there has been a third night of heavy skirmishes in eastjerusalem between israeli police, jewish settlers and palestinians. the confrontations are over the possible eviction of palestinian families from their homes to make way forjewish settlers. the un security council is due to meet to discuss the violence. the taliban in afghanistan have announced a 3—day ceasefire to mark the muslim festival of eid. this comes as the funerals take place of more than 60 people, mostly young girls, who were killed in a militant attack outside a school in kabul. over 1,000 migrants have landed on the italian island of lampedusa within a 24—hour period. 0ne boat alone was carrying almost 400 men, women and children. lampedusa is one of the main arrival ports for people wanting to reach europe.

now on bbc news, it's hardtalk with zeinab badawi. this interview was recorded last thursday, before the deadly weekend attack near a kabul school. welcome to hardtalk with me, zeinab badawi. the withdrawal of us troops from afghanistan later this year after two decades represents a major turning point for the country — especially for afghan women. many believe the western troop presence protected theirfragile rights. my guest is rare in afghan politics. fawzia koofi is the first woman to lead a political party in afghanistan and is part of an afghan delegation in talks with the taliban. yet, she is one of their fiercest critics, endures constant intimidation, and has survived several attempts on her life. why is fawzia koofi so worried about the future stability of afghanistan and its women?

fawzia koofi in kabul, welcome to hardtalk. now, you had a very interesting start in life — if i can put it that way. you were your mother's eighth child. she was desperate for a boy. she didn't want to see you when she gave birth to you, and asked for somebody to take you out so you could die in the sun. after hours and hours of screaming, somebody rescues you, takes you back to your mother. she's overcome with guilt

and she keeps you. so how on earth did your mother become your heroine? thank you. my mother, as a woman, has gone under extreme discrimination in her life, living in afghanistan, yet she didn't want to have another woman to experience the same experiences she had. so, therefore, when i was born — my mother, my father was, of course, multi—marriage, and the other woman of my father delivered a son baby. in order for my mother to regain the love of my father, she also wanted a son, because a son is most favoured in afghanistan's family, when the woman deliver a son. so my mother wanted to have a son, and it was me. she did not want to have a girl, but she gave me later the love and also she demonstrated the strength and the resilience

through her life, taking care of the children of my father — even from the other woman, from the other wives of my father — when my father was killed, that she became — although she was not educated, she became the role model of my life for being so strong and so passionate. and so, in fact, you became the first girl in your very large family of about 19 to go to school. you went to medical school to become a doctor. but in 1996, your studies were stopped by the taliban. you then had a very difficult time. your father and your brothers were killed for their political activism in the 19705. you got married, had two children, but your husband was imprisoned. he contracted tb there, subsequently died of it. so how did your personal life fashion your political ambitions, your career? whoever i am in my political career is what my personal life brought me to.

actually, i'm a product of my personal life. the experiences that i have gone through as a woman — in particular during taliban, but since my childhood — gave me more reasons to fight for equality. so, in 2005, you were elected as an mp. you couldn't stand, for various reasons, in the 2018 parliamentary elections. you lead a party called the movement of change for afghanistan. you have three mps currently in parliament. but we know that afghanistan is a very dangerous place for high—profile women such as yourself. we had two supreme courtjudges who were women murdered in january this year. activists, journalists, all the rest of it, harassed and killed. you yourself most recently survived an assassination attempt in august when you were shot in your arm, your daughter beside you in the car. what is it like to live under this kind of constant threat? for most of us, actually, we regard this as part

of our normal life. most of the afghans have grown up and born during the war and grown up during the war. for most of the afghans living in afghanistan, they don't know what does peace for life mean. so, that's why, you know, living under extremely difficult situation in terms of security... also, afghanistan is a country that has its own challenges when it comes to traditional aspects, and women have been the victim of some of those wrong practices of tradition. so, there are not only one challenge, which is security, there are multi kind of dimensional challenges on the life of people. but of course, the major one is the war because, daily base, people lose lives. recently, based on many reports, actually, since

the last time the us signed agreement with the taliban, more than 400 women were killed in a targeted assassination, so that indicates how challenging life is. but we have chosen to live in this country, to bring a positive change if we can. all right. so, look, you've won numerous international awards for your advocacy work. you're an emerging world leader at the world economic forum. and you have said that "a rushed dialogue", as you put it, "between the government and the taliban risks sidelining afghan women and all of the gains we have made over the years". why exactly do you believe that? well, we know that any war has three ends — either a military victory, a political settlement, a negotiated settlement. this is what we actually expected and this is what we expect in afghan context.

