to the hamas—controlled ministry of health. we will hear tonight from the director general of the international committee of the red cross. israel says above ground it has cut off gaza city from the south. 0vernight it hit over a50 targets in one of the most intense bombardments so far. but what are they targeting? we will get an expert view on that tonight. and a year out from the 2024 us elections, why isjoe biden trailing donald trump in all the key battleground states? good evening. in nearly a month of fighting, over 1,400 israelis have been slaughtered and maybe 10,000 palestinians in gaza. the hamas—run health ministry, which updated its figures today, said 4,000 of those were children. we can't independently vouch for those numbers, because we are not there, but the un said today that during hostilities in 2014, their verified figures were not entirely disimilar from those hamas had put out to the media. what we do know for certain, is that last night gaza sustained one of the most intense bombardments since this conflict began. some of that around the hospitals in the north, and shortly after the telecommunications went down for a third time. the israel defence forces say they have now cut—off gaza city from the south, though they are well aware that beneath them, the tunnels provide means of escape for the hamas fighters. and those air strikes are not confined to the north of the gaza strip. there were reports 50 people were killed yesterday in an attack on the al—maghazi camp just north of khan younis. the united nations continues to press for a humanitarian pause. in a statement 18 un agencies and humanitarian groups said "enough is enough". it is "unacceptable" they added the population of gaza is denied essential goods and services as well as being "bombed in their homes, shelters, hospitals and places of worship," the us secretary of state antony blinken was in turkey this morning. he said they had discussed efforts to significantly expand humanitarian assistance, as well as ways to prevent the conflict expanding to other parts of the region. 0ur international editor jeremy bowen sent this report from jerusalem, and again there are disturbing images in his report. israel promised mighty vengeance. it thundered across gaza city. it thundered across beach camp in gaza city. israel's justification is defending the living, as well as avenging its dead. palestinians call this genocide. this girl, from jabalya camp, is asked what happened to her. she says, "a missile came down on us, bricks fell on us." "i asked, �*where is my dad and where is my mum?” she is asked, "where were you?" "i was here, in the house. "we were at home and the roof came down on us." we looked in on the war this afternoon from sderot, the closest israeli border town. israel's ruthless campaign in gaza is powered by the way hamas killed more than 1,400 and took well over 200 hostages. this was beach refugee camp this morning in gaza city, where israeli strikes killed dozens during the night. palestinians reject israel's justifications for killing so many of them. further south in khan younis, living in their cars, some of the more than 1 million displaced palestinians hoping for safety, and not finding it. translation: our home, where we used to feel - comfort and security, was destroyed by rockets in an instant. we came here in hope to find safety and security, but that doesn't exist. we survive death to find death again. the israelis seem to be making steady progress, making steady progress in terms of territory inside the gaza strip, at the cost of a large number of civilian lives. israel has set itself a very ambitious objective — to make sure that hamas can never again threaten the lives of its citizens. there's a big question. do prime minister netanyahu and the rest of his war cabinet believe that can be achieved by purely military means? 0r, longer—term, are israelis prepared to try to get a political deal with the palestinians to try to end the conflict once and for all? from flakjackets in baghdad to handshakes in turkey, antony blinken, the us secretary of state, is back in the region. look, we know the deep concern here for the terrible toll that gaza is taking on palestinians, on men, women and children in gaza, innocent civilians. a concern we share, and that we are working every single day. we have engaged the israelis on steps they can take to minimize civilian casualties. the only way out of this, for the us, uk, and others, is an independent palestine alongside israel — an old idea that two decades of talks could not deliver. the horrors of the last month and those to come will make it even harder to achieve. jeremy bowen, bbc news, in southern israel. live now to our diplomatic correspondent paul adams, in jerusalem. asjeremy says, as jeremy says, the asjeremy says, the month anniversary will be upon us tomorrow. quite extraordinary to think what will do much has happened in that time. and it has been an intense 24 hours? it in that time. and it has been an intense 24 hours?— in that time. and it has been an intense 24 hours? it has. we seem to have said that — intense 24 hours? it has. we seem to have said that several— intense 24 hours? it has. we seem to have said that several times, - have said that several times, christian. i think maybe some people see the scenes from gaza and think this is kind of the way things go in gaza. this is what the israelis and palestinians due to each other every so often. what we are seeing down there at the moment is completely unprecedented. the events that triggered it were completely unprecedented in terms of the pain and suffering inflicted on israelis, and suffering inflicted on israelis, and everything that has happened since has been utterly unprecedented in terms of the dreadful toll that this is taken on the palestinian population of the gaza strip. not in their long, bitter history of the contest between these two pupils has each side inflicted so much pain, so much death on the other. it is just mind—boggling to wrap your head around it. mind-boggling to wrap your head around it. ~ . , ., mind-boggling to wrap your head around it. ~ ., i. ., ~ mind-boggling to wrap your head around it. ~ ., .,~ ., around it. what you make of the worsening _ around it. what you make of the worsening relationship - around it. what you make of the worsening relationship between | around it. what you make of the i worsening relationship between the israeli government and the un secretary—general�*s office? i am just reading a comment that says shame on you, anthony ujah terrace, hamas is the problem, not israel who are trying to eliminate this terrorist organisation. —— shame on you, antonio guterres. is terrorist organisation. -- shame on you, antonio guterres.