this is bbc news, the headlines. israel steps up its offensives against hezbollah in lebanon and hamas in gaza, on the eve of the october seventh anniversary. in the last few minutes the israeli military has called on civilians nearfour buildings in a surburb of beirut to evacuate immediately. thousands of people gather across the world to call for the return of the 101 hostages still being held in gaza. events have been held in paris, london and glasgow, among others. israel is on a state of high alert with a 19 year—old female israeli border police officer

killed on sunday and ten people wounded — in a shooting in southern israel. the prime minister's chief of staff quit her role — sue gray said she "risked becoming a distraction". she had been caught in rows over pay, after it was revealed her salary was higher than sir keir starmer�*s. i will have a full event but now it's time for americast. it's all very combustible, isn't it? huge violence in the middle east and an american election about to happen. two questions, then. does the election affect the conflict in the middle east? and does the conflict affect the election in america? those two questions of course hugely important, both hugely complex, and the answer to each of them can be yes or no. so, they do not necessarily cancel each other out. but there is no question

at all that what is happening in the middle east matters in america, and what happens in america matters in the middle east. welcome to americast. hello, it's sarah, and i'm in the bbc�*s bureau in washington, dc. and it's justin in the worldwide headquarters of americast in london, england. it is such a big question, isn't it, whether or not the american election is affecting the events in the middle east, and vice versa, whether they will affect the outcome of the election? and a fascinating one, i think, because we often say that foreign policy doesn't really impact on us elections. but i wonder if this is creating enough background noise that it will get into people's heads. i don't think anyone�*s going to go to the ballot box thinking, you know, i do or do not agree with the administration's policy on precisely the two—state solution between israel and palestine. but i do think it creates an atmosphere that will

influence people's thinking. so, if we're answering that question first — do events in the middle east affect the american election — before we get to looking at it the other way around, i think they do. i mean, the classic sort of conventional answer is they don't because americans don't care about abroad very much. and very few americans, let's be frank, would be able to place lebanon on a map. although, of course, as we've discussed before, in certain key states like michigan, people are very well able to place those places on a map because they come from there and that that will matter a bit. but writ large, i think the danger, actually, for kamala harris is that there is just a sense of added chaos that was already, frankly, a sense of chaos, wasn't there around the world, but a sense of added chaos and jeopardy, which plays into particularly, frankly, low information voters thinking, oh, donald trump tells me that he can stop the chaos with a phone call, as he has literally done.

and he can ring whoever, someone in iran and threaten them personally, and that'll be the end of the matter. and those sorts of voters may be more persuaded, i suppose, to turn out and vote for him, in these circumstances than they would in other circumstances. to be honest, i think it's marginal, sarah. i mean, ijust think you can make too much of it because actually, most people will be voting on the economy and on immigration and all the things we've talked about ad nauseam, butjust on the margins, and the margins matter this year it could have an impact. because as we keep saying, this election is going to be won or lost in the margins because it is so very, very tight and particularly in the key swing states that will affect the outcome. and so i think you've put yourfinger on itjust in very, very well. there are people who care deeply about this. you'll remember the student protests we talked about a lot earlier this yearfrom

pro—palestinian undergraduates very, very upset about what was going on in gaza. there's obviously a big community who care very deeply about israel as well. and that stastoe biden�*s hand a bit sometimes on how firm he can be with israel. but it's this sense, i think, notjust of chaos in the world, but how america projects its image. and donald trump is very much the strong man, even the bully who'll be there on the world stage, sorting things out in america's interest. and because the israeli government really do seem to be notjust ignoring, but defying american advice from the biden administration at the moment, it looks weaker. and there are people who just, the vibes, as we've talked about before in this election, just don't like the idea that america is less of a global presence than it used to be. and i think maybe this feeds into that sense. yeah, i mean, she's had this line, hasn't she, kamala harris, which i know some people on the progressive left have been a bit nervous about where she says, i can't remember exactly what the word is, she's talked about america's military and its might in a way that has made some people on the progressive left of american politics who don't

