this is the context. two years ago, shortly before dawn, russian troops marched across the border in ukraine. and putin believed he could easily bend the will and break the resolve of the free people of ukraine. translation: if ukraine had been admitted into nato, - that war would have never happened, because i believe russia wouldn't have dared attack nato. and today, we have a war. gunfire. so the gunfire you can hear- is ukrainian troops trying to shoot down a suspected russian drone. they heard it overhead. we've taken cover under some trees. the un security council meets to discuss ukraine on the eve of the second anniversary of the war. here's a live shot of the chamber in new york.

the british foreign secretary will speak shortly. we'll also hear tonight from the polish president. andrzej duda has spoken exclusively to this programme about the threat to his country and his concerns about european defence. andrew harding has been observing the war through through the eyes of front—line soldiers in eastern ukraine. and we will focus on the meeting in paris this weekend where israel will participate in the talks over a possible ceasefire in gaza. good evening. a year ago when we marked the first anniversary of the russian invasion, the nato countries were united in their resolve to help ukraine. kyiv was beginning to retake significant swathes of territory, the russian offensive was stalling and hopes for the ukrainian counter—offensive were high. on the eve of this year's anniversary, it all feels very different. russia is more dangerous, america less reliable and — for the first time — here in europe, there is now serious talk about an eventual russian

threat to nato territory. the talk in europe has shifted towards the view that russia must be stopped in ukraine before it moves on to other targets, like moldova and the smaller baltic states. as we go to air, the un security council is meeting to discuss the war. these are the live pictures from new york. we are expecting david cameron to speak shortly, and we will bring you news of that when it happens. but first, our interview with andrzej duda. i spoke to the polish president yesterday in warsaw, a leader who is much closer to donald trump than most others here in europe. mr president, we're two years on from russia's expanded invasion of ukraine. avdiivka has just fallen, the ukrainian troops are rationing arms on the front—line and there is a crisis of recruitment

within the ukrainian army. do you think we're at a tipping point? translation: when the war broke out two years ago, - on the eve of the outbreak, just a few hours before the russian invasion started, myself and the president of lithuania visited kyiv to give our support to president zelensky to show our solidarity. on the 23rd of february, and back then, everyone was saying that ukraine will fall and there was a great fear that it would happen within hours. then they said it would last a couple of days. now two years have passed. ukraine is still defending itself. ukraine has persevered and stopped the russian aggression. and as i said, on the front—line, there are very difficult moments. there are better moments, but there are more difficult ones. but to me, one thing is the most important. we still have an independent, sovereign ukraine. we're sitting in a room with a portrait of the late

president lech kaczynski, who of course, died in a plane crash in russia back in 2008. he was in georgia on his way to the separatist south ossetia and came underfire from russian troops in the company of president saakashvili. 15 years ago, it was georgia. now it's ukraine. how long before it is poland, estonia, lithuania? translation: since you made that reference - to president lech kaczynski, i'm calling him my president because back then i served as minister in the president's office. i was his lawyer. we need to remind ourselves that before the russian aggression against georgia happened in august of 2008, there was a summit of nato in bucharest in april 2008. at that very summit

of nato in bucharest, president lech kaczynski supported president george bush, the president of the united states, and they fought together to make sure that ukraine would receive the so—called membership action plan. in other words, the plan of being admitted to nato as a fully—fledged member. back then, france and germany blocked that, and it didn't happen. and the same applied to georgia, by the way, when the russian attack against georgia happened. and then in 2014, we witnessed the russian attack against ukraine and the beginning of the occupation of crimea and donetsk, luhansk. and then in 2022, a full—scale aggression. from a historical perspective, it was the west that didn't pass the exam, as a matter of fact, because if they had listened to the words of kaczynski in 2008, which he said in tbilisi, that, "today, russia is attacking georgia,