in this context, we don't know what is the us narrative of ending the current war. many see this as a retreat from the united states — an essential retreat, actually — that can lead to two scenarios — a vacuum of power, a vacuum of a situation where everybody can live in peace, or a deteriorated security situation. however, we know that the other side have not demonstrated their preferred strategy as a political settlement. they have demonstrated more a military victory, and that makes the peace process and the life difficult. lately, there has been an increase in the violence. the violence has escalated and the international

community, mainly the united states, announced the withdrawal, which even makes the peace process more complicated. our hope was that in 2021, we will have some progress for a political settlement. however, i think now after the withdrawal, we still have a few months ahead of us to agree politically and hopefully, on an inclusive government, including taliban and the women of afghanistan and the political community of afghanistan. but there are the risks also that the deteriorating and escalating violence might even — fewer the chances of a political settlement. of course, that is the danger. but what is the outcome of that view? do you want the american troop presence and the nato troops in afghanistan to stay there forever to maintain the rights of women,

for instance? that's not a reason for troops to remain, is it? 0therwise, there'd be invading armies all over the world protecting women's rights. zeinab, the international community was not in afghanistan from day one to protect the rights of afghan women. remember, before 2001, we were actually shouting that we, afghanistan, is a victim of terrorism. it's not a civil war. many countries in the world would regard the taliban ruling afghanistan as — and then the situation then as a civil war. until then the 11 september attack happened, and then the international community decided to come to afghanistan. they actually came for their own cause. they came, and their mission was very clear. they came, they wanted to dismantle al-qaeda and, of course, de—link them with the taliban. but women freedom and liberty was a major achievement

of international community and women of afghanistan where they are — they are reliable partner over the years. so, now, we do not want — of course, no country wants international community or military presence in their country forever. we want to, you know, be able to stand on our feet. what i'm trying to say is the rushed withdrawal, without any condition, even violating the doha agreement that the united states signed with the taliban in february 2020, which is interlinked with each other, that is something that at least we had expected. all right. so, i'm in a rush, you say, but of course, the western presence has been in afghanistan for 20 years. let's just pick up that point about why they went in. you said because of international terror. as general sir nick carter, chief of the british defence staff, said recently, "in the last 20 years, there has been no international

terrorist attack mounted from afg hanistan". lisa maddox, former cia analyst — "the taliban is an ideological organisation, and that ideology is afghan—centric and not aligned with isis. there is no reason any more on terror grounds for international troops to remain in afghanistan." do you buy that? do you accept that? based on many reports, there are 25 military extremist groups that actually operate in the region between afghanistan, pakistan, centralasia, mainly uzbekistan. they have been able to use afghanistan territory in the past 20 years for their transit purpose. based on also the report, the sigar report, the taliban — there is no indication that the taliban actually have de—linked themselves with al-qaeda. and also, their relationship with isis is complicated in afghanistan.

in some regions of afghanistan, isis do not have — they are in fight with taliban. in some regions, they actually join hands together to fight against the government of afghanistan. so there are the risks of return of military extremism at any stage to afghanistan, especially if there is no political settlement and establishment of a government which is acceptable by everybody, and that government is strong enough to preserve its territory from the military extremism, there is always the chances of comeback of military extremism, given the history. all right. and the other point you made was you don't want the rushed withdrawal until there's a power—sharing agreement. but, look, the americans are well aware of that. a us intelligence agencies�* report prepared last year for the trump administration says that if us troops are withdrawn before a power—sharing agreement between the taliban and the afghan government, the country could fall largely under the control of the taliban within two or three years. they're aware of that. antony blinken, the us

secretary of state, has said very recently that the us is staying in the game and would remain engaged with the country, despite its troop withdrawal. you don't need to be worried, fawzia koofi. it's not about who is going to control more territory in afghanistan. to be honest, i don't think neither side actually control more territory in terms of the people, the population, because when you control the territory, the land, does not necessarily mean that you have an influence over people. in this case, i do not think actually the taliban control areas which are populated. they control mountainous areas. they control places which are not densely populated. so, that's not a worry. the worry is that if any side tried to gain power through a military means, which will lead to a vacuum of power, there are two scenarios. firstly, there will be