much like the american idea of american military, might a bit nervy in the past. as commander in chief, i will ensure america always has the strongest, most lethal fighting force in the world. and i will fulfil our sacred obligation to care for our troops and theirfamilies, and i will always honour and never disparage their service and their sacrifice. ijust think for her, you know, the problem for her, frankly, and we've talked about this as well, is she's just not out there. she's doing rallies, kind of set piece speeches. and the events in the middle east may mean that she has to be a bit gutsier, actually, about putting herself

about, doing interviews where she's asked about these things, and actually giving detailed answers, potentially — and here's the point, sarah — i wonder, potentially take her away from the biden administration and kind of forge her own line so that people can think, you know, this is a strong america. she has definite principles that she'll adhere to. she's willing to knock heads together, and she's got a plan. and i just think that at the moment you don't, you know, we're asking about a bit about biden. we're asking about trump, and it's fair to say that, you know, it's unclear what trump would do, except, exactly as you say, this kind of strong guy image. but with kamala harris, itjust seems to me this is a challenge to her to get out and tell americans what would happen in the middle east, as elsewhere, under her administration. it's doubly important, i think,

because the audition to become commander in chief of the united states of america is tougherfor a female candidate. itjust is. there's never been a female president. some people still have a problem wondering how a woman would sit in the situation room and control to international i suppose, the threat i suppose, the threat from iran of international from iran of international terrorism, how that plays in. terrorism, how that plays in. and i wonder in those and i wonder in those circumstances, whether it circumstances, whether it still plays to trump, as we've still plays to trump, as we've been kind of suggesting, been kind of suggesting, this strong guy image, this strong guy image,

or actually whether his or actually whether his kind of chaotic approach kind of chaotic approach to international affairs makes people frightened that they don't want to go back there. in other words, i think the net effect might not be huge, mightn�*t it? because there are actually arguments you could have in both directions. and you can bring up one of the rare american elections, ithink, where we can point to foreign affairs having a significant impact. that 2004 election coming, of course, just three years after the 9/11 attacks and a very heightened sense of of terror, if there were, god forbid, to be something like that happen.

whenjemmy carter was running for re—election, and, you know, back to iran, the iranian hostage siege was what did for him. with the steady unravelling of authority in iran - and the mounting dangers that were posed to the - safety of the hostages - themselves, and the growing realisation that their early realisation that their early release _ was highly unlikely, _ release _ was highly unlikely, _ i made a decision to commence i made a decision to commence the rescue operation's plans. the rescue operation's plans. it was my decision to attempt it was my decision to attempt the rescue operation. - the rescue operation. - it was my decision to cancel it. it was my decision to cancel it. when problems developed in the when problems developed in the placement of our rescue team placement of our rescue team for a future rescue operation. | for a future rescue operation. | the responsibility the responsibility the whole dimension is fully my own. i is fully my own. i and you can see situations and you can see situations where, once again, where, once again, if it becomes a conflict that if it becomes a conflict that that involves the us that involves the us and iran, either very closely and iran, either very closely up against each other, or even up against each other, or even in some sort of form in some sort of form of conflict, where that actually changes of conflict, where that actually changes

the whole dimension of the thing and further complicates and frightens, actually, americans into possibly this election becoming a more foreign affairs election. there's a much larger group, though, justin, i think it's worth reminding our americasters about — evangelical christians here in the us who really strongly support israel.

