you're watching beyond 100 days. us officials say they are now confident a ukrainian passenger plane was shot down by an iranian surface—to—air missile. all 176 people on board, including 63 canadians were killed when the kiyv—bound flight crashed near tehran. us intelligence sources reportedly say satellite imagery shows the launch of two missiles shortly after the plane took off. donald trump describes his terrible feeling about the crash. it's such a tragic thing. but somebody could have made a mistake on the other side. many of the people killed in the crash were canadian. and in the next hour, we're expecting an update from prime ministerjustin trudeau on the crash.

meanwhile, the us house of representatives is to vote on legislation to limit trump's ability to launch military action against iran. europe says it remains committed to the nuclear deal with iran, but the uk says iran must now return to full compliance with the agreement. the queen has called a meeting of the royal households to try and find a "workable" future role for the duke and duchess of sussex. hello and welcome. i'm michelle fleury in new york, christian fraser is in london. there are reports tonight that the ukrainian passengerjet that crashed just outside tehran on wednesday morning killing all 176 people on board, was shot down by iran. in the last few hours, the pentagon has released details which suggests the aircraft was struck from the ground by a russian—built

surface—to—air missile. the information comes from us intelligence which sources say picked up signals of a radar being turned on. separately, us satellites reportedly detected two missile launches shortly before the plane exploded. the pentagon's assessment is that the incident was accidental. iran's anti—aircraft systems were active at the time the revolutionary guard was attacking us bases in iraq. of the 176 people killed 82 were iranian, 63 canadian, 11 were ukrainian. here's the bbc‘s tom burridge. was this ukraine international airlines flight shot down by mistake by an irate missile? reports out of washington tonight suggest it was. us media is quoting american officials are saying satellite imagery shows the trail of two missiles. donald trump dismissing other theories. i have my suspicions. some people say it was mechanical, i personally don't think

that is even a question, personally. so we will see what happens. it was just five hours after iran launched a wave of missile strikes on us bases in iraq that the plane crashed shortly after takeoff from tehran airport. this video appears to show the plane, which seems to be on fire as it goes down. it will take months if not years to get the full crash report, led by the iranians. but they say their preliminary findings suggest the plane encountered a technical problem. they say the crew did try and turn back to the airport and the pilot made no mayday call to air—traffic control. but the ukrainians are keeping an omen mind. —— open mind. a senior ukrainian security official said a number of theories are being considered — including terrorism, a missile strike or engine failure. this was the plane which crashed, a boeing 737. you might well have travelled

on one on your holiday. major airlines use them in and out of uk airports. this is the most popular aircraft in the world, there are thousands of them flying people every day, everywhere, we want to know what happened. in canada, prayers for loved ones lost. eight people from toronto university were on the ukraine international airlines flight. a community in mourning. i think everyone is just heartbroken. everyone is just trying to process it and believe it. i saw the list of the people who died in this crash. i wasjust seeing familiar names, like, one after another

ukraine's ukraine's president paid his respects to the pilots and crew. he wants british accident in gators to be involved. borisjohnson said he was concerned about reports that the airliner, with 176 people on board, was shot down. iran's civil a chief dismissed those claims as illogical rumours. tom burridge, bbc news. for more, let's bring in the bbc‘s jonah fisher, who is in kyiv, and nada tawfik in toronto. let me start with you, what is the reaction from the ukrainians to this news we are getting out of washington? to be quite frank, the unit to ukrainians discovered this info from the united states as the same time we alldid. an the united states as the same time we all did. an hour before it all came out, president zelinski was tweeting in a very positive faction about a discussion he had with the iranian president. in the last half hour or iranian president. in the last half houror so, iranian president. in the last half hour or so, there have been some things which you could response

classify as a response of sort from president's zelinski office. it says ukraine is interested in the truth, we ask all our international partners to assist in the investigation and provide any information. they are saying to the us, if you have any information, share it with us. ukraine has a team oi'i share it with us. ukraine has a team on the ground in iran trying to get involved in that investigation by iran into what happened to the plane. just talk us through this, prior to the news from the us officials, the understanding was that the ukrainians were exploring for possible causes for the plane crash? yes, i think this was a pushback to what had been the ukrainian democrat iranian story 24 hours ago, which was that this was some sort of technical problem on board the plane that brought the plane down. today we had one of the

top security officials here in the ukraine effectively delivering the message that all options in terms of what might have happened to this plane were still on the table. he listed the four main theories which investigators were going to look at, they included terrorism, the possibility of a collision in the air, possibly with a drone, technical failure, and also in that list was the possibility that this flight had list was the possibility that this flight had been brought down by some sort of missile. at that point it became clear that ukraine was really nothing in or out, and now we have to see how they really respond to this new intelligence that comes from the us. now the vast majority of those on board the plane were headed to canada. can you share what the reaction has been from the iranian community where you are? you know, it is really interesting because i actually reached out to a numberof because i actually reached out to a number of people who knew several of

