thanks, stephen. good to be on with you. it's great to have you on the show. senator, would you agree that, day by day, the israel—hamas war is becoming more of a headache for presidentjoe biden? i think this is the most consequential period in modern israeli history, and i think president biden did exactly the right thing in engaging directly, immediately, flying over to israel, deploying two aircraft carrier groups. but it is becoming a real challenge for us, domestically and internationally. his commitment to israel, their right to self—defence, their ability to carry out a difficult and intense campaign against hamas is unwavering. but he is also privately engaging with israeli leaders and pressing for more humanitarian relief, for a clear plan for what comes after in gaza and the region, and for a more targeted campaign. unwavering, you say, and yet the outside world sees a biden message which is changing. in the early days it was all, "we have got your back, "israel". it was an absolute israeli right to self—defence. and right now, mr biden is focused on, for example, insisting that gaza's hospitals must be protected, antony blinken saying that the casualty levels are unacceptable, too high. the tone, the message has shifted. no, it hasn't. president biden has said, from his first day in israel, "you must observe international law, you must minimise "civilian casualties, and you have a right "to self—defence and we have your back". and i was recently in israel with a bipartisan delegation of ten senators. we delivered the same message. we also visited riyadh and cairo to meet with important regional leaders. so i would suggest that as the tempo and intensity, as the casualties have mounted, there's more of an emphasis on that side of the message from president biden and other american leaders. but that balance has been there from the start. but it is not a good look for the biden administration, is it, when president biden in public says those hospitals have to be protected and then within hours we see israeli tanks, israeli troops inside the shifa hospital compound talking about a precise, targeted military operation in the hospital? the israelis are ignoring joe biden. well, let's be clear. hamas has tunnels and operational headquarters underneath that hospital, and so part of this tension is the tension in what does it mean to carry out a campaign, to take out hamas in a place where hamas is using palestinians as human shields? they have a long practice, a well—documented practice of putting missiles and depots and tunnels underneath schools, apartment buildings and hospitals. so what i heard our president to have said was, "you cannot "bomb or destroy that hospital. "and if you're going to go in and try..." well, with respect, what he clearly said was that hospital, and all of the others, too, have to be protected, and they are not being protected. the hospital has not been destroyed. there are operations underneath the hospital, and this is a very difficult circumstance. so the core question is how do you eliminate hamas without literally going into the tunnels, going in and around the hospital? this is a very difficult, very fraught moment. i'll agree with that. senator, you are known as, alongside the president, a very staunch, long—time supporter of israel. let me just ask you the most simple, straightforward question — in your view, in the last few days and weeks, continuing today, has israel, is israel violating international humanitarian law? israel needs to provide more opportunities for humanitarian relief to get into gaza. they have provided notice before carrying out attacks. they have provided pathways for civilians to escape the north of gaza. but their campaign has — and i will agree with secretary blinken — caused too many civilian casualties. so we are in a very... so, i asked you a very straightforward yes/no question. i'd like a yes/no answer. has israel violated international humanitarian law? i don't think it's for me to make a judgement whether they have or haven't violated international law. it would have significant consequences for an american leader to reach that conclusion. but there is a critical moment here in the court of world opinion, where i have cautioned israeli leaders directly that they're losing support, globally, and they need to be focused in this campaign and find ways to make sure that the way they conduct it going forward comports with international law and the expectations of the civilised world. did you tell netanyahu that? yes. what did he say to you? his response to me was similar to the response to the president, which is, "we have an urgent and "challenging mission, which is to take out hamas, "and we will do our absolute best to minimise civilian "casualties". so you tell me you know that world opinion... to be clear, when i say yes, i was part of a delegation that delivered that message. you tell me you are aware that international opinion is deeply concerned right now. yes. absolutely. the truth is, it's notjust international opinion. it's opinion right here in washington, dc. it's opinion right here inside the biden administration. the new york times yesterday reporting more than 500 government political appointees and staffers who represent more than a0 biden administration different government agencies have sent a joint letter protesting biden's stance on the war. your own government machine is now against biden's stance. i disagree with that. i don't think... are you disagreeing with the fact? that's not a characterisation of the facts that i would say is a credible characterisation. you said, "your own government machine is against biden". yes, there are some folks within different government agencies who've expressed their dissent, who disagree with the president. that is a very small sampling of a very large federal government. it is important that there are folks, career diplomats in the state department, people in the executive branch, who are expressing disagreement. the same is true in the british government. significant officials. josh paul, i don't know if you know him personally, but director of congressional public affairs for the state department's bureau of political military affairs, said, "the biden