a civil war, possibilities of a civil war. second is that if people on one side try to come militarily to power, there is all chances that in a military situation, people will lose their basic rights, especially women. linda thomas—greenfield, the american ambassador to the united nations, says any agreement must preserve the gains of afghan women if afghanistan wants to ensure the international community's continued political and financial support — very important for them because there's a lot of poverty in afghanistan, 47% levels, 25% unemployment. the taliban need the support, and, you know, explicit statements like that are being made. so, there is leverage to keep them in order. yes, they do. the nato and international community has leverage on both sides. they can use their diplomacy, first of all, to bring taliban to the negotiation table,

and a meaningful negotiation, bring regional consensus, build more international consensus on the peace process in afghanistan to use the... ..the few next months for a political negotiated settlement. but also they have leverage of their financial support. if we have strong institutions in afghanistan that holds back the right of women and protect them, you know, there are possibilities that we will continue to keep the rights of women that we have gained in the past 20 years. but in the meantime, if everything becomes so militarily and if both sides try to use military strategy as the victory point, then, in that situation, women will be the main victim of the war. all right. let me just pick up on the women's issue, because, of course, it's a very important one. suhail shaheen, who's a spokesman for the taliban's political leadership, said in may this year the group

is committed to women's rights, whether they are in terms of access to education or work. so, you don't need to worry about your basic rights, do you? i mean, they're making assurances such as those. we really want... the women of afghanistan want to see more public policy change from taliban side. i have been in the negotiation table with them for the past six months. of course, you know, after six months, we have now come to a time where we call each other with each other�*s name and then we try to build some respect and some mutual understanding. but the people of afghanistan and the women of afghanistan want more. they want taliban to publicise their policy on education, publicise their policy on work for women, on political participation of women. these are... just saying that we have changed is not enough.

it will not build enough trust by the women of afghanistan over taliban. they need to really demonstrate, because i know that in many places now under the control of taliban, still girls have difficulty going to school, women cannot go to work. so, it has to come to practise from words. all right. but, look, i mean, obviously, the taliban are key to all this, but it's notjust the taliban who are impeding women's rights in afghanistan. this is a deeply conservative country. there have been moves to try to bring a bill against violence against women in the parliament in afghanistan. conservative religious forces, nothing to do with the taliban, are blocking this. so, it's not as though you get the taliban in the right place and then women can just walk around the streets of kabul and everywhere else with all the freedoms they want to enjoy. it's notjust the taliban, is it? absolutely. no, i couldn't agree more. it's a conservative society.

however, in transformation, there is one part of society which is transformed. women, younger generation, thanks to the media over the past 20 years, they have been the major driving factor of the progress of afghanistan and the progress of the nation. but, of course, there is one part of society which is conservative. they try to hold back the progress. we have had a lot of them, not only in the parliament, in the government, in the society. the difference is that we do not share views. we have extreme differences of views with those conservative elements and politicians. but at the end of the day, we have equal power. the power of a vote of a woman is equal to the power of a vote of a conservative man in the parliament. yeah. when it comes to the taliban, we do not share that power. we do not have that power. they use their military extremism, they use a gun

to pursue their political agenda, and that makes it difficult for women. all right, you say that they are using the gun to pursue their own agenda. but, look, president ashraf ghani has said if they want to go down the path of violence, then they will have the peace of the grave, as he put it. and he says that 90... more than 90% of afghan military operations have been conducted entirely by afghan security forces. the americans — antony blinken, that the afghan military is one of the more advanced militaries in the world. so, the afghan security forces are more than able to take on the taliban. there has been escalation on the violence, i know, in many provinces now. right now, there are active fighting, as a result of which people are killed in both sides. and unfortunately, also the civilians are killed.

and it does not benefit anybody because at the end of the day, these are the children, the son of a mother, and the family of somebody. and to put an end to this, we actually went to negotiation six months ago. i know that both sides, the afghan government and the taliban, are trying to revise their military strategy, prepare themselves for a worst—case scenario. so, the cost has been high, which is why president ashraf ghani has said during these negotiations — on may 4, he wrote an article, and he said, "if it meant peace would be secured, i am willing to end my term early." there are those who see him as a bit of an obstacle to peace. fatima gailani, yourfellow female negotiator, believes that that is the real roadblock in the negotiations, the lack of trust between president ghani and the taliban. do you think he's an obstacle to peace? should he step down early

as he's suggested he might? i know that we need to really demonstrate an enormous amount of flexibility in the peace process, and we need to put also genuine and sincere efforts in this process, because, as you rightly mentioned, the figures since the announcement of us, of its troops�* withdrawal, hundreds of people, mainly women, actually contacted me or came to my office. they are the elites of the society. they are trying to find a way to leave the country. that's going to be a brain drain. it's not going to be ordinary citizens from the streets who leave afghanistan, but they're elites that we have invested on that. so, yes, we need to have some level of flexibility. now, we need to negotiate about what. .. flexibility from the president, you mean? because he was recently re—elected, of course, 2019.