the victims who held vigils last night and have another planned later today. they are a bit beside themselves with the fact that there has been so much information that has been so much information that has been so much information that has been contradictory coming out about the cause of this accident. for some, they say it doesn't matter what caused it, they are still mourning their loved ones and are unable to put words to how they are feeling. others have said they want to make sure that any investigation is done by the ukrainians, other than iran and the us. they say they can't trust conclusions from the two powers that are at deep tensions. the community wants answers, but they want to see a clear investigation done here, they don't wa nt investigation done here, they don't want tojust investigation done here, they don't want to just rely on the word from the us and intelligence agencies. they also —— it is also worth pointing out that paris minister justin trudeau yesterday said that he couldn't rule out a missile attack, you know that uranian

canadians want answers, and he will make sure to push for those secular thatis make sure to push for those secular that is the podium we are viewing at the moment, we are still waiting for the moment, we are still waiting for the prior minister to appear.m the moment, we are still waiting for the prior minister to appear. it is worth pointing out to people that this was a cheaper route for people getting from iran to canada from the ukraine. a nonstop flight to toronto. these are people from all over canada, so this is a national tragedy? absolutely. you have people all the way from british columbia, alberta, take here in ontario who have been affected. tight—knit communities who have lost newlyweds, students, researchers, members of the same family in some instances. so this is deeply affected people. there were 138 people on that flight, 63 there were 138 people on that flight, 63 of whom were canadians headed here to toronto to get in connecting flights. that is one of the main questions that a lot of

members have asked today. given that iran and canada have such a bad relationship, they haven't had double medic relationships democrat relations since 2012, there are no direct flights to canada. but given the second largest iranian dennis borah here, there should have been some direct flights established, they should not have to rely on can you make flights. but many students we re you make flights. but many students were taking this cheaper route, which is why they were coming from the holiday break and coming back here. thank you both. the plane suddenly stopped sending flight the plane suddenly stopped sending flight data, there was no mayday from the pilots. does it all start at upfor from the pilots. does it all start at up for you? it really does. the first thing we have to question is,

why were civilian airliners permitted to operate in and out of iran's airspace during a period of immediate conflict? ballistic missiles were shot by iran towards american targets in iraq several hours before, clearly iran was on a high level alert for an american missile or aircraft for retaliation. aircraft should not have been permitted to be flying in that region during that period of time. i think that is the first area of neglect, whether this was a missile ora neglect, whether this was a missile or a natural event, civilian airliners simply should not have been permitted to be flying in that area. likewise international aircraft should have been diverted from that airspace during the course of their international flights. sol think on a number of levels, this is a very big problem. we know that

there are iranian teams on the ground, ukrainian teams on the ground, ukrainian teams on the ground, they are now sifting through the record. what kind of things will they be looking for? they will be looking for explosive residues, and particular types of evidence with regard to the airframe and the type of damage that was done to the aircraft. the russian anti—aircraft missile, which is a low level missile, which is a low level missile, prolific in iran, used intercept a fighter aircraft, cruise missiles at low altitude, which this aircraft, the ukrainian aircraft, was flying, is a very effective anti—aircraft missile, and has a particular signature. and we will be able to determine, the west will be able to determine, the west will be able to determine whether or not there is in fact physical evidence. there will be missile debris from the area, heat signatures of a

certain type, but there is no question that both european and american intelligence can easily and reasonably tell if missiles were launched in the area of this flight, and whether this aircraft was struck. interesting detail. thank you very much for that. sadly we've been here before, no one needs reminders of the malaysian aircraft that was shot down, it also happened in 1988 when the uss vincent was shot dashed shot down and iranian airjet. the difficulty is the tension between the two sides in the access to the site? yes, i think the difference between the uss vincent incident was that was an airline that was shot down by the us in a time of conflict, to the era of the iran— iraq war. the us insisted it was a mistake, but the iranians

insisted it was deliberate, and it was a huge huge confrontation at that time that had a huge impact on us- that time that had a huge impact on us— iranian relations for many years to come. this is a slightly different situation where the suggestion is that iran itself has, through an error, shot down one of its own airlines. i think the really interesting question is what the response to that is. is there a sense that this is an illustration of the kind of price that is sometimes paid during a conflict, the awful tragedies and mistakes that can take place that potentially brings both sides back from the brink of? or, an alternative scenario is, does the iranian leadership feel it has to respond somehow, if it receives some kind of negative pressure internally? if the iranian people tell the government, what was going on here? and if that pressure is the iranian government to do something else in response. i think it is a really interesting question that we don't know the

