ukraine receive compensation for damage caused by russia. here's what presidents biden and zelensky had to say after signing. and we have signed the strongest agreement between ukraine and us since our independence. and this is an agreement on security and thus, on the protection of human life. our goal is to strengthen ukraine's credible defence and deterrence capabilities for the long term. a lasting peace for ukraine must be underwritten by ukraine's own ability to defend itself now and to deter future aggression any time in the future. for reaction here in washington to the us—ukraine agreement, i spoke to congressman gabe amo, a democrat from rhode island who serves on the house committee on foreign affairs. congressman, i want to start with the new security pact announced by the us and ukraine that's supposed to show the us's long—term influence and also interest in ukraine. what do you make of this agreement? well, look, i think this is exactly the type of commitment that the united states is demonstrating in what we have done in standing with ukraine for democracy — not only the short term of democracy and the immediacy of combating russia and putin's aggression but the long term — making sure that ukraine is able to have a vibrant economy that sustains itself while, you know, being in a region proximal to a foe who is violating the rule of law and focused on their destruction. it does, of course, include security. we know ukraine want tojoin nato. so, why is this bilateral pact needed? couldn't itjust also open the way for nato membership? well, look, we know the conversation about ukraine becoming a member of nato is one that will take some time. and, certainly, as that process unfolds, we cannot wait a moment for the united states to stand alongside its partners in europe to make sure that ukraine is fortified in the near term while we let the broader processes take place. if you look at what the security pact says, the agreement says, "in the event of an armed "attack against ukraine the us and ukraine will meet within 2a "hours to discuss a response". it doesn't commit to sending us forces in but if you look at what's been done so far — you mentioned us support for ukraine until now, it's has been more than 175 billion. what else is left? isn't this essentially a mutual defence pact where we could see us troops? i think we know fundamentally that us stands firmly with ukraine because we have common cause in fighting for democracy, fighting for the maintenance of the post—world war ii international order and so, you know, i would stay extremely focused on the united states has committed in this pact as a commitment to ukraine, to its people and the shared fight we have for democracy. this g7 summit we're seeing comes off the back important eu elections where we have seen, in big countries like france and germany, far—right groups make gains — and these parties who have been sceptical, to say the least, of sending did ukraine. do you think this changes the equation for the us? i think we are experiencing a lot of volatility in the global theatre. certainly, as we've seen recent electoral successes of movements that have not necessarily been supportive, that may cause us to question. but i think when we appeal to values, when we appeal to what we are aligned on — which is the preservation of the democratic values and norms with which we share across the world, certainly in europe — i know that i have no cause for concern. we just have to reiterate, recommit and refocus our efforts on sharing, with the people in our countries, the values that we are putting forward and why these conflicts belong to our broader fight for democracy. that is a message we continue to hearfrom president biden. at the same time, the g7 has agreed to use frozen russian assets to raise around $50 billion for ukraine. do you think that is, at the same time, an acknowledgement, if you will, that political will and funds for ukraine might be drying up? we knew how long it took, of course, for congress to pass an aid package here in the us. well, look, i think it is a measure of acknowledgement that we should leave tools unused. everything at its disposal to make sure that the unchecked power of vladimir putin goes checked. obviously, it took longer that we wanted — in the context of the united states — then we wanted but we got there and so, i would reaffirm our commitments to this fight that europe is committed to this fight and we will use every tool available to make sure we have the resources necessary. the g7 also agreed to a $50 billion loan for ukraine. those funds will be taken from interest generated by the seizure of russian assets. the money will be used to support ukraine in a variety of ways — including infrastructure, energy investments and weaponry for the battlefield. the group of 7 nations — which includes the us, canada, britain, france, germany, japan and italy — are sitting on about $300 billion in seized russian assets. 0ur diplomatic correspondent james landale has more. many of the g7 leaders are facing electoral troubles at home. there's no guarantee they will all be here next there's no guarantee they will all be here next year. so, what they have tried to do today is agree a package of measures of support for ukraine that will last for the long term — potentially, after they're out of office. now, the centre of that was this idea of using frozen russian assets to try and generate a loan for ukraine worth as much as $50 billion, using the interest that all of that russian asset is generating to pay off this new loan in a technical, complicated deal. there's also been various other agreements. the united states and japan have agreed new security arrangements with ukraine, the uk has promised a bit more money and has widened some sanctions — that's off the back of some more sanctions that the americans announced yesterday — all designed to tackle third parties, and firms and others that are dodging existing sanctions to try to support russia's economy. but of course, there's problems with this. the detail — on the russian assets, it's still not entirely clear who will bear the risk, it's not entirely clear where those loans are going to be generated, so there's a little bit more detailed to be negotiated and some officials are saying it's still not entirely clear when the cash will actually reach ukraine. so, essentially, today is a big show of support by the world's richest democracies for ukraine to try to send a message — president biden said to president putin — that you can't wait us out, you