— you, antonio guterres. is real and the un have _ you, antonio guterres. is real and the un have a _ you, antonio guterres. is real and the un have a complicated - you, antonio guterres. is real and| the un have a complicated history. they have never been hugely keen on the body which they see as instinctively hostile to israel, more prone to criticising israel than other countries that abuse human rights, and they are particularly angry with the secretary general, because a week or so ago he talked about the events in gaza, the events of full last month not taking place in a vacuum, talking about the decades of suffering the palestinians had experience. the israelis were furious about that, feeling he had not recognised the depravity and sheer scale of what was done on october seven to israeli civilians, and felt he was not explaining but somehow excusing the actions of hamas. they have not forgiven him for that, and when he spoke again today the reaction was broadly speaking the same. it doesn't really change the picture as far as aid is concerned, because it is not a un business. the un is the implementer, they will deliver what aid gets into they will deliver what aid gets into the gaza strip, but it is up to people blight the egyptians and the israelis and the americans and other regional players to create a situation in which the aid situation can be improved. we are still seeing remarkably few trucks going on, despite the americans feeling they have made progress on this front. 0nly have made progress on this front. only a few dozen trucks went in today, and we're still not seeing sign of the humanitarian pauses that the americans have now been talking about for, what, at least a couple of weeks? the israelis do not seem to be interested in allowing such a thing. they believe anything that slows down the pace and gets in the way of their military operation will simply allow hamas to regroup, and theyjust simply allow hamas to regroup, and they just don't want to see that. the un international security spokesman has just said at the briefing that fewer than 30 lorries got in today. you are right, it is nowhere near enough. boarded it open to foreign nationals, and it has been closed over the weekend. yes. there has been _ been closed over the weekend. yes. there has been a _ been closed over the weekend. yes. there has been a row— been closed over the weekend. yes there has been a row going on almost every day about who exactly is allowed to cross, and whether injured palestinians in ambulances can be among those able to get out. i suspect that even though we are not necessarily told the ins and outs of this, this may be a debate about whether or not hamas might be trying to sneak some of its fighters out across that border. for whatever reason, it was closed yesterday. it did open for a bit today, and some injured people and some of the foreign nationals who are waiting to get out did manage to get out. there are thought to be upwards of 7000 people from more than 40 countries, all desperately trying to get out as quickly as they can, and obviously this is proving to be a very, very slow process, because itjust gets wrapped up in the politics and the military business that is going on day today. military business that is going on da toda . ., ., ~ , ., , military business that is going on da toda . . ., ~' , . day today. paul, thank you very much for that. in spite of the bat, the un secretary—general is not pulling his punches. he spoke again today of the clear violations as he sees it. "no party to an armed conflict he said is above international humanitarian law". but how israel is selecting its targets is shrouded in secrecy, making it extremely hard for experts to judge their legality. american officials admit they do not know exactly how idf commanders are assessing the threshold for civilian casualties — even as they publicly urge israel to minimize the "collateral damage" mikey kay is a former uk military strategic planner who spent 20 years as an raf assault helicopter pilot. good to see you again. how do we know that they are taking every possible precaution to limit these casualties? who is watching over that targeting to ensure they do? i that targeting to ensure they do? i think the simple answer, christian, is that there is no overseeing authority, official overseeing authority, official overseeing authority of what the targeting processes, and more importantly the rules of engagement that the idf are utilising in order to target hamas militants. the us obviously has the ability to place pressure on the idf, and has been doing so over the last few days in terms of reducing the collateral damage, but from a uk perspective, i worked the collateral damage, but from a uk perspective, iworked in the collateral damage, but from a uk perspective, i worked in the targeting chain inside baghdad for a number of years, and i worked alongside the us, and we had very stringent offensive force rules of engagement, and in order to drop lethal weapons, you need what is called offensive rules of engagement. there are a number of pillars inside that rules of engagement that need to be satisfied. for example, there is a cd v, a collateral damage estimate. that is a fairly digitised process that can effectively assess the type of bomb. we spoke about this last time, it could be add 250lbs pound, up time, it could be add 250lbs pound, up to a 2000lbs bomb. and that can assess the collateral damage if it is dropped less than ten metres. that says, if the target is dropped in the middle of the desert, it is going to be very low collateral damage, there will be less risk to civilians and population. however, if there is a school or a hospital nearby, other pillars of offensive rules of engagement will come in. that is such as a positive identification. such as, is there a drone tacking a hamas target into the building? that is an example of pid. �* the building? that is an example of pid.�* ., _ the building? that is an example of pid. , the building? that is an example of pid. but obviously the israelis are 0 eratin: pid. but obviously the israelis are operating in _ pid. but obviously the israelis are operating in a _ pid. but obviously the israelis are operating in a densely _ pid. but obviously the israelis are operating in a densely populated l operating in a densely populated environment. housing because of that and the existential threat they see, they therefore have a greater tolerance for civilian casualties than might have been the case for the raf? i than might have been the case for the raf? ., , ,, ., ., the raf? i would say it is less of a tolerance for _ the raf? i would say it is less of a tolerance for civilian _ the raf? i would say it is less of a tolerance for civilian casualties. i tolerance for civilian casualties. yes, gaza is a massively populated area to stop the collateral damage estimate will, in my experience, show that there is a massive risk. obviously, from the pictures we are seeing, there is clearly an actuality of severe deaths for women, children, and civilian population. then it comes to the human opponent. in the uk, there was a zero tolerance for any civilian casualty on a target. if the pattern of life and the scoping shows a school bus passes the target that three bm every day, there is absolutely no chance that you could prosecute that target to 3pm, because there be a high risk of civilian collateral. what we are seeing here is that from the pictures that are coming out of gaza, the missile strikes going on, the tolerance for civilian casualties by the idf is, in my experience, way less that what the uk or the us ever approached in afghanistan or iraq. for example, mistakes do happen. i was part of the liberation of muscle where the americans had to eventually admit they were wrong. mistakes happen and they were wrong. mistakes happen and they are terrible, but the execute on the target is never committed knowing that you are then going to have a severe amount of civilian collateral damage. i think that is the difference at the moment. i don't think the americans have the influence of the overall —— or the overarching on the idf, and they are trying to put a soft skill set on the idf to prevent them doing that. there's the other conversation of what actually makes up for a legitimate target. we all heard about the ambulance that was targeted a couple of days ago. under the rules of law, under international law, if in ambulances carrying a civilian casualties, to strike that i'm going to be a war crime. it is against the rules of law. having interviewed the one star brigadier in charge of the targeting backin brigadier in charge of the targeting back in 2017, she made it quite clear that if an ambulance, a school, a hospital is being used by militants as a firing point, it loses that protective status. 0nce loses that protective status. once it loses that protective status, the whole process of the collateral damage estimate, the positive id, the pattern of life, that still has to be carried out in order to minimise collateral damage, and just because a special target loses its prospective status, school, hospital, whatever it may be, just because it loses that status, it doesn't mean you can prosecute it and have a massive amount of collateral damage as well. it is very nuanced. i collateral damage as well. it is very nuanced-— very nuanced. i respect your professional _ very nuanced. i respect your professional opinion - very nuanced. i respect your professional opinion on - very nuanced. i respect your professional opinion on how| very nuanced. i respect your - professional opinion on how these targets are selected, but i want to give some context of this. by the end of the second week, the israeli air force that it had dropped end of the second week, the israeli airforce that it had dropped 6000 bombs on hamas targets in 45 square kilometres. in context, the washington post says the us led coalition dropped... 0n the entirety of afghanistan in 2019, the heaviest year of bombardment. 6045 square kilometres. i think what a lot of people have difficulty squaring, giving the density of the population, is how you can you drop that amount of bombs and are built—up civilian area, and yet, at the same time, have a very high threshold for civilian casualties, as you have said? how do you square that? i as you have said? how do you square that? ., �* ., �* , ., that? i don't. i don't understand it, i don't— that? i don't. i don't understand it, i don't respect _ that? i don't. i don't understand it, i don't respect it. _ that? i don't. i don't understand it, i don't respect it. i— that? i don't. i don't understand it, i don't respect it. ithink- that? i don't. i don't understand it, i don't respect it. ithink it. it, i don't respect it. i think it is against all of the international rules of war. you cannot drop 6000 bombs in a week or a couple of weeks on the size of gaza without expecting a massive amount of civilian casualties. the fact that america is not speaking up against that, and nato countries are not speaking up against that, there is something severely wrong here. israel has the right to defend itself, but doesn't have the right to prosecute targets and kill women and children. that isn't accepted anywhere in the world. i don't square that, christian. all i'm trying to explain to you and your viewers is that there is a targeting process that has been used by the us and the uk for 20 years inside iraq and the uk for 20 years inside iraq and afghanistan, and the appetite for collateral damage is pretty much zero unless the target with someone like some bin laden. just zero unless the target with someone like some bin laden.— like some bin laden. just very cuickl , like some bin laden. just very quickly, because _ like some bin laden. just very quickly, because i'm - like some bin laden. just very quickly, because i'm out - like some bin laden. just very quickly, because i'm out of. like some bin laden. just very i quickly, because i'm out of time, obviously they would have been a number of strike locations that they had preordained or pre—vetted. as we switch to what is called dynamic targeting in the trade, does become more dangerous for civilians? just exlain more dangerous for civilians? just exniain what _ more dangerous for civilians? inst explain what it is, it is, time sensitive targeting, and that means you get less time to collect the collateral damage estimate. —— commit to the collateral damage estimate. therefore, dynamic targeting means that decisions are made way quicker, without the usual assessment of collateral damage. from what we have seen from experience, there is clearly a disconnect between the value of life that the idf are putting on civilian casualties, versus the targets they are going after. we've seen that, we have seen the amount of people that have seen the amount of people that have been killed. when it comes to time sensitive targeting, what it does is reduce that window o