answer to. something to watch. stay with us because we want to talk about other issues surrounding iran. let me to show you the pictures from canada where we will seejustin trudeau shortly on that podium, his reaction to the news we are getting out of washington. sticking with the iranian crisis, and donald trump has put europe on notice. he wants france, germany, and the uk to break away from the nuclear deal agreed with iran. the british prime minister spoke to president rouhani for 20 minutes today, while his foreign secretary dominic raab met with the us secretary of state mike pompeo in washington. the uk told both sides it remains committed to the agreement but perhaps not indefinitely. we've obviously been committed to the jcpoa, but we've reached a point where noncompliance has been so cute, and the most recent steps taken by iran, that obviously we will be looking very hard at what should happen next. we want to see iran come back to full compliance, and we will look at all majors, including potentially triggering the drm.

james, you have borisjohnson saying that he is essentially there with the united states, but also committed to sticking with the nuclear deal. is it possible to reconcile that, or is the nuclear deal at this point dead in the water? i don't think it is dead, but it is heading towards the mortuary. what is happening momentarily as there is a huge debate going on within the european signatures of the nuclear deal. they are under huge pressure from the americans to pull out. they do not want to do it, the europeans believe there is still value in the nuclear deal, that it might not be perfect but it is better than nothing. however they are losing patience with the iranians, who are increasingly stepping back from the deal themselves. this week they announced they would no longer consider themselves restricted by any of the rules about enriching uranium. as a

result of that, the europeans are actively thinking about whether or not they should trigger a formal complaints mechanism which is allowed under this deal, which says to the iranians that we are formally complaining that you are no longer abiding by the deal. the americans are desperate for this to happen because they think it is a one—way ticket to ending the deal. the europeans are considering it because they think it might put pressure on iran to start coming back into compliance. but that is a huge risk, the reason none of this matters is that if the deal eventually dies in the iranians pull out, then the sta kes the iranians pull out, then the stakes rise in immensely. the risk is that the iranians increase their programme, and other countries might ta ke programme, and other countries might take military action to stop that. and if that takes place, that would make this week's confrontation appear quite modest. as far as i'm aware, the british side is the only side taking place... is that right, they're the only side talking about

it? the french are pushing hard, the french foreign minister... extrapolate that for me, once they've had this 30 day period to bring iran back in line, if they don't come back in line, what are the steps for the uk and france withdrawing from the deal altogether? it is very boring and complicated, i wouldn't dare impose the full detail on you. essentially there is a procedure where they put a complaint, iran response, there are various commissions and committees, and it works its way up to the un security council. and if the un security company, her counsel comes back to the view that it is formally in breach, then after 30 days, there is what is called a snapback. un sanctions are reimposed on iran. if that were to happen, iran with —— would withdraw from the deal. if there was even a threat of that happening, it is possible iran would pull out of the deal beforehand. would pull out of the deal before hand. like all would pull out of the deal beforehand. like all things, would pull out of the deal beforehand. like allthings, once the mechanism starts, there is an inevitability about it. so what the europeans are hoping is that it is

possible to start the process without it being inevitable that the deal dies, just to put formal pressure on the iranians saying we are buying some time here, you guys respond and being come back from the brink. thanks for talking to us through all of those steps, james. the big contradiction in donald trump's strategy is that this hardline approach to iran, requires a bigger footprint in the middle east. and with 3,500 more us troops on the way to the region, mr trump has now asked nato to step in. yesterday, jens stoltenberg, the nato secretary—general, said the alliance "could contribute more" — but how much more? after trump's abrupt withdrawal from syria, on general suleimani, relations with europe are at a pretty low ebb. the leading members of the alliance argue it was mr trump who picked this fight with iran, by dumping the 2015 nuclear agreement. and as mr trump himself complains, the europeans don't have the military capability

to fulfil the role the united states has played. so, what next? we spoke to morgan 0rtegus, spokesperson for the us state department. donald trump said that it appeared iran was stepping down. what evidence do you have to support that? well, we were certainly pleased, as we always would be, that there was no loss of american life, coalition partners's life — which of course includes our allies in the uk, who are in iraq to help on the de—isis mission, and no loss of iraqi life. that would have been the worst case scenario. so what we are really focused on here under the leadership of secretary mike pompeo at the state department is continuing the maximum economic pressure campaign that we have pursued, our policy in iran for the last year and a half. we are really looking to diplomatically, economically isolate the iranian regime because of their activities around the world. and that of course, we also believe our colleagues at the department of defence have restored military deterrence, given the strike just last week.

