return to the white house of donald trump. this is the scene live in rio dejaneiro. brazil's president has welcomed the us and chinese presidents — along with the leaders of britain, australia, france, germany, india, japan, saudi arabia and other countries. joe biden�*s decision to give kyiv the green light to use us long—range missiles, to strike inside russia means ukraine can now use army tactical missile systems to defend its forces in russia's kursk region, on ukraine's north—east border. washington had previously refused to agree to the request — fearing it would escalate the war. our diplomatic correspondent james landale sent this report from rio. another night, another round of russian air strikes on ukraine. in sumi, 11 people were killed including two children. many more were injured. a relentless bombardment in a war that's almost 1,000 days old. but now perhaps a chance for ukraine to fight back in a new way, with permission

to use these american long—range missiles known as atacms against targets in russia. translation: strikes i are not made with words. such things are not announced. the missiles will speak for themselves, definitely. the us decision means britain and france may now allow ukraine to use their own storm shadow missiles and also long—range, also able to hit deep into russia, although there is no confirmation yet. all this means that the world leaders arriving in brazil for the g20's summit, the war in ukraine will once again figure highly in their discussions. all eyes will be on russia's foreign minister, sergei lavrov, here in place of president putin who is facing arrest by an international court for alleged war crimes in ukraine. president biden, here visiting

brazil's rainforests, long resisted allowing kyiv to use us missiles in russia, fearing escalation. but he's changed his mind, perhaps aware of what his successor plans. for donald trump may not be here in brazil, but he wants the war in ukraine to end soon and his presence hangs heavy over the summit as the world prepares for his presidency. that uncertainty is one reason why sir keir starmer met president xi of china, the first british prime minister to do so for more than six years, seeking what he called a sensible and pragmatic relationship to boost trade and the economy at home. the international community is in something of a holding pattern, until donald trump takes office. so this summit is a chance for world leaders to compare notes and prepare for whatever is coming their way injanuary. they face a tough choice, do theyjust accept mr trump's

agenda or try to set one of their own? president lula of brazil wants his summit to discuss global poverty and climate finance and reform of international institutions. but once again the focus will be on ukraine, the middle east and, yes, donald trump. james landale, bbc news, in rio dejaneiro. moscow has quickly condemned the move — the kremlin describing the decision as adding fuel to the fire of the conflict. 0ur russia editor, steve rosenberg, is in moscow. well, most russians know the sort of the picture, the story that is told by state television. and it's a very different picture, a very different story to the one that is told in the west. remember, there is this sort of parallel reality going on here. russians are told that their army are liberators. russia is a victim, not the aggressor in this war. russians are told that the west is waging a war against russia

on the territory of ukraine. and at the moment, russians are being told that the war is going russia's way. and you can see the growing confidence, i think, with vladimir putin, he seems to be emboldened at the moment. he's emboldened by recent military success on the battlefield in eastern ukraine. things seem to be going his way there. i think he's been emboldened by the result of the us presidential election. now, in a couple of months�* time, donald trump will be returning to the white house. someone who has publicly expressed scepticism about continuing us military assistance for kyiv. for those reasons alone, i think he's been quite confident. it will be interesting to see how he reacts now tojoe biden�*s decision to allow ukraine to use us—supplied long—range missiles against russia, because he knows that donald trump, in a couple of months, will be in the white

house, and i wonder whether he'll factor that in when he tries to work out his response now. it's a consequential change because ukraine has had the launchers capable for two years. it has hard them for over one year, and it is taken this long and the final days of joe biden for this change to be made. it is too important thing is, one is it appears to be north korea sending a message to troops in kursk, and this will shape the way ukraine goes into negotiations with russia next year if that is what donald trump chooses to do, strengthen their hand in any

talks that do unfold after january the 20. i talks that do unfold after january the 20.— talks that do unfold after january the 20. i will come back to that, _ january the 20. i will come back to that, but _ january the 20. i will come back to that, but how - january the 20. i will come | back to that, but how much january the 20. i will come - back to that, but how much do you think it changes things on the battlefield? it you think it changes things on the battlefield?— you think it changes things on the battlefield? it depends on which bit you _ the battlefield? it depends on which bit you means, - the battlefield? it depends on which bit you means, not - the battlefield? it depends on which bit you means, not at i the battlefield? it depends on | which bit you means, not at all on the front line in the next days and weeks because it it is not the purpose of the weapons, striking deep behind the front lines on command post, i'm initially and depots, bunkers, logistic sites, all those important things. it is not as if it was russia or gear ukraine the ability to go back on the back foot. what it does do is in a war of attrition, where relative rates are so important, perhaps the most important, perhaps the most important thing, it will steadily, if used correctly, breakdown russia's stockpiles of munition, make it harderfor them to command their forces and break up north korean forces and attack some of