administration's blind support "for one side," i.e. israel, "is short—sighted, "destructive, unjust and, importantly, contradictory "to the very values that we in america "publicly espouse." good for him. this is not a good look, is it? i think it's important that president biden has made and is keeping key commitments around the world, whether it's to come to ukraine's aid, to support nato, to support israel, to advocate for humanitarian relief and to engage with the world in the principled way he has. your democratic party risks really fragmenting over this. i see that in the senate, almost half of your caucus, your group, are asking biden now for a specific justification of the 14 billion new dollars that he wants to send in military assistance to israel. that's kind of unprecedented. and in the house, we have representatives like pramila jayapal, a prominent democrat, talking about a basic double standard inside the biden administration, calling out, rightly, russia, for its siege of ukraine but then undermining the authority of the us on the moral stage because of the military siege that israel has launched on gaza and that we support. this is all hugely problematic. here's the connection that i think is most important. right after hamas carried out a horrific terrorist attack that massacred nearly 1,200 civilians in israel... and nobody is disputing that. ..which world leader welcomed and celebrated hamas? putin. if you were to cover the ongoing attacks of drones and missiles that are raining down on civilians in ukraine and in israel, they have one common source, which is iran. and so, yes, there are some folks who disagree with the president's policy. at the end of the day, i think what the president is doing is pulling together countries who are opposing the aggressive, authoritarian, militarised actions of iran, china and russia. by the way, the republican party thinks it's going to make real political headway with an argument which says vice presidentjoe biden was desperate to do a deal with iran over its nuclear programme, wanted to give iran major economic benefits in that deal. trump ultimately walked away from that deal. and now president biden has offered iran billions of dollars in exchange for a few american hostages. it isjoe biden that has been consistently weak on iran. i think that's nonsense. and i thinkjoe biden has consistently stood up to putin's aggression and been strong in pulling together 50 countries to support ukraine's fight for freedom and has shown — in fact, that's what we were just talking about — a clear and forceful response to the attack of hamas and iranian proxy on israeli citizens. we can disagree about what's the best way to constrain iran's nuclear programme. but president biden's response to iranian provocation in iraq, in syria and through hamas, hezbollah and the houthis, i think, has been clear and forceful. just one more thought on the politics of where we are now in america on the mid east crisis — democrats are worried they're going to lose votes because ofjoe biden's stand. let me quote to you the words of waleed shahid, a former democratic staffer here on the hill who said this the other day — "the old guard," and maybe he was talking about people like you, "the old guard "of the democratic party has an outdated view of how "unconditionally supportive their own democratic party "voters are of israel. "truth is, a new generation of democratic voters wants "to see a more even—handed approach which treats israeli "and palestinian lives equally". let's be clear — the only path forward towards justice and an independent state for palestinians is not through hamas violence, it is through president biden's calm, effective and persistent advocacy for a two—state solution. it is a real problem for us that prime minister netanyahu does not embrace a two—state solution. butjoe biden has believed in and fought for an outcome in which palestinians have a chance to actually govern themselves. but, senator, that's not true, is it? imean, foryears... what's not true? it's not true thatjoe biden has done his utmost to get to a two—state solution. what we have seen in the 0bama presidency, wherejoe biden was vice president, and in this presidency, wherejoe biden is commander in chief, we've seen his united states continue to fund israel to the tune of $3.8 billion per year, before this extra assistance that's now being talked about, funding israel, all the while knowing that israel is massively expanding its settlement activities on the west bank. when did that settlement activity most massively expand? under the previous administration. the truth is, the united states has continued to regard israel as its key strategic ally, which it backs with vast amounts of money, whatever israeli settlers have been doing on the west bank. and that surely is the core us mistake when it comes to saying, "we've done our utmost for a two—state "solution". you haven't. so, i think the previous administration took a very sharp change in direction in terms of us israeli relations. and one of our challenges has been in terms of holding israeli governments' feet to the fire and supporting palestinian ambitions for a two—state solution, versus tolerating, even welcoming settler expansion, potential annexation of the west bank. there's been quite different approaches from different administrations. i will give ourformer president real credit for the abraham accords, for coming up with ways to reduce tensions with regional arab muslim nations and putting off the potential annexation of the west bank through those abraham accords. but your assertion is that the arc of the united states over decades and somehow consistently across 0bama to trump, to biden, is to oppose a two—state solution. i don't think that's true. do you think that the mideast crisis is damaging america's capacity to continue supporting ukraine? it's straining our capacity politically, domestically. 