morgan, can we go back to the nuclear deal? donald trump spoke directly to the europeans, so let's just remind our viewers of what he said. the time has come for the united kingdom, germany, france, russia, and china to recognise this reality. they must now break away from the remnants of the iran deal, oerpoa. and yet, boris johnson, the british prime minister, spoke to the president rouhani today, and the prime minister told him that the uk is fully committed to the nuclear deal. so we are back to where we were, aren't we? so here at the state department, we had your foreign secretary, dominic raab — this was certainly an important point of discussion, with secretary pompeo and the foreign secretary. listen, the president has made his intentions very public and very clear, and it is something we will continue to work on with everyone who is a signatory of the jcpoa. none of these things happen

overnight, but our stated goal will be for not only the withdrawal of the jcpoa, but for continued diplomatic and economic isolation of iran. a lot of people around the world are calling for iran to de—escalate, so any of our allies or friends who are speaking to the iranians and urging them not to make the unwise decisions that they were making in the weeks and months leading up to the attacks on america that resulted in loss of life on our end, and then attacks on our embassy — anyone who can de—escalate, anyone who can convince the iranians not to make these unwise decisions from tehran and through their proxies, is certainly something that we welcome. mr trump spoke with the secretary—general of nato yesterday, and he wants nato to do more. with what purpose? does he want nato to put forces into replace american troops, or is he wanting more from nato to bolster us presence? yes, so certainly replacing the us troops has never been the stated

goal of president trump. what we saw under president trump's leadership, and with the help of coalition forces like the united kingdom, which we are incredibly grateful for your military support — we were able to assist the iraqi security forces in a territorial defeat of isis, of the islamic caliphate. now we know that just because the territorial caliphate was destroyed, that does not mean that an ideology, a hateful, vindictive ideology has been erased. we know that that is an ideology that we still have to confront. we still have isis fighters to confront. so here we have ambassadorjim jeffrey at the state department leading our de—isis campaign. we think american involvement is crucial, we think british involvement is crucial, and we are incredibly grateful for all our coalition partners. and we urge nato to do more because it is important notjust american security or iraqi security, but to the collective nato security that we continue this de—isis campaign.

as we mentioned, we will bring you those comments from justin trudeau in canada when he speaks. as you can see, here is the podium. we are waiting for an update on the crash shortly. the royal fireworks have been exploding ever since the duke and duchess of sussex announced they were stepping down as "senior" members of the royal family. the queen has asked staff to work with the couple and with the government to find a workable solution. according to reports, no one — including the queen or prince william — got a heads—up. it appears harry did originally contact his father prince charles about the idea of spending more time in north america and was told to come up with a thought—out plan. the queen also reportedly made it clear to harry that he should not yet go public with his future plans. 0ur royal corresondent nicholas witchell is here with me now. normally things within the royal household unfolds slowly with great thought. i imagine under the

circumstances, it's been very difficult to different today. well, thatis difficult to different today. well, that is harry and megan. it is certainly causing exasperation and exhaustion last night both to the queen and to prince william. they probably had a few minutes notice, it is reported the queen had specifically asked harry to not publish this plan. at the exasperation of last night has certainly given way today to a pragmatic sense, a wish to find a solution to this. but a recognition that it will not be easy. it is important to say that there is no sense a punitive approach to this, nobody wants to kick them out or punish them in any way, there is a degree of sympathy and understanding, particularly for harry recognising everything that he's been through. but the most complex area of this is to realise this ambition, as they have stated, of finding theirown this ambition, as they have stated, of finding their own financial independence. >> alan: we willjust say goodbye to our viewers on bbc four, if you want to keep watching this, you can do on

the bbc news channel on bbc world news. that's the housework done, let's carry on because i want to know what's going to be going on behind closed doors. when they bring the government into talk this hybrid role that the sussex is want to, presumably they will have to look at what titles they keep and how they do it financially? i think there are four potential areas, the question of their titles, following from what i was saying, there is no wish to punish them. i don't think they will be stripped of their titles, which give them royal status. they will remain the duke and duchess of sussex, he will remain prince harry and six in line to the british throne, as things stand. in terms of accommodation, they have a house near windsor castle, there was lots of money spent from public british money to furnish that, i don't think

there's any question of them having to move out. but one of the financial considerations will be that they have to pay rent for it. but we will have to see. now security is a big issue about which very little is generally made public. but for example, that is where the british from secretary is involved because wherever they travel in the world, there will be british, london metropolitan police services protecting them. if they are going to spend significant parts of time in the british or north america —— canada, if they were staffed by british police officers, that would be exorbitantly pricey. there are the ramifications of them becoming a hybrid member of the royal family, but the fact is that royals — by that i mean ranking, hrh royals — by that i mean ranking, hrh royals — by that i mean ranking, hrh royals — do not mix with the commercial world. if you are a memberof the commercial world. if you are a member of the british royal family, you cannot capitalise on your royal