it has to be stopped at all costs, because if it does not stop, perhaps soon ukraine will come as the next victim, then maybe the baltic states, and then perhaps my country, poland." if those words had been listened to back then, if back then it had been implemented, what been implemented, what george bush had wanted from nato, supported by kaczynski. perhaps history would have taken a different turn. if ukraine would have been admitted into nato, that war would have never happened because i believe russia wouldn't have dared attack nato. and today, we have a war. but i believe, and i want to stress this, to conclude this part, because it's what you're referring to — i do not believe that russia will attack nato countries, any nato countries, that it would dare to have an open war against nato, with the north atlantic alliance. if you take a look at article v on collective defence and if you take into account how far

over the last two years russia has been trying to conquer ukraine, it hasn't been able to deal with the ukrainian nation and their heroism. it's interesting you talk about collective defence because i want to talk about donald trump and his comments a few weeks ago. you know him very well because you chaired the nato summit here in warsaw that he attended. you signed a strategic partnership with him back in 2018. so perhaps you know him better than any other european leader. the point he made critically undermines the central tenet of the north atlantic treaty, and that is collective security come what may. and yet he is saying, "if you don't pay, i'm not going to protect you." surely you see that. translation: first of all, - we have to bear in mind two things.

there is an election campaign going on in the united states. in campaigns, different words are said. in campaigns, you often use sharper language than you normally use in politics. donald trump, right from the start, since he was first elected president of the united states of america, was clearly saying that he expected nato members to live up to their commitments. we, as part of nato, all of us have committed ourselves to spend no less than 2% of our gdp on defence, no less. therefore, donald trump is saying, "i expect that every nato member, since there is such an obligation to commit 2% on defence," and he says, "if somebody does not commit 2% of their defense, then i'm sorry. what are we waiting for, for the us to go and defend them? that's an american taxpayer is going to pay for their security. but he says specifically, "you've got to pay. if you don't, i would encourage them

to do whatever the hell they want." that is quite categorically undermining what the treaty is all about. translation: i have one experience with the former president _ of the united states, donald trump, when he was serving as president of the united states. everything that he agreed with me on back then was implemented. does it work two ways? will you go to washington next month to mark the 25th anniversary of poland's accession to nato? will you go and tell donald trump and house republicans that they need to unlock this money for ukraine? translation: | hope that - the assistance will be admitted. he's blocking it. it is mr trump that's blocking it now. translation: it is in the house of representatives. _ there is a political debate

going on in the united states. but on the other hand, please bear in mind that no one else but the united states of america has so far given a bigger amount of assistance to ukraine. without that assistance from the united states, i'm not sure if ukraine would be able to defend itself until today. of course, america has a democratic state. debates are going on. discussions are going on. however, right now, $95 million is in play in the house of representatives, and i hope that it will be donated for ukraine by the american authorities, by the congress. of course, i'm appealing all the time to admit this support to ukraine, because ukraine does need it in order to be able to resist effectively the russian invasion. i want to ask you about a discussion that's ongoing now in brussels about how we respond to what's going on in ukraine. do you think there needs to be a pandemic—style response to the defence problem in europe, perhaps a recovery fund that drives procurement and manufacturing, a central fund that drives that? translation: first of all, - i think that the sanctions policy is good, and i believe

it is effective. and although there are some voices saying that the sanctions policy is not working and so on and so forth, as a matter of fact, this is not true. sanctions are having an effect on russia, and they are painful for russians. they bring huge losses to the russian economy and bring relatively lower living standards. they are painful for russian oligarchs. they are very heavily limiting the possibilities for the russian defence industry to develop. but of course, they are being circumvented. this is always the case. russia tries to circumvent those sanctions in many different ways, but the sanctions are being implemented. and they have to be continued. the russian financial market needs to be hit. the russian banking sector needs to be hit. and that is why i believe that europe should be going in this direction. it should implement more sanctions packages against russia. it should be hitting those soft spots, such as exports of different raw materials from russia. should it appropriate the russian funds that are frozen?