0ur challenge here is to meet the moment of both, is to show that we are a trustworthy, reliable ally and partner. and president biden has forcefully responded to russia's aggression against ukraine, helped mobilise 50 different countries across europe, frankly, the whole world, and the united states has invested massively in ukraine's economic development, its military defence, the budget support for the government. and that support has been matched, even exceeded, by our european partners and allies. this is, in some ways nato's strongest, most effective moment in decades. it was just a few years ago the president of france was saying nato was brain dead and questioning its future. at the moment, i think it is performing the best it ever has. and so, i am... i'm looking at domestic public opinion in the us. latest gallup polling just a few weeks ago, 41% of americans now saying the us is doing too much to help ukraine — that figure up from 24% just a couple of months before. the republicans, it seems, are intent on blocking the $60—plus billion thatjoe biden wants to send to ukraine. it does look as though biden's wish to maintain that level of support is going to be thwarted. well, i would listen to the leadership of the republican party, in particular in the senate, where mitch mcconnell, john thune, john cornyn have made it very clear they support robust support for ukraine. in fact, when we welcomed president zelensky to the old senate chamber and he got standing ovation after standing ovation, it was senator mcconnell who insisted he is the strongest supporter of ukraine and their fight for freedom, notjoe biden, not chuck schumer. and i look forward to him delivering the votes to prove that. you talk of mcconnell — i could point you to the words of senatorjosh hawley. he said, in respect to blocking more money for ukraine, he said, "what about our nation? "this is not an investment in ourfuture, our people, "ourjobs. "and that, right now, needs to be america's priority." and if you look at the polls, most americans say, number one, their issue is the state of the economy, inflation. they are deeply concerned. they see the country on the wrong track. and as a result, surely you wouldn't deny, joe biden is in deep political trouble. so, lowest unemployment for the longest period in 50 years. inflation came down again — just got inflation numbers out. biggest growth in manufacturing. biggest investment in infrastructure. fastest and largest job creation first three years of any presidency in modern history. the economic numbers are very strong — in fact, the strongest of any developed economy. so, how come — if i may, senator — how come if the economy is so strong — and i wouldn't dispute the numbers are looking positive? well, no, i'm not disputing — the numbers are positive. but what is not positive isjoe biden's poll rating, particularly in comparison with donald trump. right. donald trump, who is facing four trials, 91 criminal charges, all of which he denies, and claims is a witch—hunt. but in that context, what a remarkable indictment ofjoe biden that he is trailing in the polls, particularly in key swing states. at the same point in 2007, barack 0bama was losing to rudy giuliani in polls. at the same point in 2011, barack 0bama was losing to mitt romney in the polls. i'll tell you that a year out, i'm really not that concerned about the polls. i would much rather be in the position we're in where the policies that have been enacted underjoe biden's leadership are wildly popular and have broad bipartisan and national support and the economic foundation we're laying is strong and is moving us in the right direction. we came out of the pandemic stronger than any other developed economy. yes, there is a significant hangover in terms of how americans feel and lecturing them about, "look at "the numbers. "they're great. "you shouldn't feel so bad," isn't a great political strategy. i would agree with that. but we have a year for us to make that progress. let me ask you to reflect onjoe biden in a different way, senator. you've known him for most of your adult life. yes. you are the senator from delaware, as was he. you are great friends. you are close. you know that the polls — again, polls — tell us that a clear majority, 71% in a recent poll, think joe biden is now too old to be an effective president. have you discussed this feeling abroad in america withjoe biden? yes. and when you say, "mr president, there is a problem "here," what does he say to you? so, last wednesday night, ten of us — bipartisan delegation, including some of his sharp critics — the ten of us who went to the middle east, he had us over to the white house. we started at 6:30. i left at 9:30. we spent two hours with him, talking about the middle east, about the visits we made to saudi, to egypt, to israel, about ukraine, about russia, about taiwan, about china. and as we're walking out, i said to two of his republican critics in that group, "so come on, honestly. "what did you see? "what do you think?" the end of the day, yes — i mean, chronologically for america, he's seasoned. but he's also experienced... come on, senator. he's — he's about to be 81 years old. we see him on stages. we see, at times, the confusion, the awkwardness, both mental and physical, that he experiences. there are many democrats — only a few of whom are willing to go public — who are saying that he should not be the candidate for your party in 202a. congressman dean phillips has actually launched a bid of his own, saying, "biden's a decent, a good man "but the country would be better served by a new "generation of well—prepared democrats". there is no potential democratic candidate as well prepared asjoe biden for this moment. 