status. others have tried it, the earl and count of essex tried it, it all ended in tears. that is the aspect of this that buckingham palace is most anxious about. they do not want to see harry and megan floating off in pursuit of financial independence and ending up along that make it rich and the celebrity world, embarking on unwise commercial ventures and being made use of, which is what they fear might happen. picking up on what you talked about there, this idea of financial independence is something we've heard them talk about. it is not financial independence, as i think most people probably understand it. so what might it look like if you are unable to capitalise on the brand of the royalfamily? like if you are unable to capitalise on the brand of the royal family?‘ very good question, so many questions arise from that statement. one of the problems with this statement is that so little of it has been thought through. it is a wonderful ambition to begin to seek

financial independence, the careful choice of words they used there. meghan i'm sure we'll have all sorts of ideas about resuming her blog and making use of social media, and all that sort of thing. these are all areas that will cause courtiers at buckingham palace anxiety. so i'm sure it is impossible to paint a picture of how this might be because it is against the background of other members of the royal family, asi other members of the royal family, as i was mentioning, who have tried this and seriously come to grief, and there have been serious reputational damage for the royal family going back a few years ago, the fake shake scandal involving a marginal memberof the the fake shake scandal involving a marginal member of the royal family who went into this pr area. there's a lwa ys who went into this pr area. there's always been a debate here in the uk, andi always been a debate here in the uk, and i use this term delicately, about the hangers on. if you have an airand a spare, about the hangers on. if you have an air and a spare, the spare always finds this difficult. princess margit found her difficult, prince andrew has found it difficult,

prince harry has found it difficult —— princess margaret. maybe when this all comes out in the wash, there is a future way forward on how minor roles go about their business? it is the problem of the second son, or of the younger child, yes. prince andrew, second son of the queen, third child but second son, and now prince harry. ithink third child but second son, and now prince harry. i think people are surprised prince harry, if it is feeling excluded, in the past he's rather indicated he was pleased that he was moving down the line of succession because he didn't really wa nt succession because he didn't really want that response ability. he enjoyed the position of being able to influence and do things, the invectives games and other mental health issues and things like that, without having to face up to the responsibility of being the uk monarch one day. so i think it is surprising if he has felt excluded, but there is no doubt in the british royal family, they are moving in the direction of a smaller, leaner family built more around, as we would've expected, william and harry in the future. harry is now

indicating at the moment that he wishes to do rather less of it. fascinating. good to see you, thank you for coming. this is beyond 100 days. was the ukranian airlines flight shot down by mistake by an iranian missile? to vote on a war powers resolution limiting its power to take action against iran. coming up next half hour. since the news of prince harry and taking a step back, now the queen will ask her staff to find a solution. and we will have a member of beyond 100 days on this evenings show take one last trip to the studio before he takes up the role of deputy speaker in the house of commons.

the ukrainian plane that crashed outside of tehran is now being blamed on an iranian missile. security officials say they have identified the signature from an iranian anti—aircraft missile battery being activated shortly before the aircraft crashed. it came just hours after iran carried out missile strikes on two airbases housing us forces in iraq. a pentagon official has been quoted saying the ukrainian plane was hit by a russian—made tor missile. with me is bbc persian‘sjiyar gol. when you go back to what was happening on wednesday night there was a lot of confusion, it was dark and presumably iranian forces were on heightened alert. absolutely, what you are hearing from our sources inside iran was and missile

system those in highest alert expecting some kind of retaliation. we also hearing conflicting reports about sources and numbers of us fighterjets about sources and numbers of us fighter jets taking off about sources and numbers of us fighterjets taking off and heading towards iran. there was an expectation that the united states might retaliate. at the time of the plane crash they thought one of those ballistic missiles fired towards iraq may have hit the plane come up with those missiles were fired from the west of iran which is very close to the border. around 500 km away from where the crash site is. but one eyewitness, is soldier yesterday sent a voice to our collea g u es yesterday sent a voice to our colleagues in the morning. we had an editorial meeting. can we broadcast this? we were not sure because we cannot confirm exactly what he was claiming. they have seen three missiles that were fired at the

plane and one of them hit the plane and that they thought it was an american fighter jet and and that they thought it was an american fighterjet and the guy had no clue stoplights of the sky was a soldier. he sent a voice message and he said should i not go to my military base has the were begun? he had no clue that it was a commercial plane that had been hit. we did not know because we did not have any clue about it. also the ukrainian embassy first posted a statement saying that it was a mechanical failure and that they removed it and then the iranian aviation investigation said they would not handed over to the us. but you would have seen circulating on social media and we cannot verify this but there are images doing the rounds

