hello, i'm christian fraser. you're watching the context on bbc news. tens of thousands of uk farmers converge on westminster to protest against the government's controversial new rules, on inheritance tax. plenty more on the farmer is coming up but let's pause in check on the sport. rafael nadal was beaten in what might prove to be the final match at the davis cup. nadal — who has won 22 grand slam titles — will end his career after the men's team event in malaga. even though he'd not played competitively for over three months, nadal was selected by spain captain david ferrer

for the first match and it backfired. despite a partisan spanish crowd, nadal lost 6—4 6—4 to botic van de zandschulp as the netherlands went 1—0 ahead in their quarter—final. in the last few minutes carlos alcaraz has beaten tallon griekspoor in the second match. 7—6, 6—3 the score so the tie will be decided by a final doubles match. so if spain win that nadal could still extend his career, although afterwards he wasn't sure he should be picked. translation: obviously i want to -la , translation: obviously i want to play. that's _ translation: obviously i want to play. that's why _ translation: obviously i want to play, that's why i'm - translation: obviously i want to play, that's why i'm here - to play, that's why i'm here this week. let's see how things go and hopefully we can go forward and i will keep playing or picked to play whether singles or doubles if i were the captain i would not pick myself to play given my level to date and competition compared to i have been in training, that doesn't mean i don't want to play, it's not about how much i want to play, it's about what i think is best for the team. great britain's wait to make

the final of the premier team tennis event goes on — after they were beaten by slovakia, in their billie jean king cup semifinal today. emma raducanu delivered, but her team—mates couldn't find a way past their opponents, in malaga. andy swiss was there for us. it's been called the world cup of tennis. 43 years after britain last reach the final, could they do it again? the early signs were encouraging. emma raducanu beating slovakia's viktoria hruncakova for them it meant if katie boulter when her match britain through for that when she plays to the first set it seemed just a matter of timing. from there, it all went wrong. as she took the next two sets and with it the match. slovakia strikes back.

foot up out of nowhere britain's hopes suddenly hanging by a thread. and so it's all come down to theirs. at the siding match in blood doubles can britain hold their nerve and secure their place in the final? olivia nichols and heather watson had the responsibility but they were up against hruncakova and mihalikova a seemly inspired duo. slovakia took the first set. from there they never looked back as they ended britain's hopes in ruthless fashion. slovakia through to the final where they will now face italy for what utter euphoria for them but for britain after a time they had dominated what bitter disappointed. the waiting for that elusive final goes on. so despair for great britain, but delight for slovakia. here's what their captain had to say after the tie. still i think we are underdogs, but like you said, our confidence is growing up and we played last night with italy and it was really close, i

think it was maybe two points from the victory only. so we are looking forward for that much and we willjust try to enjoy it and maybe take the cup from here. the eight quarterfinalists have already been decided but there's still plenty to play for in the nations league. wales are looking for automatic promotion to the top tier of the competition. they need to beat iceland in cardiff — and hope turkey lose in montenegro. wales 2—1 up there. liam cullen with the wales equaliser after andri gudjohnson opened the scoring early on. : has given them a 2—1 b there. turkey is to — one down to montenegro. elsewhere — germany are already in the quarters, they�* re playing hungary. currently goalless in that one. the netherlands are second in that one too — sealed already —

playing bosnia. 1-0 1—0 up there. the us envoy to the middle east amos hochstein says he believes there is a real opportunity" to end the conflict between hezbollah and israel, after some constructive talks in beirut. hochstein has been negotiating with nabih berri, the speaker of the lebanese parliament, who has been given the go ahead by hezbollah to try negotiate a deal. the us presidentjoe biden is making a last ditch attempt to find a ceasefure before he leaves office. the draft agreement drawn up by the americans includes a ceasefire and a 60—day transition period — during which the israeli military would withdraw from southern lebanon, the lebanese army would deploy in areas close to the border, and hezbollah would move its heavy weapons north of the litani river. as it was required to do under a previous un resolution. joining me now is firas maksad, senior fellow and senior director for outreach at the middle east institute. very good to have you with us

on the programme. as i say, it does seem struggling similar, this american plan to 1701, the un resolution that ended the 2006 lebanon war.— 2006 lebanon war. that's absolutely _ 2006 lebanon war. that's absolutely right, - 2006 lebanon war. that's| absolutely right, christian. 2006 lebanon war. that's - absolutely right, christian. we have on the lebanese side, hezbollah very much ready to implement or at least agree to the un security council resolution 1701 which calls for hezbollah to withdraw from south lebanon off of the israel border north of the litani river. of the israeli side is insisting that it is no longer enough for them in the sense that we have tried this before and has not worked out for us. so what the american negotiators are trying to do with amos hochstein, the presidential envoy is to put in implementation that run parallel to the 1701 resolution also a committee chaired by the united states but also to

oversee the monitoring and implementation of that proposal. that is exactly where they run into trouble and where they run into trouble and where the sticking points are. my understanding from sources in beirut and also here in washington, dc is that the iranians who envoy visited three days ago gains the go—ahead to agree to the proposal and acceptance of the proposal and acceptance of the proposal based on 1701, but nothing more than that and that is not enough for netanyahu. because the complicating factor here as you say is that he has said and publicly today he has said and publicly today he has said that he would continue to take out the hezbollah threat wherever it is, even if there is a cease—fire which begs the question whether the israelis are fully committed to it. the bottom line _ are fully committed to it. the bottom line on _ are fully committed to it. the bottom line on the _ are fully committed to it. tue: bottom line on the israeli are fully committed to it. tte: bottom line on the israeli side is that they have been winning and they have had the upper handedness war so far and they have dealt a devastating blow to hezbollah meaning on the ground for netanyahu in israel that this war it remains a very popular. there was a poll

released today by channel 12 in israel showing the majority of his party's supporters continue to want to fight and did not want to see an agreement and overall, all israelis, less than 50% — overall, all israelis, less than 50% - 48% overall, all israelis, less than 50% — 48% of them support such a deal so for netanyahu there is an incentive to call this war, continued the war, but at the same time, he has enough with the argument at least with the biden administration is hoping is he has enough to call the were often declare victory say that this deal on the table would push hezbollah off the border and allow the residents of 60,000 israelis to return to their homes in the north and will have some guarantees, american guarantees involved. the choice is for netanyahu to make and he has not made up his mind yet, what is up tables not enough for him. in mind yet, what is up tables not enough for him.— enough for him. in lebanon, even more — enough for him. in lebanon, even more difficult - enough for him. in lebanon, even more difficult in - enough for him. in lebanon, even more difficult in gaza i even more difficult in gaza when and status issues have not

been resolved. he said tonight hamas will not rule gods after the war and said they destroyed the war and said they destroyed the palestinian�*s group military capabilities. the question is what comes after that so presumably the focus of a lame—duck presidency in washington, is he restricted entirely to lebanon, is that the only when they can get in the only when they can get in the short time that is left to them? ., , the short time that is left to them? . , ., , , them? that is absolutely right. as a abundantly _ them? that is absolutely right. as a abundantly clear- them? that is absolutely right. as a abundantly clear that - them? that is absolutely right. as a abundantly clear that the l as a abundantly clear that the primary mediator and in the talks between hamas and israel is has thrown his hands up in the air and pushed the hamas leadership out of doha and mailing the talks are completely stalled and not going anywhere. so for the biden administration, the hope is that there is still the low hanging fruit in lebanon that they can capitalise on and perhaps deliver before the end of the term ends in two months but two months as and in b. netanyahu winning in lebanon

and when it comes down to it, this is a proxy war between iran and israel and right now there is still a lot of daylight between iran and israel. the american mediator and the speaker of parliament and the speaker of parliament and lebanon are trying to put together some ambiguity that would allow both sides to accept it and move forward, but we are not there yet, although lebanon is more promising than gaza for sure.— gaza for sure. one line of news, gaza for sure. one line of news. this _ gaza for sure. one line of news, this offer - gaza for sure. one line of news, this offer that - gaza for sure. one line of- news, this offer that netanyahu has put forth tonight, of reward of $5 million to anyone who returns a captive that is held in gaza by hamas. that is the week point for netanyahu, is it not? the return of the hostages. they have not been able to secure that and politically that is a risk for him. ., , politically that is a risk for him. . , ., ., him. that is a risk for him, but to be _ him. that is a risk for him, but to be honest, - him. that is a risk for him, but to be honest, that - him. that is a risk for him, but to be honest, that has| him. that is a risk for him, i but to be honest, that has not been a primary objective of his since day one. use face protests in the streets because of that, but netanyahu's objective has been to destroy

the iranian�*s ring of fire around israel starting with hamas in gaza but then moving on to hezbollah in lebanon and possibly seeing other friends as well, militias in syria and even the cooties in lebanon —— yemen so this is been a secondary one so what this decision to offer than $5 million reward is what we were talking about, these talks are stalled and now he is resorting to alternative options to possibly incentivise others in gaza to try and release is hostages from hamas and other organisations that are horrible —— holding them. organisations that are horrible -- holding them.— organisations that are horrible -- holding them. thank you for talkin: -- holding them. thank you for talking to _ -- holding them. thank you for talking to us. _ around the world and across the uk. this is bbc news.

welcome back. rarely has whitehall seen such a collection of green wellies and barbour jackets. though in fairness to the thousands of farmers who descended on central london

today, they were appropriately dressed for the bitterly cold weather. in fact it is testament to the anger that felt in the farming community, toward chancellor rachel reeves and the changes to inheritance tax she has ushered in, that so many of them made the journey. the changes, which will be introduced, from april 2025 will mean that farmers with agricultural assets over £1 million pounds will in future pay 20% inheritance tax, as they pass farms on to the next generation. the government estimates that this will raise around £520 million a year for the treasury by 2030. those representing farmers worry say it will impact up to 70,000 uk farms, though the treasury estimates that only around 500 will end up paying any tax at all. huge discrepancy between the two sides. 0ur political editor, chris mason was watching the protests. harvesting an argument, big and small. the essence of this, say the farmers in westminster

today, the next generation and this. we've got to change this so that we can pass it down to our daughter and our son, so they can farm or have the opportunity to farm if they want to in the future. daughter evelyn in tow, mum and dad, laura and robin farm in nottinghamshire. that's what it's all about at the end of the day. we're not here to earn money. we're here to pass down. to sceptics, though, that is seeking to preserve wealth which others can't. morning. i'm chris from the bbc. how angry are you? fairly angry. i can't say because some words i might come out of my mouth that you don't want to hear. your debut as a protester. here you are at the gates of downing street. yes, yes, i think they should be climbing them, don't you? are you tempted ? well, i would if i was 20 years younger, i properly would. at the same time, down the road, the national farmers union rings its members in for a rallying call. i grabbed a word with the union's president.

mr bradshaw, why should farmers be an exception? others have to pay inheritance tax, why shouldn't you? unfortunately, the margins we are making from food production are just so low. on average it's about 0.5% return on capital. the sense of betrayal is not going away. and how might that step up? should people be fearfulfood not being on the shelf? i really hope not. hope not? we don't want our consumers to bear the brunt of this. this is an issue of ill thought through government policy. you're not saying no, though. people will worry about that. i want to be working with the government on delivering the food security agenda. richard's a dairy farmer in gloucestershire, wearing an argument of the heart as well as a colourfuljacket. my farm, our family started farming there in 1822 and my 13—year—old son is with me. he was with me, milking with me on saturday morning. i'm sorry... it's all right.

i'm part of a long chain that i don't want to see broken. back outside, opposition politicians are revealing whose side they're on. this policy is cruel, it is unfair and it is going to destroy farming as we know it. you are feeding our families and struggling to feed your own. that is just so wrong. as for the prime minister, the man himself�*s not here. he's meeting world leaders in brazil. i do understand their concerns. what i have pointed out is firstly in the budget l we have put £5 billion - into farming in the next few years and that is the biggest single amount of money put| into farming because i want to support our farmers. - once people appreciate that in a typical case, l it is a £3 million threshold before income taxes paid, most people will see - the vast majority of farmers are therefore exempt. the government's determined not to give in, insisting the existing system is neither fair nor sustainable, and they need the money for schools and hospitals. and the farmers, well, they are determined too. chris mason, bbc news,

at westminster. joining me now is alex nelms, the national farmers' union county chair in berkshire, buckinghamshire and oxford. thank you for being with us. tom branch of the president for the and if you set in that report said there was a sense of betrayal to which the prime minister says, we have allocated five billion pounds over two years in the budget which he says is a substantial commitment to sustainable food production. is it not? the trouble — production. is it not? the trouble is _ production. is it not? the trouble is the _ production. is it not? the trouble is the promise - production. is it not? tte: trouble is the promise around, the promise made to farmers was this agricultural cultural relief inheritance tax were not on the table, not being looked at, made by that then deaf or shadow secretary steve reed to so that the betrayal comes is now it is in the budget and thatis now it is in the budget and that is a change from what was said privately and publicly in the past. said privately and publicly in the ast. ,, , ., said privately and publicly in the ast. ,, ., ., ~ the past. see you are talking about a meeting _ the past. see you are talking about a meeting with - the past. see you are talking about a meeting with the - the past. see you are talking| about a meeting with the and

youth last year in which she categorically said he would not change the terms.— categorically said he would not change the terms. with nfu, the cfa, farming _ change the terms. with nfu, the cfa, farming lobbying _ cfa, farming lobbying organisations who referred that back to their farmers so that is why emotions are running high. is why emotions are running hiuh. ., , high. one of the battles i saw on the march _ high. one of the battles i saw on the march today _ high. one of the battles i saw on the march today was - high. one of the battles i saw on the march today was the l on the march today was the final straw and i wonder if thatis final straw and i wonder if that is actually the point here, not to say that it does this policy specifically, it is a long litany of policies which have not supported farmers and to the food producers in our country. t to the food producers in our count . ., to the food producers in our country-— country. i would say that is a very accurate _ country. i would say that is a very accurate summation. i country. i would say that is a l very accurate summation. the trouble is farming has been let down by successive governments who have not perhaps understood the challenges of growing food in this country, whether that is the fact that we are caught between these two opposing forces, things like be

fo