translation: yes. i also believe that those proposals that the frozen russian assets, which are kept in different funds and banks across the globe, could be earmarked for the restoration of ukraine, generally, i think we need to overcome the barrier which stops everything today. some might say we cannot use it, that there are legal obstacles and so on and so forth. i believe that has to be overcome. there are huge russian assets stored in current accounts all over the world. these have been blocked, and i believe that they should be used in order to restore ukraine. however, irrespective of this, i believe that we need to start within the framework of the european union. we need to start conducting an efficient policy of rebuilding the european military potential, the production potential. that is why we need joint production of ammunition within the european union, ammunition which we have big shortfalls of. we need huge discussions, serious discussions about the joint rebuilding of the european defence

industry, joint construction of different kinds of armaments. president duda, it's been very good to talk to you. thank you. president andrzej duda speaking to me yesterday in warsaw. we will get into some of that and the next half—hour with our panel. tilling expressing his frustrations about opportunities missed. while we were talking to him, you could see the secretary general. let's dip into that. translation: and it is undermining the shared norms _ translation: and it is undermining the shared norms and _ translation: and it is undermining the shared norms and values - translation: and it is undermining the shared norms and values that - the shared norms and values that make _ the shared norms and values that make us— the shared norms and values that make us all— the shared norms and values that make us all safer. the conflict accelerated the surge in food prices, — accelerated the surge in food prices, economic shocks and a global

cost—of—living crisis, he think developing countries still recovering from covid—19 the hardest _ recovering from covid—19 the hardest. in addition, the prospect of this_ hardest. in addition, the prospect of this war— hardest. in addition, the prospect of this war resulting in nuclear accident — of this war resulting in nuclear accident chills spines around the world _ accident chills spines around the world. both sides to the conflict must _ world. both sides to the conflict must take — world. both sides to the conflict must take all possible measures to prevent— must take all possible measures to prevent that from happening and all nuclear_ prevent that from happening and all nuclear sites across the country. the international atomic energy agency— the international atomic energy agency will continue to support these _ agency will continue to support these efforts, and we will also keep pushing _ these efforts, and we will also keep pushing for freedom and safety of navigation in the black sea and that badly— navigation in the black sea and that badly needed ukrainian and russian food and _ badly needed ukrainian and russian food and fertilisers reach the global— food and fertilisers reach the global market. the food and fertilisers reach the global market. food and fertilisers reach the ulobal market. ,, . ., , , ., global market. the secretary general s - ellin . global market. the secretary general sellin: out global market. the secretary general spelling out some _ global market. the secretary general spelling out some of— global market. the secretary general spelling out some of the _ global market. the secretary general spelling out some of the impacts of l spelling out some of the impacts of the war in ukraine over the past two years. we will continue to watch that. we expect the british foreign secretary to speak shortly and we will bring you some of the as and when he speaks. coming up after a short break, our correspondent andrew harding has

been to the front—line in ukraine to revisit a medic he met at the start of the war. around the world and across the uk, this is bbc news. let's look at some other stories making news in the uk. britain today signed an agreement with the european union's borderagency, frontex, to co—operate more closely on tackling irregular migration. it'll boost the exchange of information, including on human smuggling patterns and document fraud. but it will not see joint patrols and does not provide for the return of migrants from britain. a government—commissioned review into tackling political violence is to recommend the police should be able to shut down protests outside mps' offices, council buildings and the houses of parliament. the issue of mps' safety was used by the commons speaker, sir lindsay hoyle, to justify his controversial handling of a debate on the israel—hamas war. a court date has been set for a hearing to determine whether child serial killer lucy letby can appeal against her convictions for the murder and attempted murder of babies.