and they have only appeared in the last 15 or 16 hours, these pictures of what looked like fragments of a missile. absolutely. the footage, it shows the plane on fire and also this footage of the missile hitting the plane and obviously somebody who is filming it, they may have seen the first and second one and take out the smartphones. they turn on their phones and they sought. when they're putting all those thoughts together, it seems that it may have been a missile. but at this moment, the head of aviation and television was talking and saying they are willing to allow them to investigate but many people have raised why they do not hand over the data recorded and also there are many iranians

asking if you are expecting retaliation by americans from the air, why didn't you close the airspace on commercial planes? that is what many people are asking. thank you very much for that. the us house of representatives is due to vote on a measure that could limit president trump's ability to wage war with iran, after he ordered last week's drone strike against qasem soleimani, without consulting congress. the republican senator mike lee was furious after a briefing held yesterday to discuss the military action. it was probably the worst briefing i've seen, at least on a military issue, in the nine years i've served in the united states senate. what i find so distressing about that briefing was that one of the messages we receive from the prefers was, do not debate,

do not discuss the issue of the appropriateness of further military intervention against iran. justin trudeau was going to give us some reaction. but we've gotten from the prime minister after the reports that this ukrainian jet may have been shot down by surface to air missiles. lots of people in canada and the ukraine wanting answers and wanting answers quickly. but as you are hearing from our correspondent, are hearing from our correspondent, a lot of confusion at the moment about what actually transpired. and i think people are waiting to see whatjustin trudeau will say in terms of how will candidates respond given that 63 of those people were canadian citizens. i think that is pa rt canadian citizens. i think that is part of the tragedy of this is that

as you mentioned earlier, there is not this direct flight from there to toronto many people are using this asa toronto many people are using this as a route back home after visiting friends and family. we would hope that the authorities will be making state m e nts that the authorities will be making statements to the press and under international treaties they should be providing the necessary access to the investigators but in the circumstances, we do not know whether we can count on iran to do that. so we will come back to that when justin that. so we will come back to that whenjustin trudeau that. so we will come back to that when justin trudeau appears. that. so we will come back to that whenjustin trudeau appears. he was pretty angry after that briefing and asa pretty angry after that briefing and as a result, we are starting to see whether there is going to be more republicansjoining whether there is going to be more republicans joining the democrats we re republicans joining the democrats were having a vote later to try and limit president donald trump's powers, we spoke a little earlier to the president of the woodrow wilson centre and member of congress who

sat on the intelligence committee. we asked her about the significance of today's vote. it is that congress responsibility to declare war means that it has to engage in respect of the iran issue andi engage in respect of the iran issue and i think it is a very good thing, except the resolution passes passes the senate. it sounds like it could and going forward, any president who chooses to engage in military action ina chooses to engage in military action in a foreign theatre, except on an emergency basis has permission from congress in advance. even if it passes the house of the senate, the president was not likely to sign it so president was not likely to sign it so it is largely symbolic. president was not likely to sign it so it is largely symboliclj president was not likely to sign it so it is largely symbolic. i think it is more than symbolic. it means that congress is back in the game and if you will not sign it, i think

something else will emerge that will be vetoproof. i think for two reasons this matters, number one, i think it is congress constitutional duty and the people of america get into the conversation whether they buy and are not to this action of congress in acting resolution. 0therwise congress in acting resolution. otherwise the president has a blank check and can do whatever he wants and it is notjust for this president it is for those before him. since 9/11, we have passed two authorizations to use military force, wanted 2001 against those who attacked us in afghanistan and one in 2002 against the saddam hussein regime interact. i voted for both of them but neither of them applies to them but neither of them applies to the action wejust them but neither of them applies to the action we just took with respect to the head of the revolutionary guard qasem soleimani. when you open this and debate, was an eminent

threat in this particular tape that you under national defence? nonsense. i do not think you undermined it at all. i think our country has to support what we do in the arena of national security and the arena of national security and the way that happens is, if there is a robust debate, that does not mean every details debated, there are some things that should be kept classified, such as our sources and methods of intelligence. whether or not we choose to engage in military action against the country of iran, which does happen, the people of america need to hear about it before it happens. doesn't matter to you whether it was specific threat from qasem soleimani's no one seems to doubt the threat that he posed, does really require an explanation because if they had not taken him out, the republicans are saying if they look at the intelligence that they look at the intelligence that they were presented with any had not