50 years in the senate, as vice president, as president, the experience of knowing world leaders for decades, i believe grounds him internationally. and his core values — his decency, his compassion, his middle—class roots — makes him the right leader for this moment. and we're not going to move past this without saying if you watch donald trump's speeches and tell me you don't see confusion, mistakes of fact, rambling, lack of focus there, you're not watching the same speeches that iam. one last question on this, senator. i mean, this is difficult because it — certainly, for people like you, is highly personal, butjust tell me this — if you over the next few months begin to believe that biden is not the right viable candidate for the democratic party in 2024, will you have the guts to go to the sitting president... yes. ..the commander in chief, and tell him that? so, the president has asked me to be direct with him, to be blunt with him, to fill some of that... look, he can't fire me. there's no — right? i mean, one of the things he values from me is that i give him direct and honest input. i am convinced from that experience of last wednesday that he has the mental acuity, the sharpness, the energy, the engagement to be president and continue being president. a final thought. donald trump, it is clear, is intent on running and winning the white house in 202a. we've already alluded to donald trump's legal travails, but donald trump also is an angry man. he is talking already about what he will do if he gets back into power. he's talked of his enemies as vermin... i'm clear. he has suggested they are more dangerous to america than some of america's overseas adversaries, including russia and china. do you thinkjoe biden and your party are ready for the kind of fight that we are going to see for the white house and for the future of the nation in the next year? yes. here's what i find encouraging. i think the american people are ready. in the run—up to the 2022 midterm elections, there was a lot of hand—wringing about the polling, about the messaging, about the focus. and i was one of the folks who went to president biden and said, "you're spending a lot of time talking "about democracy and our system and the importance "of defeating election deniers. "i think you should focus more on kitchen table, "bread and butter, people's chequing accounts and the costs "at the grocery store". he disagreed, and he kept focusing on the importance of defending democracy. and i honestly went into our midterm elections convinced we were going to get shellacked. across five states, every single candidate who was an election denier lost. the governor — the candidates for governor, for secretary of state, they were close. but at the end of the day, you asked whether our party is prepared for a fight. i see clearly in our former president someone who is a profound threat to the rule of law and democracy in our society. what i hearfrom other world leaders, folks i meet with in europe and the indo—pacific and africa, is they are gravely concerned about what it would mean for our alliances, our values, our place in the world to have him return and be vengeful. senator, we have to end there. thank you very much forjoining me on hardtalk. thank you, stephen. good to be on. hello there. the weekend has been pretty cloudy, but mild — temperatures of 15 degrees in the warmest spots on sunday. we had some rain as well. you can see some of that working across the skies here in gower, near swansea. and a bit more rain to come as well. the same area of low pressure�*s still with us, so damp weather for northern england, southern and central scotland, northern ireland. the rain not particularly heavy here but some heavier rain pushing across southern wales and southern counties of england over the next few hours. a mild start to the day on monday and we pick up that band of rain working into the south—east quickly monday morning before clearing out of the way. what follows again is quite a lot of cloud. the winds coming in from a northwesterly direction and they'll be bringing some showers into wales and south west england with more persistent outbreaks of rain across the north—east of scotland. in between, it does stay quite cloudy but some breaks in the cloud every now and then. a bit of sunshine, particularly for east anglia, south east england and probably brightening up in northern ireland through the afternoon as well. temperatures still on the mild side at 12 or 13. for wednesday, we start to see a ridge of high pressure build in from the north and with that comes the prospect of some bigger breaks in the cloud, particularly across southern and central scotland, northern ireland, north west england, north—west wales as well. elsewhere, quite a bit of cloud. the thickest cloud for the far north of scotland, where a weather front will start to move its way back in. 0ur temperatures close to average, though, on tuesday. it will be a slightly cooler kind of day. wednesday, we've got some warmerair coming around the top side of our area of high pressure behind this warm front and with fronts crossing scotland, it's here where we'll have the thickest cloud. outbreaks of rain. it's going to be quite windy as well. the heaviest rain for western scotland. the rain probably not amounting to too much across eastern scotland. drier further south for southern eastern wales, the midlands, east anglia, southern counties of england — that's probably where we'll see the best in the breaks in the cloud in the cloud, the best of the day's sunshine. temperatures around 11—14 degrees so, again, it's mild. now, towards the end of the week, we are going to see some more significant changes as a cold front dives southwards and starts to introduce some much colder air. question marks how far south this cold air gets and exactly how cold it will be when it arrives. however, it does look like we'll all see a significant drop in temperatures and it could get cold enough to see some snowfall over the mountains of northern scotland, so one to watch. bye for now. for the government. live from london. this is bbc news. israel releases new cctv and aerial footage it says shows hostages being taken to al—shifa hospital in gaza. far right candidate javier milei has won the argentinian presidential run off with radical plans he hopes will reboot the economy. and it's a significant week for the uk at the covid inqury, with the government's former chief scientific adviser sir patrick vallance giving evidence. hello, i'm sally bundock. we start with new footage released by the israeli military, to support its claim that hamas was using gaza's biggest hospital as a command centre. it's released cctv images, which it says show two hostages being taken by hamas into the al—shifa hospital, after they were abducted from southern israel on october 7. one is injured and wheeled in on a trolley. the bbc has not been able to verify the video. the idf has also released footage which it says shows a 55 metre—long tunnel, beneath the hospital complex.