support of israel. yeah, it's a really interesting point, that, because you could take it even further, couldn't you? not just evangelicals and obviouslyjewish voters themselves who have an interest in israel, a knowledge of israel, but actually for americans more generally, what has been going on in gaza has made them queasy and made them wonder about the justice of it all. but, actually, if this but, actually, if this becomes a fight between becomes a fight between israel and iran, either israel and iran, either metaphorically or in reality, metaphorically or in reality, then i think for a lot then i think for a lot of americans, then it of americans, then it becomes a much easier becomes a much easier choice, doesn't it? choice, doesn't it? israel is a democracy, israel is a democracy, it's an ally of the united states. it's an ally of the united states. picking a kind of good guy iran, very obviously, has done iran, very obviously, has done enormous harm to large numbers enormous harm to large numbers of people, not least in syria, of people, not least in syria, where it's backed assad, where it's backed assad, and has fomented terrorism and has fomented terrorism around the world, according around the world, according to the american government and to the american government and

the british government as well. the british government as well. so, you know, when you're so, you know, when you're picking a kind of good guy and a bad guy, to put it in those terms, i think for a lot of americans, actually, if this becomes a conflict that involves iran, ijust wonder if the choice is a bit simpler. 0h, much, much simpler. iran is, for many people, the number one enemy. i mean, china is probably the number one competitor or opponent, but iran is in the enemy camp, you know, possibly only with north korea matching it. even russia, there's a sense that, you know, you have to do business with them. but, no, iran is considered toxic by many, many voters, so that would be incredibly simple what side you take there, without the complications of what's been going on in gaza. that would be much, much easier. but of course, that's a situation in which america then would find it even harder to constrain israel's actions if they were worried about this conflict spiralling wildly out of control. if it becomes israel versus iran, then, yeah, all bets are off in

terms of the americans asking israel to hold back. 0k, folks, i'm wearing a tie today, which is unusual, but i'm doing it in part at least, because we arejoined by royalty, really. christiane amanpour is the chief international anchor of cnn. she's joined us before and told us things that are deeply fascinating. but i'm also personally in awe of her, because i've worked alongside her in the past. i wouldn't say quite to her level when it comes to working in the field, but i've certainly known her when she used to go around and dodge bullets.

obviously, all the candidates are going to use what's happening in the middle east and in american foreign policy to beat each other up, clearly. the real question is, is america having an impact on what's going on, particularly this close to an election? and often, as you know, because you've covered, in election cycles, it's often a sort of a lame duck period. either there's a gigantic so—called october surprise, which one candidate or the other thinks serves their purpose. orthere's a kind of laissez faire attitude, do no harm. well, as all this harm, or however you want to describe it, is going on in the middle east, many are saying in so many words that the us administration is awol. awol when it comes to diplomacy, awol when it comes to actual impact on the players in the region. and really the biggest impact that america can have is on its most close ally, which is israel. and i have the lebanese

prime minister, foreign minister, rathertelling me just this week that just before nasrallah was assassinated, he had got, they had got hezbollah to agree to a ceasefire. and then, clearly, netanyahu didn't want any part of it. and as he understood that there was potentially a ceasefire, he nonetheless gave his address to the un, saying that he had ordered the idf to keep fighting and to keep reaching its targets. and then nasrallah was killed, and that's launched this wave of escalation. as you're describing, the israelis have practically been humiliating joe biden and his administration when it comes to the diplomacy around this, just basically refusing to do what america is urging them to, even as america is continuing to supply them with the weapons and the military aid to allow them to prosecute these campaigns. i'm really interested to know whether you think that the particular peculiar timing of now is one of the reasons why.

so, you've gotjoe biden, essentially a lame duck president, not running for office again, managing not to have very much influence on netanyahu. but of course, they must be thinking in the israeli government about who's going to come in next. donald trump might be more sympathetic, but he's unpredictable. who knows? kamala harris might take a different path. is there a window now, between now and when the next president is sworn in at the end of january, where israel has a freedom to operate that it won't after there's a new president? you know, because this has been going on for a year now, a year before an american election, this same pattern has been going on vis a vis israel or the netanyahu government and the administration. the administration says don't do x, and the netanyahu government sort of pretends to say ok, and then does it. let'sjust take the invasion of rafah. you remember the americans said don't invade rafah. they said, oh, we'll do a limited operation, which has rings, of course,