been removed, there will be equally serious questions. it matters, if soleimani is the leader of an elite unitand soleimani is the leader of an elite unit and this is one of the allegations, blow up the us embassy in baghdad and we had information that it was imminent, taking him out early stopping the effort is justified under the presidents article to commander—in—chief authorities. 0ur constitution is three articles, congress which has the authority to declare war in the second one is the executive, which carries out the legislative laws enacted by congress in the third is a federal court system. justin trudeau is now giving his response. before we go any further, i want to extend once again my most sincere condolences to the families

of the victims and their loved ones. iand we of the victims and their loved ones. i and we are all standing with you. since last address and canadians, there have been ongoing discussions since i last address canadians, there have been ongoing discussions with foreign ministers, senior intelligence and military officials, including the fourth meeting of our response group. regarding the cause of the state of the crash, developments of which canadians should be made aware. the news will undoubtedly come as a further shock to the families who are already grieving in the face of this unspeakable tragedy. we have intelligence from multiple sources, including our allies and their own intelligence that indicates that the plane was shot down by an iranian surface—to—air missile. this may

well have been unintentional. this new information reinforces the need for a thorough investigation into this matter. canada is working with its allies to ensure that a thorough incredible investigation is conducted to determine the causes of this fatal crash. as i said yesterday, canadians have questions and they deserve answers. justin trudeau speaking in both english and french, just repeat what he said there. he is confirming, notjust from intelligence sources in washington but from canadian intelligence as well, from multiple sources that this plane was shot down by a surface—to—air missile and that reinforces the need for a thorough investigation of what we

have heard from the iranian side is that they are prepared to give access to the ukrainians and to the canadians. much access but not entirely sure what they are not giving is access to the manufacturer, boeing. whatever the cause of this tragic crash. foreign minister, the minister made it clear that the canadian officials must immediately be granted access to iran in orderto immediately be granted access to iran in order to provide services and identify the victims and participate in a thorough investigation. he also condemned iranian strikes the targeted military bases in a rack for coalition forces, including canadians are currently stationed. the minister committed to continuing this dialogue with canada as we seek

a nswe rs. this dialogue with canada as we seek answers. i spoke with the ukrainian president earlier today and conveyed my condolences to the many ukrainians who perished in this tragedy. he assured me that the ukraine is taking all necessary measures to ensure a thorough investigation and we will work closely with ukraine and our partners throughout this process. i also called prime minister of the netherlands, who shared with me his experience in handling the aftermath and investigation into malaysian airlines flight 17. clearly, there is continuing discussions with the foreign minister and having spoken to the dutch prime minister he will know how difficult an investigation like this is an area where there is

conflict and us listen then again. it is now more important than ever that we know exactly how a tragedy like this could've happened. the family of the victims and call canadians want answers. i want a nswe rs. canadians want answers. i want answers. that means closure, transparency, accountability and justice. and this government will not rest until we get that. thank you for being here this morning. i will now take your questions. good afternoon, justin trudeau, i would like to know what response iran gave you. have canada

—— staff canada participate. we are continuing to ask to have canadians involved in this process. and we will continue to have a conversation. that tells me that this is not yet confirmed. correct. given the context, do you feel that the us is partly responsible for this, given that they created the situation in which the missiles were launched? situation in which the missiles were launched ? i situation in which the missiles were launched? i think that is one of the many questions that people will be thinking about and trying to find a nswe rs thinking about and trying to find a nswers to, thinking about and trying to find answers to, but for the moment, i just want to underline the importance of having a full incredible investigation so that we can get those facts and continue to analysed based on those facts. to allow us to than draw conclusions

and reflections once we have assessed and established the facts of what happened. this is an extremely serious allegation in canadians are going to want to see proof that this is what happened. the intelligence and evidence suggests that it is likely that it was a surface to air strike but i would not go into the details of that intelligence at this time. given that the iranians have denied this in the reports that they are bulldozing the crash site, claiming that the flight and the voice of data recordings have been damaged. do you trust them that they have not actually optimise the investigation at this point? to think it is possible that we will not get a real answer? we have highlighted that it is extremely important that there be a thorough incredible investigation on—site of the with international partners in the iranians have

indicated that they understand that with the conclusions that we have been able to draw on in the preliminary conclusions we have been able to draw based on the intelligence and evidence today that they are clear enough for me to share them with canadians right now. translation do you agree that they have agreed to share and for the moment, iran said that they will be keeping the black boxes and iran but they told the ukrainian president that the investigators at least would have access to the black boxes. iranian authorities wish to keep the black boxes in iran but have indicated to president zielinski of the ukraine that the

ukrainian investigators will have access to the black boxes. translation: how can trust iran after refusing to share such information was we are calling for a complete and credible investigation with international partners so we can uncover the facts of what happened. for the families affected and for the world. circling back to an earlier question, if the intelligence is accurate, this seems to be the end result of the sequence of events that was caused by the drone strikes caused by the us president, give the information you have, how much responsibility does the united states bear for this tragedy? the evidence suggests that this is the likely cause but we need to have a full complete incredible