russia's helicopters and aircraft at airfields within range. all of it won't reverse battlefield fortunes for ukraine, but it will improve steadily the hand going into next year in this incredibly difficult. let's speak to dr matthew kroenig is vice president and senior director of the atlantic councils scowcroft center for strategy and security at the atlantic council what do you make of this decision from joe biden? it is too little. _ decision from joe biden? it is too little, too _ decision from joe biden? it is too little, too late. _ decision from joe biden? it is too little, too late. two - decision fromjoe biden? it 3 too little, too late. two and a half years ago i and other experts argued we should have a strategy of helping ukraine to win on the battlefield and take back its territory. that is not what the wasted, we provided a drip of weapons, against tanks before we were for them, and aircraft as well. it is the latest example of being unwilling to let ukraine use

missiles destroyed russian territory. at this late date we finally give them approval. what it means is russia has had time to take in. we are looking at the battlefield, it is the russians taking back territory. i don't think it will change things significantly on the battlefield. it will give the ukrainians so more leveraged negotiations, which is where donald trump says he wants to take the conflict. i donald trump says he wants to take the conflict.— take the conflict. i will come back to h- — take the conflict. i will come back to h. do _ take the conflict. i will come back to h. do you _ take the conflict. i will come back to h. do you expect - take the conflict. i will come - back to h. do you expect donald trump to unwind this decision comejanuary? h0 trump to unwind this decision come january?— trump to unwind this decision come january? no one can speak for president _ come january? no one can speak for president trump, _ come january? no one can speak for president trump, but - come january? no one can speak for president trump, but he - for president trump, but he wrote the art of the deal, the importance of having leveraged. i think it gives donald trump another piece of leveraged in negotiations. he can threaten to continue it or back off as necessary to get putin to the negotiating table and get a peaceful settlement to the

conflict, which is says he wants. ., ., ., wants. your whole background was from _ wants. your whole background was from a _ wants. your whole background was from a party _ wants. your whole background was from a party that - was from a party that recognises the threat from russia. you now potentially have an incoming president who wants to get funding to ukraine. it is not the same republican party now? i think it is, because _ republican party now? i think it is, because i _ republican party now? i think it is, because i think- republican party now? i think it is, because i think a - it is, because i think a constant stream from the party has been realism, and i think we need to recognise the reality of where we are. it might be nice if ukraine could take back all of its territory, but as i said, it is no longer realistic. in this war of attrition, it is favouring russia with russia taking territory on the battlefield. fighting this war as long as it takes, as president biden said, will lead potentially to a russian victory, not ukraine. i think trying to get some kind of deal, a ceasefire may be on the current lines, allowing

ukraine to survive as an independent state anchored in the west would be on balance a victory for the west and the us and a defeat for putin. you victory for the west and the us and a defeat for putin.- and a defeat for putin. you say and a defeat for putin. you say a defeat. _ and a defeat for putin. you say a defeat, but _ and a defeat for putin. you say a defeat, but you _ and a defeat for putin. you say a defeat, but you are - and a defeat for putin. you say a defeat, but you are talking i a defeat, but you are talking about a deal with a triumvirate of russia, north korea and iran. the likes of ronald reagan would turn in his grave at the thought. i reagan would turn in his grave at the thought.— at the thought. i don't know it is true. at the thought. i don't know it is true- i— at the thought. i don't know it is true. i think _ at the thought. i don't know it is true. i think ronald - at the thought. i don't know it is true. i think ronald reagan | is true. i think ronald reagan was a pragmatist, didn't push for everything all at once. i think you recognise the value of small wins, and i do think stopping the killing, stopping this war, allowing ukraine to survive as an independent state would be a small window, and certainly better than where we are now, which is the russians taking territory from the ukrainians.— taking territory from the ukrainians. when you say allowing _ ukrainians. when you say allowing ukraine - ukrainians. when you say allowing ukraine to - ukrainians. when you say. allowing ukraine to survive ukrainians. when you say - allowing ukraine to survive as allowing ukraine to survive as a territorial state, do you

