonight i ask all americans to say a prayer for our tonight i ask all americans to say a prayerfor our noble tonight i ask all americans to say a prayer for our noble warriors and our allies as they carry out their missions. we pray that god will bring comfort to those suffering in syria. we pray that god will guide the whole region toward a future of dignity and at peace. and we pray that god will continue to watch over and less the united states of america —— bless. thank you and good night. that was a statement from president trump. he was announcing that the united states has decided to strike syria, strike locations in syria and president trump said that that was done in conjunction with france and the united kingdom. president trump talked about savage chemical weapons against his own

people, referring to syria, talking about last year when they use 58 missile strikes that destroyed a significant proportion of the syrian air force. significant proportion of the syrian airforce. he described significant proportion of the syrian air force. he described this particular incident, the use of chemical weapons in douma as a significant escalation, and he said they were not the actions of a man but the crimes of a monster, referring to president bashar al—assad. with going out to chris buchler, our correspondent who is in washington. chris, itappears buchler, our correspondent who is in washington. chris, it appears as if for the past week, the question we have been wondering about, whether any action would be taken, has just been answered by president trump. the days of diplomacy, and now we have the announcement that military action has begun. it has been long anticipated that we have also had this stand—off with russia and if you listen to the conversation that

was being happy, donald trump was setting out, he was saying that this was going to be precision strikes, specifically trying to target bashar al—assad's chemical weapons. when you read through some of that speech he talks about this being a significant escalation but a pattern of behaviour. so really this is the west saying they are going to put up with chemical weapons attacks, and he said that over and over again. but there was also a message to syria's allies, a message to russia and a message to iran. but they should not be standing alongside syria. and despite the threats of russian retaliation, and that this could lead to some kind of conflict, after the conversations away had with the leaders of the uk and france, they have decided that it is important to take action, and so we

have this unified response. and key within what was being said there was that it would be a sustained response. if you look back at what president trump was saying there, he talked about that military strike that happened a year ago, after a sour and gas attack inside syria. —— it was —— sarin. it was called a one—off, a single event. there are suggestions that this military strike will be something more sustained and targeted, specifically to target president assad's at weapons capability. just to bring our viewers up to speed, president trump has been addressing the nation andindeed trump has been addressing the nation and indeed the world about the decision to strike inside syria, and just as he was speaking, this is from the reuters newsagency, it appears as if those strikes were being carried out. witnesses hearing in damascus several big explosions,

seeing smoke rising on the east side of the city. clearly, there is a possibility that there is not related, but the coincidence seems quite something. chris is still in washington, how important was it to get the uk and france on board, because we know these discussions have been taking place over the past few days. i think there was a real attempt by the us for this not to look like just attempt by the us for this not to look likejust a single attempt by the us for this not to look like just a single country taking action, but trying to get some support. and i think this has felt from the start like america is trying to ensure that this is a international response to those dreadful pictures that came out of douma out of that chemical weapons attack there. certainly those pictures have caused a lot of shock and a lot of outrage, and so they wa nt to and a lot of outrage, and so they want to have military support and it is clear now that they have that military support from both france and the uk. in taking this military

action. as you mentioned there are now reports that beginning, and president trump was very beginning that make very clear at the beginning of the speech, he said that military action had begun, this marked the start of those strikes. president trump making very clear that they were taking a definitive stand against a man who he called "a monster", calling syria a rogue state at one stage and again sending a message to syria's allies that they should not be standing alongside them. chris arkle in washington —— arkle, president trump at the top of the hour addressing the nation and indeed the international committee, saying that the us had decided in conjunction with france and the uk to strike inside syria in reaction to that chemical weapons attack by the assad regime on people in the city, the

region of douma that happened on sunday night and monday morning, and that has been the reaction, and just as president trump was speaking, we had reports from reuters that several large explosions have occurred and smoke can be seen inside the city. steve hermannjoins steve hermann joins us steve hermannjoins us now from washington. when there was that darren gasper tak last year inside syria, when president reacted, —— sarin gas attack, what he said, this was almost inevitable and was coming. i was in moralising last yearin coming. i was in moralising last year in april when that announcement was made, just when he finished his desert, hosting the chinese president xijinping, desert, hosting the chinese president xi jinping, and desert, hosting the chinese president xijinping, and again desert, hosting the chinese president xi jinping, and again that happened very quickly going from a