investigation to establish exactly what happened. that is what we are calling for and that is what we're expecting will happen. if iran does not co—operate and there are some reports of minimal cooperation to this point, what pressure can you bring to bear for sanctions, economic reproductions —— repercussions? what can be done? we will contemplate them as this unfolds but will continue to work with partners and direct iran with our request that we have a credible and complete investigation. translation: to come back to the question of

iran, if you're concluding that this is due to a missile strike, bubble your reaction be and how do you intend respond to iran? first of all, the conclusion that we drew was based on a preliminary analysis of the intelligence that we have, but it just underscores the intelligence that we have, but itjust underscores the importance of having a credible and complete investigation and that is forever going to proceed that step before we draw any conclusions. so i understand that but will that not threaten any diplomatic relations in terms of access to the site and repatriation of the victims. and our presence and erratic if people are

launching missiles of the bases. learn situation change, i imagine something will happen. indeed, this isa something will happen. indeed, this is a very concerning situation and thatis is a very concerning situation and that is what we want to know more. will be working with international authorities and with investigators and with iran in order to get a nswe rs and with iran in order to get answers into exactly what happened. we recognise that this may have been done accidentally but thatjust makes it even more important to clarify exactly what happened. good afternoon. ijust clarify exactly what happened. good afternoon. i just want clarify exactly what happened. good afternoon. ijust want to come back to the qualifiers you have been using may well have been unintentional, you just said that it may have been accidental. that implies that it may not have been unintentional. db is definitive as you can be, during which you know in which you cannot share with us about the intentionality. it is one of the

reasons why it is so important to have a credible investigation before we get into definitive conclusions it as you say, we need to ensure that we have all of the facts gathered all of the intelligence and evidence right now suggests very clearly a possible and probable cause for the crash but it is all the more necessary to gather all of the more necessary to gather all of the evidence of a complete picture of what happened. the evidence if it doesin of what happened. the evidence if it does in fact show and accidental, unintentional surface—to—air missile, what range of options come with the government of canada respond in some way to that and if so, what range of responses might your government consider? anything in the range of responses would need to start from a clear understanding

and a credible confirmation of what might actually happen and that is why a proper and full investigation is going to be so important. translation: based on what you know now, are you convinced that this was a missile or unintentional. to be convinced beyond all doubt, we would need a credible, thorough and in—depth investigation and that is exactly what we are calling for. we want a com plete what we are calling for. we want a complete investigation, that this will be asked for yesterday and continue to ask for that today in those discussions are ongoing. and i wa nt to those discussions are ongoing. and i want to tell canadians and families that what we have gathered in terms of intelligence does indicate a very

clear that this could've been an unintentional strike. the families of the victims want answers, if the investigation is not done with the operation of iran, how do you assure them that you're really doing everything possible to get answers and to have a credible transparent investigation. we understand that investigations of this type to take time. we know that getting ready thorough investigation —— really thorough investigation —— really thorough investigations take time and we are early drawing conclusions at this time that we need more clarity and the families who are

feeling despair and really suffering right now. so we will continue to insist on getting more information and more in—depth investigation. when you spoke with president zielinski today, have you been briefed by any of his allies on his intelligence that you have been receiving in the recent hours at each of the share this intelligence with them for the first time?|j each of the share this intelligence with them for the first time? i had to share with them some of the reasons why we to share with them some of the reasons why we are so to share with them some of the reasons why we are so intent on having a full and complete investigation. we know it is extremely important to establish clarity around the facts of what happened and he assured me that canada is a good friend of the ukraine and will be closely involved with them in the investigation into this tragedy. did president zielinski know about intelligence suggesting that the missile possibly have been used to hit the plane?”

believe there have been media reports throughout much of the day but i do not know for sure if he was briefed by intelligence officials or not. translation: i understand that you are not ruling out the possibility that this was intentional. is that correct? it is too early to draw any clear conclusions or to rule out any possibilities. certainly we know that we need more in depth in credible investigations that law establish beyond any doubt the tragic accident. have you been able to talk to your

cou nterpa rts have you been able to talk to your counterparts and i am willing to talk to anyone to get answers in this tragedy. reporter: given the tensions in the area for the cause of a joan strike by the united states, do you think the united states is at least partially responsible for this trashy? i think it is too soon to be drawing conclusions or assigning planes of whatever proportions. our focus right now is supporting the families grieving right across the country and providing what answers we can in april in every way. but recognising there is going to need to bea recognising there is going to need to be a full and credible investigation into what etc happen before we draw any conclusions stopping off president trump said he had concerns that a missile might have brought down the plane. he