mean with the original ukrainian border is in place, as opposed to chunks now that russia controls, that they want to continue to control after negotiations? ii to continue to control after negotiations?— negotiations? if we get to negotiations, _ negotiations? if we get to negotiations, which - negotiations? if we get to negotiations, which is - negotiations? if we get to l negotiations, which is what president trump says he wants to do, there will be details of course to be worked out. i don't think we want to make our bottom line clear now, and i think the purpose... it bottom line clear now, and i think the purpose. . .- think the purpose... it is a simle think the purpose... it is a simple question, - think the purpose... it is a simple question, the - think the purpose... it is a i simple question, the existing boundaries or not? what is on the table?— the table? that would have to be worked _ the table? that would have to be worked out _ the table? that would have to be worked out by _ the table? that would have to be worked out by the - be worked out by the negotiators. my recommendation would not to be say congratulations to russia, but to say we will get a ceasefire along the current lines and you are illegally occupying 20% of ukraine, and we won't contest it for the moment. we will contest it diplomatically over time to try to reclaim all of

ukraine's international weekly recognise territory. aha, ukraine's international weekly recognise territory.— recognise territory. a final question. _ recognise territory. a final question, because - recognise territory. a finali question, because ukraine recognise territory. a final - question, because ukraine gave up question, because ukraine gave up their nuclear weapons in exchange for western security. it represents the worst security guarantee in history in the way it is panning out. the people in taiwan who know china wants to move into taiwan, should they be nervous about the way it has panned out in ukraine and the support the us has given, and what may lie ahead for them?— ahead for them? no, i don't think so, — ahead for them? no, i don't think so, i— ahead for them? no, i don't think so, i several— ahead for them? no, i don't think so, i several points. i ahead for them? no, i don't i think so, i several points. the commitment to taiwan through the relations act is stronger than the commitment was to ukraine. the military operation will be more difficult for china to project power across a body of water than for russia to drive tanks across its border. and again, i think if we get a ceasefire along the current lines, it would be a

loss for putin. he was looking for a lightning strike to take all of ukraine in a few days, and instead he fought for three years and didn't achieve his goal of subduing ukraine. if taiwan could also maintain its essential independence in the face of a chinese attack, it would be a success. 0bviously, would be a success. obviously, the purpose will be to deteriorate, not fight it. great to great to talk to you, thank you for your time. around the world and across the uk, you are watching bbc news.

you are watching bbc news. let's turn to the middle east. the head of the un relief agency, unrwa, has warned there is �*no plan b�* to the organisation's work in the palestinian territories after israel's parliament voted to ban it

from operating within israel and occupied eastjerusalem. the ban is due to come into effect in two months�* time, despite widespread condemnation from around the world. philippe lazzarini told a press conference that children will starve and aid supply chains could fall apart as a result of the ban. we have to be clear, even if unrwa today would cease its operation, the statue of refugee would remain. why so? because the statue of the palestinian refugees is determined in a general assembly resolution 194, whereas the activities and the mandate of the agency is defined in a different resolution, which was basically adopted later. i keep being asked, is there yes or not a plan b? there is no plan b within the un agency, within the un family,

because there is no other agency geared to provide the same activities. and in reality, unwra is the response of the international community to the plight of the palestinian refugees through the mandate provided by the resolution. so if there is no un or international community response, the responsibility will go back to the occupying power being israel. and that's where we have to ask, where does the plan b sit today? that's me give you the latest from gaza because our security cross buonanotte giving details of the un gaza convoy ambushed. details of an armed attack on a convoy in gaza. they say at least 97 trucks are missing from 109 convoy. eyewitnesses

say it was attacked by mass man who threw grenades. aid workers say the food situation has become critical with basic supplies fetching prices well beyond most people's means. an aid convoy being attacked with 97 trucks still missing. that news just coming here, 97 trucks still missing. that newsjust coming here, we 97 trucks still missing. that news just coming here, we will bring you more as we get it. let's return to the g20 because on the fringes, keir starmer has met with china's leader xi jinping on the sidelines of the summit, marking the first time in more than six years british prime this has met with him. keir starmer said... china's leader said...

it is something quite critical with uk, china relations, given that this last senior leader meeting between the chinese president and british prime minister was january 2018. it has been more than six years that the two national leaders haven't spoken. this marked the beginning of better relations between beijing and london. what do you think the key areas both sides are likely to want to exploit? i both sides are likely to want to exoloit?_ both sides are likely to want to exoloit?— to exploit? i think there's a coule to exploit? i think there's a couole of — to exploit? i think there's a couple of areas. _ to exploit? i think there's a couple of areas. for - to exploit? i think there's a couple of areas. for most, | to exploit? i think there's a i couple of areas. for most, the labour government has really put prosperity labour government