of lebanon right now. but then they did invade rafah and it's practically, you know, levelled, certainly huge swaths of it. so, look, it is clear that israel is acting in its own interest. and what are you hearing from people about the pressure that america has been putting on for the last year, for israel not to take its military actions too far and that it must be fairly extreme at the moment. it's pretty obvious here in washington, listening to officials in the white house and the state department, that they are very much urging israel not to take action that will provoke a counterattack, willjust lead to an escalation further of a conflict between iran and israel. everybody�*s worst nightmare. do you get a sense that they're treating america's advice differently now? as an american official told me yesterday, a former state department official, said america is in the passenger seat, period, end of story. and that is how it's being viewed by elements

of the us government, those who have resigned in protest of us policy over this year, and those in the rest of the region as well. so, by and large, that is what is the view of the united states' ability to affect the dynamics in the place where it used to be dominant. let's face it, america's influence in the middle east was huge, and it was always considered to be, quote unquote, even by american negotiators, israel's lawyer. rather than playing the so—called, evenhanded, honest broker, even when it came to trying to negotiate this elusive peace between israel and the palestinians. so, just to say that america provides them with all their weapons, provides them with all their ammunition, provides them with the ability to defend themselves, and is clearly, you know, devoted to that and committed to that. this former official said to me on my show, so he said it publicly, there needs to be a huge upsurge in very, very intense shuttle diplomacy. and i said, well,

that's been going on. he said, yes, but they have to tell netanyahu that, you know, they have to make the cost of defying the united states high, — and they have not done that. so, that is the issue right now. and on that, christiane, it's interesting, isn't it? because donald trump, i mean, there are a range of outcomes with donald trump if he's elected president, we don't know who his people would be. there are all sorts of discussions, aren't there, about how personal it could all get, how his foreign policy could go in a direction that even in his first term it didn't go. but with kamala harris, it's kind of a bit of a blank slate, isn't it? and phil gordon, her national security adviser, who i knew well in dc and you will know, always struck me... well, i mean, he is a kind of conservative guy with a small c, in the sense that he's quite cautious about

the use of american power, but very well versed in the middle east. and i just wonder whether there are incremental things that you could imagine her doing and tonal changes and things. but from what you hear, anything more than that? no, it's very, very hard. and nothing, they will say nothing to put any light between them and israel, even though it's had an impact on the american people. the american people, in particular, democrats, democratic voters, are upset with the biden administration policy on this. i don't believe they'll do anything, barring some massive escalation that brings iran into a full scale war or whatever, before the election. and let's face it, you know, president biden is against foreign wars. president trump in his time was not involved in foreign wars, and he keeps saying on the campaign trail that, you know, i wouldn't be involved in a foreign war. and i would go back, though. we know from the past what his policy

towards israel has been. he went to israel, it was part of his first trip abroad, saudi arabia, israel, etc, early 2017. and there he empowered the far right, essentially the ben—gvir ideology, the smotrich ideology. remember, he practically handed the occupied west bank over to them. he practically said that, go ahead, annexe it. in fact, we don't consider settlements to be a violation of international law, as the un says. do you remember all that? and then they had to walk a lot of it back. and so, you know, moved the embassy tojerusalem from tel aviv. basically did a whole load of things that previous american

administrations refused to do pending a final settlement of the palestinian—israeli conflict, because many of those areas are what the world and palestinians have set aside for their state. christiane, to to take it back to what impact this might have on the american election. i'm really interested to hear from you what you think the impact is on american voters. i've noticed going around talking to people that donald trump's talking points that america shouldn't be involved in foreign wars and shouldn't be the world's policeman, funding other crises as well, is coming through a lot, and notjust from big trump supporters. it really does seem to have changed americans' minds about what their responsibilities on the world stage are. so, looking at this conflict, it's really interesting to try and work out how it might impact the election. obviously you've got some progressives who are very, very upset about what's happening in gaza, protesting about that, refusing to vote for any democratic candidate. but when joe biden threatened to withhold some weapons from israel because they weren't listening to him basically over how they were prosecuting the war in gaza, there was such a backlash from republicans and democrats, who were essentially fearful of voters, that he had to change his mind quite quickly. and that made him look even more powerless. is the biggest risk, do you think, in