should he step down early? 0h, from all sides, i think we have to really talk sincerely about what a road map would look like. in the past six months of negotiations, we have tried to propose to taliban that we are willing to introduce, you know, serious discussions about what a political settlement would look like and who should sacrifice to what extent in terms of power. but we have not heard from taliban what they think a power—sharing should look like. all right. therefore, i think we... yes, the president needs also to play a more important role in terms of building consensus in afghanistan, bring more people around, you know, around this republic system. many people in afghanistan have their own views about how the government also works. yep. but when it comes to peace, i think there is a unity internally that, you know, we have to go for a

political settlement. all right. so, just tell me, what is it like on a personal level for you to be a member of the �*21 official delegation in talks with the taliban, given you've suffered so much at their hands. what's it like on a personal level? briefly. i have been in the negotiation table for the past six months. of course, extremely difficult, because you are part of a... i'm part of a negotiation that, unlike many negotiations in the world or many peace processes in the world, the women rights will be bargained. and also on a personal level, i'm actually facing... ..a group that 20 years back, they would not recognise women as equal class citizens. so, extremely challenging. but in the meantime, i feel proud because if i am the reason to protect the citizens�* right, if i�*m the reason to protect women�*s right, if i am there to raise my voice and be able to present the 55% of my country, which are

the women, then that give me a sense of power, a sense of more determination to continue my agenda. fawzia koofi in kabul, thank you very much indeed for coming on hardtalk. hello. on sunday, the uk recorded its highest temperatures since the end of march, 22.5 celsius in suffolk. now, nothing that high in the week ahead. temperatures will be close to average for the time of year, and for monday, it is a mixture of sunshine and showers.

in fact, that pretty much covers it for much of the week ahead, because for much of the week ahead, low pressure will be close by the uk, the source of these showers, and at least for monday, some brisk winds as well, especially in england and wales. and after a cloudy, breezy, showery night, well, this is where temperatures are to start the day. no frost out there. in fact, some spots just around 10—12 degrees celsius. we�*re not expecting any frost in the week ahead. there mayjust be a bit of rain skirting parts of eastern england to begin with. that moves off and may well head towards the northern isles of scotland later in the day. some of that could be heavy and thundery. whereas elsewhere, it�*s sunshine, these showers moving west to east, some heavy and thundery, a risk of hail. and it will be quite blustery, particularly in england and wales. these are average wind speeds. there�*ll be higher gusts around 40—115 mph or so. and temperatures generally in the range of around 13—17 degrees celsius. now, quite a bit of sunshine to end the day across east anglia and south east england as many of the showers will fade away. as ever, some places will avoid the showers. you may get one, just a brief wet moment and england and wales

will be mainly dry on monday night, but a batch of showers will move out of northern ireland and into parts of scotland. and these are tuesday morning�*s temperatures. again no frost out there. low pressure still very much close by as we go into tuesday, and from that, we�*re going to see some further showers. now, maybe notjust popping up, but tending to move through in a zone that will travel from south—west to north—east during the day. and a weather front close to north west scotland will bring cloud and some outbreaks of rain. some places may well miss the showers as the system moves its way in. similar sorts of temperatures on tuesday. and for wednesday and thursday, sunshine and showers. it�*s not going to be as breezy. with a fair amount of cloud out there. and with the air coming down from the north—east, it will turn a bit cooler, but not particularly cold, mind you. so, that�*s how the week is shaping up. it is sunshine, showers — some of those are going to be quite heavy — and not as cold as it was last week, and mainly frost—free. i don�*t know whether we�*re done with frost at the moment, but it�*s certainly

not around this week.

this is bbc news. i�*m sally bundock with the latest headlines for viewers in the uk and around the world. exercise restraint and respect: the stark warning from the un to israel as clashes continue in eastjerusalem. mass rescue in the med: more than 1,000 migrants land on the italian island of lampedusa in a single day. germany�*s coronavirus checks have restricted kerb crawling and closed brothels. sex workers say it�*s putting them in danger. we have a special report. the corona restrictions are supposed to make life safer for all of us. sex workers we have spoken to say for them, they have simply made life more dangerous. mass protests across france: demonstrators say president macron�*s new climate change bill isn�*t ambitious enough.

and heading for a hug: