the clean—up operation begins, after storm bert brought major disruption to parts of the uk. but more rain is on the way. and the search operation continues in the red sea, where 16 people are still missing, after a tourist boat sank off the coast of egypt yesterday. hello and welcome to bbc news. i'm lukwesa burak. israel and lebanon appear to be be on the verge of a ceasefire deal. us officials say the israeli cabinet is due to meet later on tuesday to discuss approval of a draft agreement. prime minister benjamin netanyahu is said to have agreed to the deal "in principle". the latest developments are largely down to pressure from the us, which is serving

as a key mediator, in an effort to prevent the conflict in the middle east from expanding into a regional war. the ceasefire that's on the table would see a 60—day pause in fighting, during which, israeli troops would withdraw from southern lebanon and hezbollah would move further away from israel's northern border, so that civilians could return back to their homes in their respective areas. in their absence, the lebanese army would deploy in areas close to the border. earlier, the us state department emphasised that the deal was close. this has been an incredibly frustrating process, both getting to a ceasefire and a diplomatic resolution to the conflict in lebanon, and also, the many rounds

of negotiations to get a ceasefire in gaza. there are any number of stages where we have hoped that the parties would get to an agreement. and remember, that's what it requires in these cases, it's not the united states, but the parties to the agreement to say yes. there have been many times when we thought we would be getting to yes and, in both cases, for various reasons, the parties didn't get there. that said, we believe we are close here. but that's why you heard me come out and say "nothing's final until everything's final", because we know we don't have a deal until there's one that's been fully agreed to by both sides. speaking to the bbc, israel's ambassador to the united nations, danny danon, said it would be vital for both sides to honour the terms of the ceasefire if it is agreed. well, i think we can agree that, you know, hezbollah will be north of the litani river and that the lebanese military will deploy

to the south of lebanon. and we welcome their presence in the region, together with unifil forces. and i think the most challenging part is what will happen if, what will happen if hezbollah will start to infiltrate again the region, or to bring a weapons and ammunition into the villages of southern lebanon. and i think that is the challenge for us. it's very important to make it clear to all the parties that we will not sit idly by. we will not allow hezbollah to regroup and to rebuild their capabilities right on the fence with israel. let's speak to gina abercrombie—winstanley, non—resident senior fellow at the atlantic council. hello and welcome to the programme. so your thoughts at news that we could be close to some form of agreement on the ceasefire deal?— ceasefire deal? thank you. well, it is _ ceasefire deal? thank you. well, it is what _ ceasefire deal? thank you. well, it is what we - ceasefire deal? thank you. well, it is what we have i ceasefire deal? thank you. well, it is what we have all been hoping for on both fronts,

both gaza and of course, lebanon. and this is the agreement that should have been implemented in 2006. this is un security council resolution 1701, with the movement of hezbollah north and the replacing of them by the lebanese armed forces. 0bviously, they are going to be augmented with technical means and those guarantees that the united states is likely making to israel about what it can do if hezbollah violates the agreement. there will be a few questions that we have to watch. if indeed, it is agreed, and that is two tight issues. one, the israeli saying that they have the right and freedom to invade lebanon on at will. that would be very difficult for a lebanese government to sign off on, black—and—white in that way. and of course, for

hezbollah to stay out of that area, since it is part of 11 on, and the lebanese armed forces being able to guarantee that. so we will have to keep our eyes on that. —— part of 11 on. if parliament and israel signs off on it, to be sure. —— part of lebanon on. and watch the next two days, how is the movement, otherslippages the next two days, how is the movement, other slippages and mistakes made by individual fighters, whether hezbollah or on the idf side? is there tolerance for missteps as the withdrawal is taking place in the lebanese armed forces meme —— move into them? can civilians move back? this is something civilians on both sides of the border have been desperate to get back home and restart their lives. so we're going to be watching all of that in the next 60 days. let's

start off first _ that in the next 60 days. let's start off first with, _ that in the next 60 days. let's start off first with, why - that in the next 60 days. let's start off first with, why now? | start off first with, why now? if this is essentially a ceasefire deal that had been proposed back in 2006, why now revert back to it?— revert back to it? well, hezbollah _ revert back to it? well, hezbollah was - revert back to it? well, hezbollah was not - revert back to it? well, i hezbollah was not willing revert back to it? well, - hezbollah was not willing to abide by it in 2006. but the war had gone very badly for lebanon and had not gone well for israel. so both sides tired and looked for peace. and that held for 16, 17 years, with minor cross—border skirmishes. so now, israel has really taken hezbollah apart, with the attacks on the communication devices and the constant aerial bombing and the ground skirmishes that have gone on in the last several months. so hezbollah has been undermined, deeply weakened, weakened enough that israel is willing to take a chance on this holding for a while. i don't

believe either side thinks that this is the be all and end all that there will never be conflict again. but it will hold for some time to allow both sides to take a deep breath. untilyou both sides to take a deep breath. until you resolve the palestinian issue, it is unlikely, impossible for this to be a long lasting permanent peace. to be a long lasting permanent eace. . ,., , to be a long lasting permanent eace. . , ., peace. there are reports that mr netanyahu _ peace. there are reports that mr netanyahu has _ peace. there are reports that mr netanyahu has expressed | peace. there are reports that. mr netanyahu has expressed his willingness to come to the table on the ceasefire deal because of direct pressure from us officials. what leverage would they be using again spit yahoo? the hope is, of course, that this is agreed before thanksgiving. == that this is agreed before thanksgiving.— that this is agreed before thanksgiving. -- against mr netanyahu- _ thanksgiving. -- against mr netanyahu. indeed, - thanksgiving. -- against mr netanyahu. indeed, we - thanksgiving. -- against mr| netanyahu. indeed, we have thanksgiving. -- against mr. netanyahu. indeed, we have a couple of days for that. the leverage has always been there for president biden and secretary blinken use the president, had decided not to use it until now, but hoping to

get the israelis to agree to a ceasefire. there are statements and discussions that there has been a slowdown in the delivery of weapons to israel. that is one mode of pressure. that veto the united states gave just the sweet, a week and a half ago, 14-1, sweet, a week and a half ago, 14—1, which really put the united states out there again, reputational harm for the united states to stand against all 1a other members of the security council when the world does see in fact that assistance, age, humanitarian assistance, age, humanitarian assistance has been held up by the israelis. the united states didn't deny that. —— aid. the united states might have said, this is the last one and we will not shield you in the united nations again. there was pressure from the rest of the international community. the united states has been willing to do some shielding of israel,

whether it is the international court ofjustice or international criminal court, there are things that the united states can do to further protect israel that president biden may have said, we are not going to do it. the time is now to get to a ceasefire.— to get to a ceasefire. read my li s, to get to a ceasefire. read my lis, i to get to a ceasefire. read my lips. i mean — to get to a ceasefire. read my lips. i mean it _ to get to a ceasefire. read my lips, i mean it this _ to get to a ceasefire. read my lips, i mean it this time. - gina abercrombie—winstanley. as ever, thank you very much indeed, thank you.— as ever, thank you very much indeed, thank you. thank you. breakina indeed, thank you. thank you. breaking news. _ some breaking news from pakistan, where protestors calling for the release of pakistan's jailed ex—prime minister imran khan have clashed with police, as they reach the capital, islamabad. officers have thrown tear gas at the demonstrators, who are calling for mr khan's release from prison. imran khan's wife had called on thousands of supporters to keep marching until

her husband is freed. at least one police officer has been killed and nine others injured during clashes. the us has called for calm from both protestors and the authorities. more on this as and when we get it. ajudge in the us has dismissed a court case against president—elect donald trump, after he was accused of trying to overturn the result of the 2020 election. special prosecutorjack smith, who brought the charges against mrtrump, had to request for them to be dropped, due to a long—standing justice department rule which bans the prosecution of a sitting us president. the judge dismissed the case "without prejudice", which means it could still be reopened at the end