american politics, for biden to look as though he's not supporting israel enough? you know, it's a risk, of course, but it can't be attributed or laid at his door, because he has stood shoulder to shoulder with netanyahu from day one. he went in the immediate aftermath of the savagery of october 7 to israel. he hugged netanyahu, who is no friend of democrats, let's face it. he's come several times to the congress to speak against democrats and their policies. certainly obama, certainly did it again now under biden and takes to the un podium as well to do that. christiane, you are as blunt as you always are. it's why we love having you on. thanks so much. real pleasure to talk to you. thanks, justin. thank you, sarah. bye. that's it for this week's episode of americast. thank you forjoining us as we count down to the election on november 5. i hope you'lljoin us again. bye— bye.

hello there. good evening. a very messy and unsettled picture weather—wise as we head through the next few days. but it was a pretty start earlier on this morning. lots of red skies as captured by our weather watchers. and of course, the heaviest downpours today were out towards the west, some of the showers pushing further eastwards at times. not as much sunshine as we saw yesterday, but still the chance of some more bright and sunny spells as we go through the next few days, accompanied by some rather blustery showers. brisk southerly winds

so the air is mild, warm for the time of year, even. and it's unsettled because low pressure is the dominant force. it's out towards the west of ireland. of course, all of these bands of rain showers swirling around it that sets the scene. for the rest of tonight there will be further bands of rain just gradually pushing northwards and eastwards, but some long clear spells across northern areas of england and through the southern half of the uk as we head towards dawn tomorrow. here, temperatures could potentially drop back into high single figures. otherwise a mild start, double figures pretty much across the board. now, tomorrow, the low pressure remains out towards the west. again, there will be furthershowers, longer spells of rain at times. it's quite a cloudy picture across scotland, for example, and there will be rain on and off here throughout the day. the early rain clears away from northern ireland, moves into north—west england, and there could be some heavy, possibly thundery, downpours across south—west england into southern wales as we head through the afternoon. but you could catch a shower almost anywhere. a little less frequent out towards the east. some sunny spells and the best of the sunshine.

temperatures will peak 16—19 celsius. that's above the seasonal average. now, the low pressure sinks a little further southwards as we head through tuesday, so some of the focus of the heaviest downpours could be across the southern half of the uk. there'll be quite frequent showers here, but again some bright and some sunny spells in between. another band of rain just pushes northwards into scotland. again, there will be quite a lot of cloud here, but once again in the best of the sunshine, it will feel warm for the time of year. temperatures generally 14—18 celsius. now, wednesday's weather needs watching. this deep area of low pressure contains the remnants of hurricane kirk, and at the moment, we think that the worst of the weather will be across northern france, moving into the low countries, heavy rain and strong winds. but some of that rain could move into kent, perhaps. we're likely to see some very blustery winds down the north sea facing coasts as that low pulls away, and then it turns a lot colder. bye— bye.

live from london, this is bbc news. israel steps up its offensives against hezbollah in lebanon, and hamas in gaza, on the eve of the october 7th anniversary. this place was hit about 12 hours ago and there's still smoke coming out of the rubble. there is a heavy smell in the air and there is destruction all around, including some buildings farfrom here. prime minister keir starmer�*s top adviser, sue gray, resigns from her position as downing street chief of staff. she says she "risked becoming a distraction". she'd been caught up in rows over pay, it was revealed her salary was higher than the prime minister's. and new research on a revolutionary treatment aims to discover why immunotherapy fails to work for most cancer patients.