the nurse's case will be considered by a panel ofjudges at a public hearing in april. you're live with bbc news. at the two—year mark, ukraine is not defeated, which in itself is extraordinary when you consider that at the outset the kremlin had ordered the murder of the entire executive branch and the takeover of the parliament. that has not happened. the ukrainians have fought with courage and with cunning, but it is hard going. the troops are exhausted, their ammunition supplies running low, and just this past week, the country suffered a morale—busting defeat in the city of avdiivka. the bbc�*s andrew harding has returned to the front—lines of eastern ukraine and has this assessment through the experience of one ukrainian fighter. two years of war seen through the struggles of one ukrainian doctor. this was the first time we met oleg kravchenko back in 2022,

in a besieged town called lysychansk. oleg had justjoined ukraine's army as a volunteer medic. look here. he drove us to his unit near the front—lines. it's safe from russia. in those early days, a smiling oleg was full of confidence. it's my country. but the russians are pushing now... yes. ..a lot. i hope maybe 1.5 months and we will shoot every russian. you'll push them out? yes. so you think you're winning this? yes, yes. but within weeks, the russians had destroyed and captured lysychansk. nice to meet you. good to see you, too. it would be a year before we met oleg again. his medical team was now working in another front—line town, bakhmut. lots of casualties from ukraine's

struggling counter—offensive, the danger is growing. i still live. you're still alive? alive, yes. but it's been a difficult year? very difficult. as if to prove the point, incoming fire. you're not worried about your safety? my faith... my faith is... hm... i don't know. and now, two years into the war, we've come to meet oleg's team once again. as usual, they're in the thick of it, this time in kupiansk, another furious battle underway. russia now inching forwards. gunfire.

so the gunfire you can hear is ukrainian troops trying to shoot down a suspected russian drone. they heard it overhead. we've taken cover under some trees. not sure if they've hit it yet. the ukrainians have found a new russian target, but what of oleg? we'd lost touch with him for several months, but now hear news of an attack last october. a russian rocket hit the field hospital he was working in. three medics were killed. but oleg survived, his leg badly mangled. my friend died. it's difficult. difficult for me, and my mind is changed after that. when we first met in lysychansk, you were hopeful that ukraine could win. when we met in bakhmut, you were tired and worried, very tired.

now, how do you feel about the war? can ukraine win? yes. of course, i hope. but i think it's war. we will be long. a long war, then. medal of honor, it's from zelensky. and for oleh, medals and an early retirement after two years that have transformed every life in this country. andrew harding, bbc news, eastern ukraine. let's go live to kyiv, where the ukrainian mp oleksiy goncharenko is waiting to talk to us. very good evening to you. thank you for being with us again. before we talk policy and defence, maybe i could ask you for a personal reflection on the eve of the second anniversary of the war. what does it mean to you? we

anniversary of the war. what does it mean to you?— mean to you? we continue to fight. it's mean to you? we continue to fight. it's difficult — mean to you? we continue to fight. it's difficult. we — mean to you? we continue to fight. it's difficult. we are _ mean to you? we continue to fight. it's difficult. we are tired, - mean to you? we continue to fight. it's difficult. we are tired, but - mean to you? we continue to fight. it's difficult. we are tired, but we . it's difficult. we are tired, but we show to the whole world our resilience. the whole world realised that ukraine exists in ukraine will exist. i think that we already one of their warfor our exist. i think that we already one of their war for our independence, but now we are fighting for our territorial integrity. is but now we are fighting for our territorial integrity.— territorial integrity. is there in k iv a territorial integrity. is there in kyiv a nervousness _ territorial integrity. is there in kyiv a nervousness about - territorial integrity. is there in | kyiv a nervousness about what territorial integrity. is there in - kyiv a nervousness about what might come tomorrow on the anniversary itself? ., �* , ., ., �* come tomorrow on the anniversary itself? ., h ., ~' ., itself? no, it's not. i don't know. we need personnel— itself? no, it's not. i don't know. we need personnel in _ itself? no, it's not. i don't know. we need personnel in battle - itself? no, it's not. i don't know. we need personnel in battle and| we need personnel in battle and people on the streets. we already are prepared for everything bad which russia can do. this usually what they do. but i don't think that they can surprise us any more. we are prepared, and we are not afraid. i don't know if you heard our interview with president andrzej duda come over there was certainly frustration in that interview about the opportunities missed and also the opportunities missed and also the lack of capacity that there is