can't divide us. what is not yet clear is how much this will change minds in the kremlin. an israeli government spokesperson is warning that the country will respond with force to any aggression by hezbollah. that comes after the group says it launched a new rocket and drone attack from lebanon towards northern israel, targeting a number of israeli military sites. it's the second major attack launched by hezbollah within 2a hours as retaliation for israel's killing of a senior hezbollah commander. israel's military said most of the rockets and drones were intercepted by its air defences. meanwhile, at the g7 summit, president biden said he's not confident a ceasefire deal between israel and hamas will be reached but that he hasn't lost hope. it comes one day after hamas came back with several amendments to the proposal. in his latest trip to the middle east, us secretary of state antony blinken said some of hamas' terms are impractical. a hamas official said one of their new terms for the ceasefire deal would include allowing them to choose a list of 100 palestinians with long sentences to be released from israeli prisons. 0ur middle east correspondent hugo bachega has the latest on those ceasefire negotiations. a breakthrough in the negotiations for a ceasefire and hostage release deal in gaza seems far off after the response given by hamas to the proposal laid out by president biden. antony blinken, the us secretary of state, has criticised the group for not accepting the plan, which he said was very similar to a deal that had been accepted by hamas weeks ago, and he even questioned whether hamas was engaging in these negotiations in good faith. he said some of the demands that have been made by hamas were unworkable. now, hamas has pushed back, saying it had reacted positively to the proposal and said that israel was the side that hasn't yet publicly supported the plan. still, negotiators from the us, egypt and qatar say that efforts will continue for a deal to be reached and jake sullivan, the national security adviser, said the goal here is to bridge gaps with hamas and to get a deal soon. we haven't had an official response from the israeli government after hamas issued its response but an official, speaking with media outlets, said israel sees the hamas reaction as a rejection of the proposal that was laid out. so, efforts continue but it seems that there are no indications of a breakthrough in these negotiations. the un security council is calling for an immediate end to the fighting in sudan, as well as an end to the siege of el fasher — a city in north darfur — by the paramilitary rapid support forces. it's the last major city in the region not controlled by the rsf which is fighting the sudanese army for control of the country. the 15 members adopted a british resolution which also called for the withdrawal of troops. the security council last passed a resolution calling for an end to the conflict in march. sudan's civil war has led to the mass displacement of civilians. the un says ten million people in sudan have had to leave their homes — injust over a year. they're among a record 120 million people globally who've been forced out of their homes this year because of violence or persecution. the un says refugee numbers have tripled from a decade ago and that 40% of the refugees worldwide in 2023 were children, most of them displaced by conflict and violence. matthew saltmarsh is the global spokesperson for the un's high commissioner for refugees. he told us a bit about the circumstances that are forcing people to flee their homes. the overall numbers are 120 million people forcibly displaced globally inaudible may this year which is a huge number and to put it in context, it's about the size of japan, so if you consider that thatis japan, so if you consider that that is the number that are displaced. why is it happening? it's happening because there are long—standing wars that remain unresolved and have been going on, in many cases, for decades and there are more recent conflicts and intensification is of those conflicts. 0n intensification is of those conflicts. on top of that, we have climate change, which is an exacerbating factor. so when you put all of those things together, and you have the failure by the international community to create the conditions for peacemaking, that's really, in short, the reason why you have this increase and we've had increases now for 12 straight years, so it is becoming numbingly regular. around the world and across the uk, this is bbc news. let's look at a story making news in the uk. the coroner in the inquest into the death of harry dunn has recommended better training for americans at the raf base near where the 19—year—old was killed. mr dunn died in 2019 when the motorbike he was riding was hit by a car driven by anne sacoolas, who was driving on the wrong side of the road. the mother of mr dunn attended the inquest. she accused the us government of "obstructing" the inquest. we've had a lot of interaction with both the uk and the us and unfortunately, most of it not particularly very good, but we will be keeping that pressure on to try to make sure that they do carry it through. we cannot have any other family go through what we went through. at the time of the crash the driver, anne sacoolas, was the wife of a us diplomat. she left the country, claiming diplomatic immunity, and attended her uk court case virtually. she was eventually sentenced to eight months in prison, suspended for a year, and did not spend time injail. sacoolas did not attend the inquest thursday, but provided a statement where she apologised for the quote "tragic mistake." you're live with bbc news. the us supreme court unanimously rejected a bid to sharply restrict access to the abortion medication, mifepristone. mifepristone — which blocks the hormone progesterone — is the most common method of terminating pregnancies in the united states. the supreme court decided that the plaintiffs — a group of anti—abortion doctors and activists — did not have the right to sue. following the decision, president biden released a statement saying "today's decision does not change the fact that the fight for reproductive freedom continues — the right for a woman to get the care she needs is imperilled if not impossible in many states." 