of donald trump's second term in the white house. let's speak to frank bowman, emeritus professor of law at the university of missouri and a formerfederal and state prosecutor. welcome to the programme. this is good news for donald trump, but not necessarily the end of his legal challenges. ida. his legal challenges. no, effectively. _ his legal challenges. no, effectively, it _ his legal challenges. no, effectively, it may - his legal challenges. no, effectively, it may prove | his legal challenges. no, l effectively, it may prove to his legal challenges. iiifr, effectively, it may prove to be the end. as you noted, the request from special counsel jack smith is for a dismissal without prejudice, which means in theory that the cases could be refiled once mr trump is out of office. practically speaking, however, that would be very difficult. there are a couple of problems, first is the question of whether the next president's in ministration would have any interest in doing this. secondarily, with the passage of another four years, statute of another four years, statute of limitations on these charges

is likely to run unless a judge were to find somewhat extraordinarily that the statute of limitations just didn't run during the time he was in office. for lots of reasons, i think this is in essence the end of the effort at least virtually to bring mr trump to justice for his effort to overthrow the us government to overthrow the us government to reverse the election. professor, is there any president of something similar happening in the past? many people quoting nixon, but it is not quite the same at all, is it? ~ , not quite the same at all, is it? . , ., not quite the same at all, is it? ~ , ., , , it? well, it is not because in that instance _ it? well, it is not because in that instance of _ it? well, it is not because in that instance of course, - it? well, it is not because in that instance of course, mr| that instance of course, mr nixon did in fact, a that instance of course, mr nixon did infact, a number of crimes. the special prosecutor was investigating the watergate scandal, and concluded that he was at least an uninvited co—conspirator, that is what they chose to call him in some

of the indictments, but did not charge him. however, nixon, as a result of immense political pressure he was under and the threat of impeachment, elected to resign. thereafter, president gerald ford gave him a pardon. but in that case, even though mr nixon did not face criminal charges, whether it should have or not is a different question, even though he didn't face criminal charges, the threat of impeachment and the effect of the long—running criminal investigation into watergate was to drive him from political life. 0bviously, that is not what is happening with mr trump. in what is happening with mr trum -. l. , what is happening with mr trum -. u, , ., trump. in the case of the wider im acts trump. in the case of the wider impacts and — trump. in the case of the wider impacts and consequences - trump. in the case of the wider impacts and consequences of. trump. in the case of the widerl impacts and consequences of us law, is there anything once in office that donald trump could do to change the constitution that would mean that he never faces any charges if they were to be refiled? we have seen similar moves. he did say he

was going to make changes at the doj. but we saw how he placed people in his favour at the supreme court. would he have that power?— the supreme court. would he have that power? well, he has no direct power— have that power? well, he has no direct power to _ have that power? well, he has no direct power to change - have that power? well, he has no direct power to change the | no direct power to change the constitution. he has no direct power to change the law at all himself. while he is in office, he has de—facto control of the justice department and the department therefore under his own policies is not going to prosecute him. i mean, a larger concern i think is that the failure of the doj to bring this case to trial before he was re—elected means that he is going to escape justice. and certainly, he's doing that in some parts due to the dilatory nurse with which thejustice department started these cases. he is getting away with it in significant part because the supreme court did adopt a new

rule about the immunity of presidents for a lot of the things that they do well in office. and i think the long—term consequences of this are potentially very bad indeed —— while in office. it invites mr trump to —— while in office. it invites mrtrump to think —— while in office. it invites mr trump to think he is in office and is essentially bullet—proof from the perspective of any criminal legal consequences. he already knows he is essentially bullet—proof in terms of impeachment because his party plainly will not convict him and remove him from office. so i think an