in europe right now to help ukraine. that said, when you look at what has been sent to kyiv in the last two years, it's barely 1% of the entire gdp of the european union. the west could do much more.— could do much more. that's true. but first off, i could do much more. that's true. but first off. i want _ could do much more. that's true. but first off, i want to _ could do much more. that's true. but first off, i want to thank— could do much more. that's true. but first off, i want to thank the - could do much more. that's true. but first off, i want to thank the west - first off, i want to thank the west and the united kingdom, united states, holland and everybody for all the support we are receiving. but it's really frustrating to know, three years ago on february 2a, i joint territorial defence and took weapons in my hand to defend kyiv. and i saw everything by my own eyes, and if ukraine would have in february, march 2022 weapons that we received then in the summer, then it will be completely different story. we did not have what could change

the russians when they were retreating from kyiv. then it happened again and we are preparing ourfirst happened again and we are preparing our first counteroffensive, which was very successful. but we did not have the bradley's instructors and so armour intensity with which to chase russians. and then it happened again and again, all the time. we are chasing after putin and by chasing after it russians and by this we are prolonging this war, making it more and more and more dangerous. and we can finish it, but give to ukraine everything we need without any artificial restrictions and limitations on using it. because we are like a boxer who was boxing with one hand typed and not allowed to use this or that and russian territory or somewhere else. it's quite difficult and it's frustrating but we are doing our best. weapons is one thing. — but we are doing our best. weapons is one thing, the _ but we are doing our best. weapons is one thing, the draught _ but we are doing our best. weapons is one thing, the draught is - but we are doing our best. weapons is one thing, the draught is also a i is one thing, the draught is also a significant problem. you might have heard in andrew's piece the sheer

exhaustion that there is on the front line. how does ukraine refresh rejuvenate its armed forces when asking people to fight without the appropriate weapons? first asking people to fight without the appropriate weapons?— asking people to fight without the appropriate weapons? first of all, we need to _ appropriate weapons? first of all, we need to change _ appropriate weapons? first of all, we need to change people - appropriate weapons? first of all, we need to change people on - appropriate weapons? first of all, we need to change people on the | we need to change people on the front lines. they cannot fight forever, and this is a big challenge. this is the biggest challenge. this is the biggest challenge because we are not sure of people, we are not sure on courage, we are short on weaponry and supplies, that's true. but also with thing about the draught, i hear this question quite often recently, but i just want to remind you ukraine cannot fight with the russians by numbers. because we will mobilise 300,000 people and they will mobilise 600,000 people. we will mobilise 600,000 people. we will mobilise one million and they will mobilise one million and they will mobilise 2 million. so it's not the way for us. we should fight with russians by quality, by a very well—equipped army and not of a very

big size but very well—equipped, trained, motivated. that's definitely what happened. so that's how our strategy should look like. good of you to be with us on the programme again and we will be thinking of you and all the ukrainians tomorrow on the second anniversary, thank you for coming on. . ~' anniversary, thank you for coming on. . ~ , ., y anniversary, thank you for coming on. . ~' , ., , . anniversary, thank you for coming on. . ~ , . you anniversary, thank you for coming - on-_ you see we on. thank you very much. you see we are disappearing _ on. thank you very much. you see we are disappearing from _ on. thank you very much. you see we are disappearing from the _ on. thank you very much. you see we are disappearing from the french - are disappearing from the french side at the un security council meeting in new york. still not heard from david cameron but we will dip into that life in the second half of the programme. we will focus plenty more in the programme on ukraine, butjust after the break more in the programme on ukraine, but just after the break we will talk about the other major conflict, the israeli conflict in gaza. important meetings happening this week in paris, the israelis alongside the cia chief are those discussions maybe we will get some reaction to that in a few minutes' time. do stay with us, we will be right back.