0ur north america correspondent nomia iqbal has more. this unanimous decision by the justices have not involved them taking any kind of moral or safety position on mifepristone. rather, they argued, there was no legal standing to hear the case. and what that means, essentially, is that their viewpoint is, look — to the plaintiffs — look, you we know your moral, legal and ideological objection to the drug but you haven't proven that you have suffered any concrete or serious injuries as a result of mifepristone. none of the anti—abortion doctors or organisations that brought this case the supreme court prescribe the drug or use it and so, this legal standing doctrine was summed up byjustice kavanaugh, who wrote the opinion, using a doctrine that was articulated byjustice scalia — former conservative justice scalia — who said, "what is it to you?" and the plaintiffs had no argument to make against that, so basically, the merits of the case weren't even looked at. having said that, anti—abortion activists are very likely to regroup and find another way to bring the case the supreme court. it's important to note that this ruling doesn't change anything, so these abortion pills are still illegal in the 1a states that have near—total abortion bans, and that's whether there is a ban through — a ban on the procedure or on the pills. we know that abortion is a very potent issue going into the presidential election. we've seen that the position that democrats have taken is pretty much in line with the public opinion, two years on since roe v wade was overturned. surveys and polls suggest that most americans do believe in abortion rights, they do believe in medicated abortion rights as well, broadly speaking. i think for republicans, they've probably dodged a slightly toxic issue, if the ruling had gone another way, given we are heading towards very tight presidential race. as nomia mentioned, thursday's ruling has no bearing in the 1a states — seen here — where medication abortion remains illegal. this includes louisiana, which banned all abortions injune of 2022, right after the supreme court overturned the long—standing right to an abortion, roe v wade. more recently, it became the first us state to designate mifepristone as dangerous controlled substances last month. following that decision, dozens of doctors raised concerns, highlighting other crucial uses of the medication outside of abortions including as treatment for cushing syndrome. earlier, i spoke to dr nicole freehill, an 0bgyn based in new orleans, louisiana. when we spoke in the past we discussed the fact you did previously worked with me for bridgestone as a medication for patients who did elect to have an abortion so first up i would like to give you —— get your reaction to this ruling quickly. reaction to this ruling quickly-— reaction to this ruling cuickl . , . ~' reaction to this ruling cuickl. , ., ~ . quickly. yes, thank you so much for having _ quickly. yes, thank you so much for having me — quickly. yes, thank you so much for having me and _ quickly. yes, thank you so much for having me and i'm _ quickly. yes, thank you so much for having me and i'm very - for having me and i'm very pleased at the decision today. i will leave it at that. == i will leave it at that. -- mifepristone. _ i will leave it at that. -- mifepristone. we - i will leave it at that. —— mifepristone. we mentioned the fact louisiana is still very restrictive when it comes to abortions. it made mifepristone abortions. it made mifepristone a controlled substance last month. what impact can you tell us has that had on your work, despite we've seen from the supreme court?— despite we've seen from the supreme court? right, so even thou:h supreme court? right, so even though this _ supreme court? right, so even though this lawmaking - though this lawmaking mifepristone and mr postel both scheduled controlled medicines was passed last month, it is not going into effect or will not going into effect or will not going into effect or will not go into effect for several months —— misoprostol. it really hasn't had an impact as of yet, but the concern we haven't always have had is what impact will it have once it is active and once these medications are a scheduled medications are a scheduled medication or controlled medication or controlled medication that is similar to something like a painkiller or anything that has addictive potential, which these medications do not. tell us more about _ medications do not. tell us more about that _ medications do not. tell us more about that does - medications do not. tell us more about that does are l medications do not. tell us i more about that does are you concerned about the impact it could have down the road? right, these medicines, a good one and misoprostol, are utilised in many different ways. they are used for abortion care but also for induction of labour —— mifepristone. are utilised to treat haemorrhage or heavy bleeding after a woman has delivered a baby. like you mentioned, there is cushing's syndrome. acid reflux for misoprostol. there are so many other uses and they are utilised very widely, both in the world of 0b/gyn but also in other areas of medicine as well. . , , well. that being said, the use of this medication _ well. that being said, the use of this medication is - well. that being said, the use of this medication is the - well. that being said, the use of this medication is the most popularform of of this medication is the most popular form of carrying of this medication is the most popularform of carrying out of this medication is the most popular form of carrying out an abortion in the us at the moment, so do you understand why states like louisiana want to control access to this? well, yes. i mean, given the position and the laws that have been passed in louisiana to restrict access to abortion care, i guess i understand where they're coming from in wanting to restrict access to the medications. but if you look at the safety profile and why a medication is made a controlled substance versus one that would not be, it doesn't make sense. it is not a medication that is addictive, it is not a medication that is going to make you use it in any way, —— you abuse it in any way, so it reallyjust doesn't fit with the other medications that are controlled. you touched on this, nicole, but louisiana is a conservative state and the elected officials in louisiana have passed these bills to make mifepristone a controlled substance so what is the problem that you potentially see in having these states with different regulations, from louisiana to for example new york? right, so one of the concerns that was voiced during the legislative process surrounding this law is that if a state or multiple states make the medications scheduled, will that affect manufacturing? will i