moment of calm and normalcy to this type of announcement of a military attack. the same thing that happened, i can tell you, just a few hours ago at the white house everything was very normal. we knew that deputies of the national security council were meeting and nikki haley of the united nations and other top officials were in the white house, but there was no indication that anything was imminent. some senior officials were caught by surprise as little as one hour while before the presidential announcement. obviously they want is some element of surprise to the timing of this. i think as has been mentioned by your correspondence, the talk about this being possibly sustained is going to make it much different than the launching of 59 tomahawk cruise missiles from two us vessels last year. this is something much bigger. we are going to find out a little bit more about it at the top of the hour, about 45

minutes from now, when there will be a briefing at the pentagon. steve, how has the calculation be made within the white house, because it was just a couple of weeks since john bolton took over as national security advisor, in fact, i don't think he has even been confirmed as national security advisor. you have a new person in the state department. it is a new security team. and they have had to make this fairly big decision. certainly. there is some suspicion that maybe there wasn't a more immediate response because you didn't have the cohesion yet with the new team with the director of the cia transitioning over two state department, he is the one who has not been confirmed yet. bolzan has beenin not been confirmed yet. bolzan has been in place for a few days. not so many new people coming in yet —— john bolton. perhaps more important in the timing of this and what some may see as the delay was the need to get together and co—ordinate with the allies, the united kingdom and

france, and select the targets and what we are hearing just now coming in from damascus, as you noted, explosions are being heard, smokers rising from the eastern side of the city, and one reporter in damascus is saying that it looks like world war iii, is the way they are describing what they are hearing and seeing. from what you understand and president trump did indeed addresses when he was talking about and iran. he was talking about russia, would you want to be on the state —— side ofa you want to be on the state —— side of a dictator, on the zuttah people who commit commit these crimes, was that an important factor in coming to this decision in that the united states could come into conflict with russia? —— the side of people. states could come into conflict with russia? -- the side of people. just how widespread the attackers, russia has clearly warned that if any of its troops were harmed by this that there would be consequences. one russian officials say they would

shoot down the sites from where the missiles were launched. that may not be very practical, but russia has been warning for days, very clearly, that they did not want to see a larger scale offensive, an attempt to ta ke larger scale offensive, an attempt to take out assad or to harm its troops or facilities. one other thing that has to be considered is if this is a large scale sustained a strike, you will certainly have civilian casualties. and that could hurt the interests of the united states, united kingdom, and france. if all of a sudden we seek russian media and syrian media showing pictures of many dying children as a result of these and air strikes. withjohn result of these and air strikes. with john bolton coming result of these and air strikes. withjohn bolton coming in, he is definitely a hardliner, one who would want to go for the big strike. there was apparently some pushback

fromjim there was apparently some pushback from jim mattis, there was apparently some pushback fromjim mattis, the there was apparently some pushback from jim mattis, the secretary of defence, at the pentagon, to perhaps limit in scope so that things potentially did not spiral out of control, leading to a wider conflict where we could see the united states and russia each other. steve, at the risk of over reading this, president trump has been a very desperate not to be seen as someone who dithered, for talking about how president obama dealt with this during the first incidences of the use of chemical weapons in syria, where there was a red light that was cross and then subsequently no significant action was taken, and president drop seems to want to distance himself from that —— red line. seems to want to distance himself from that -- red line. obviously what is happening here is good natured. with a lease two other nations. it is probably going to involve not only air strikes, but

also strikes from some us vessels. there is more naval strategic power from the united states moving into the region. if this is going to be sustained beyond a matter of days, the united states will have the firepower not only from its aerial assets, but its naval assets. but i think we will get a better indication at the top of the hour when we are briefed by the pentagon as to what sort of forces are being thrown at this initially. ok, just to bring our viewers up to speed, president trump at the top of the hour, addressed the nation in the international community, saying that the decision had been to strike inside syria. it had been taken in conjunction with the united kingdom and france. it is in reaction to the chemical weapons attack carried out in the syrian colour damascus suburb of douma, which happened on sunday

night, monday morning. president trump said this was a significant escalation of the sarin gas attack which took place last year. the united states is reacting. we stay with steve herrmann. steve, listening to president trump on something that a significant about his statement, is talking almost in a sense about an endgame, almost indicating that this was something that the us would not dwell on forever in a sense of not wanting to get bogged down as they have in iraq and afghanistan. right. ithink get bogged down as they have in iraq and afghanistan. right. i think that might have been a message to moscow and others that the united states is not looking to start a wider war here. the united states has 2000 troops on the ground in syria. there have been hundreds of air strikes against targets such as al-qaeda and

other sorts of fighters in syria. so this is meant, as the president said, to stop assad from using chemical weapons. there are some a nalysts chemical weapons. there are some analysts who are sceptical of that, who do not believe that damascus, that moscow, and tehran will change their behaviour because of this. i think it is perhaps, in his opening moments, a little difficult to get a very good analysis of what exactly we are talking about as concerning the scope of the strike and just how much damage it is going to inflict on the government and the forces of bashar al—assad. on the government and the forces of bashar al-assad. addressing potential conflict with russia and iran. president trump appeared not to be bellicose or belligerent, almost saying to them, would you not

wa nt to almost saying to them, would you not want tojoin almost saying to them, would you not want to join the civilised nations, rather than someone who is a mass murder of men, women, and children, almost saying to russia this is your chance to do right. he did in setting debbie hope. he has made this statement before, with slightly different wording, that he hopes the united states and russia can get along. —— he did insert that in there. he said even iran can be in that mix as well. i think it was a little bit of coding on the statement that it was not something meant to be totally ballack —— bellicose and not a little figurative declaration of war on russia or iran. thank you very much. that is steve herman. the white house pyrrhic chief. joining us from

washington on this breaking news story, which is that president trump has authorised air strikes on syria in conjunction with the united kingdom and france. this was done in reaction to the chemical weapons attack carried out by the syrian regime on the damascus suburb of douma which happened at sunday night, monday morning, and there we re night, monday morning, and there were discussions of the past few days what to do in response to that. president trump has tweeted about reaction, talking about smart bombs in one of his tweets, saying that this attack that the syrian government carried out on its people was an escalation in comparison to what happened last year, which is when there was a sarin president trump reacted with the substance. this is the latest. you were watching bbc news.

let us bring in ben ando who is in the studio with us. here in the uk there have been so discussions about whether the uk should take part in any air strikes against syria, whether parliament have the right to make that decision, whether the prime minister, there have been so many discussions, but it appears as if that decision has been made and action is ongoing. that is right. we have had a statement from the prime minister in the united kingdom, theresa may, saying she has authorised precision air strikes to ta ke authorised precision air strikes to take place in syria, with the aid of degrading syria's chemical weapons capabilities. she says there are limited target strikes aimed at not further escalating tensions in the region. she adds they will do everything possible to prevent civilian casualties. she said this action was taken because there was

no practical alternative to the use of pearls to deter syria from using chemical weapons. she said it is not about regime change —— the use of force. it is being made very clear, first through donald trump's statement and now what we are hearing theresa may say, that this is an effort to counter the use of chemical weapons. it is clearly targeted, it is very clearly about the west taking action over a clear breach of the geneva —— convention. there are a loss of diplomatic effo rts there are a loss of diplomatic efforts to allow the west to strike against syria for using chemical weapons, while at the same time not wanting to escalate tensions with russia, which of course no one wa nts. russia, which of course no one wants. at the un meeting last night there was very clear tension with antonio guterres warning about the creation of a new cold war. it is

quite clear, particularly from what president trump said in his address, that he wants russia to think about where it is positioning its l. is it a country that wants to be seen as a friend to regimes like that of the chara lazard or is it a country that wa nts to chara lazard or is it a country that wants to move orjoin in the civilised countries of the world —— bashar al—assad. it is significant, theresa may's statement. many politicians in the uk would feel that we need to learn the lessons of possibly ill—fated interventions abroad, particularly, of course, in the iraq war. nonetheless, it is very clear that although it has become the norm for parliament to be consulted when british military action is taken, that is not necessary. there is no law or rule

that says that has to happen. and the prime minister and the war cabinet are able to authorise the use of force without going to parliament if they feel that is what is required. clearly, in this instance, time, speed was felt to be important. there was a time to recall parliament, at the moment in the uk it is in recess, that means that the decision has been made to join in this use of force with the united states and france. just to go back to a few years ago when the very first, not necessarily the very first, but when there was a chemical weapons attack inside syria by the assad regime on its own people, that was president obama at the time, his red line, and in a sense it got covered because the british parliament, when david cameron was prime minister, asked parliament to make their decision and they voted not to strike syria at the time. that is right. that was then and this is now. perhaps prime minister theresa may has seen that and

decided not to take the chance of going to parliament. to be fair, i think therejust was going to parliament. to be fair, i think there just was not time. even if she was minded to go to parliament, there was a time to do it. it is quite clear that president trump and possibly president macron and friends were looking to act quickly, strike while the iron is hot, not to let the moment pass, as perhaps president obama did, as you said, afew perhaps president obama did, as you said, a few years ago. they're practically wasn't time. it is quite possible that the prime minister would have been sounding out members of her own party, possibly even member is of the opposition, although that is unlikely. i think time precluded the opportunity of the british parliament having a say in whether action should be taken up. thank you very much. please don't go away. keep an eye across the wires for us and let us know what is going on. just to keep you up—to—date with