hello there. we saw lots of showers breaking out today and there's still quite a few around at the moment. you may have noticed also that it felt a little bit chillier out there today. we're in that cooler air as we head into the weekend and dominated more by low pressure, if you like. that's going to keep some showers going, but hopefully not quite as many as we saw earlier on. through the night, we'll see the showers that are around tending to decay and retreat back to more western coastal areas. although we will see a package of heavier showers in the far south—west. apologies to viewers watching the weather, let's listen to david cameron speaking at the un security council. fir cameron speaking at the un security council. ., . , cameron speaking at the un security council. ., ., , ., ., council. or of any threat from ukraine- _ council. or of any threat from ukraine. the _ council. or of any threat from ukraine. the abject _ council. or of any threat from ukraine. the abject disregard| council. or of any threat from i ukraine. the abject disregard for the laws that bind nations over the principles of this united nations, the brazenness with which putin still claimed this was somehow legitimate. days after february the

24th, the united nations general assembly declared that the invasion was wrong and that russia must withdraw immediately. two years on, this has not changed. and so today i want to posted questions. my first of the kremlin — my first visit as 43 terry was to ukraine will so i stood in the wreckage of odesa's bob at cathedral. i saw a brave ukrainians kissing loved ones goodbye as they left to defend their homeland. and i know that such scenes are not limited to ukraine. russian mothers, too, having to russian mothers, too, having to russian science, russian cities now bear the scars of war. so my question to putin is simple, why? is government claims this to be a battle between brothers. what twisted form of brotherhood is this for which so many lives must be ruined? how is russia living up to its responsibilities as a permanent member of this council uphold international peace and security? and ham and eat ridiculous

explanations that we now add for this invasion? are they criminals or are they fellow russians? one minute, ukraine is in a potential threat and the next we are told it does not exist. are you fighting stooges of nato or nazis? the only people behaving like nazis are the putin regime in vetting of the country and hoping the world will beat week and let you get away with it. that is the simple truth. putin believes he can take territories, redraw borders, exercise force to build his empire and we must not let this stand. we know ukraine's answer it. we have the courage of president zelensky two years ago, and i say to the permanent representative of the russian federation, he is quite capable and the ukrainian people are quite capable of making up their own mind about whether they should surrender part of their country to your illegal invasion. and today, we admire the perseverance of the ukrainian people day in, day out.

they won't falter. indeed they will continue to push russia back, liberating half the land putin seized and driving the russian navy out of its base in sevastopol. the course of the war may evan flow, but the seizure of a small town does not change the reality of it russia's situation was of the russian military is being drained of its modern equipment. you are having to rely on poor quality shells from pyongyang, and you sent the generation of russian boys into the meat grinder. what do you tell their mothers they died for equipment or don't you even bother? the kremlin expected ukraine to fold, but they are standing firm for their freedom. and you should all know britain's answer as well. last month the prime minister with the first leader to address the part of it there. we are the first or to assign a security pact with ukraine, and today we impose further sanctions clamping down on a russia plus my

military—industrial complex and those enablers seeking to keep it running. where watching david cameron at the security council in new york. let's listen in. he security council in new york. let's listen in. , ., . , listen in. he showed incredible coura . e listen in. he showed incredible courage in _ listen in. he showed incredible courage in returning _ listen in. he showed incredible courage in returning to - listen in. he showed incredible courage in returning to russia. listen in. he showed incredible . courage in returning to russia. he didn't falter, and he's now suffered terrible consequences for standing firm for russian democracy. and todayis firm for russian democracy. and today is an opportunity to give the world's answer. all of us up or needless suffering, yet we all know what is at stake here. in acting so brazenly, putin is not only trying to seize a chunk of his neighbour's territory, trying to extinguish the ukrainian people's right to self—determination, he's openly trying to upset the international order, replace it with not some progressive vision of an equality to nations, but returning to a 19th

century quality