prime minister benjamin netanyahu that fighting against hamas in rafah will not stop, but mr netanyahu reportedly called the move "unacceptable". he is under strong pressure from far—right members of his coalition government to reject any pauses in the conflict until hamas is totally defeated. in a sign of further tension between the israeli army and those far—right parties, the army's chief—of—staff said sunday there is a "clear need" to conscript ultra—orthodox jewish israelis, who are currently exempt from military service. that's a change mr netanyahu's coalition partners firmly oppose. sunday marks the festival of eid al—adha, one of islam's holiest days. there was a notable lull in fighting, with gaza's hamas—run civil defence agency telling the afp news agency that "calm has prevailed across all of gaza". lucy williamson reports from jerusalem. allahu akbar. in gaza, they stood to pray in places with little else left standing. the festival after eid al—adha, marking another milestone in this war. those for whom conflict and celebration are new. those who have lived through them many times before. translation: for all muslims, eid means sacrificing animals, l to shed blood, but this eid, there are no sacrificed animals. now, we sacrifice ourselves. we sacrifice our own bodies. agencies warn a lack of aid is causing acute malnutrition in gaza. today, confusion over a limited daily truce announced by the army along a key aid route. it sparked fury from israel's far—right ministers and a rapid army response to say the fighting in gaza wouldn't stop. but the costs of this war are also pressing on israel's prime minister. 11 soldiers killed in gaza yesterday. his instruction to dismantle the hamas army has left his soldiers still facing a guerrilla war. translation: when the price is so heavy, we will remember what we are fighting for. we are fighting to ensure our existence and our future. we are fighting to return all our hostages. mr netanyahu's room for manoeuvre on gaza is narrowing. protesters last night called again for an end to the war. but ending it now probably means an end to his government. and the rhetoric over gaza is straining to mask the reality of his choices. caught between his promise of total victory and the prospect of a forever war. lucy williamson, bbc news, jerusalem. as we've been reporting, tensions escalated this week between israel and hezbollah, an islamist armed group based in lebanon. on sunday night, the white house announced it is sending a senior official to the region to try to calm the situation. deputy special assistant to the president, amos hochstein — seen here on a visit to saudi arabia in 2022 — will fly to israel on monday, for meetings with top officials. the biden administration has long expressed concern that the israel—gaza war could spread further in the region. president volodymyr zelenesky says ukraine would hold peace talks with russia, quote, "tomorrow", were moscow to pull its troops out of all ukrainian territories. a two—day summit in switzerland aimed at bringing peace to ukraine wrapped up on sunday. dozens of countries committed to ukraine's territorial integrity but the names of several countries were notably absent from the final communique. russia was not invited to the conference but mr zelensky says the results of the summit will be communicated to moscow. our eastern europe correspondent sarah rainsford sent this report from the summit. it was to this swiss mountain retreat that politicians came this weekend to talk peace — to discuss ending the biggest conflict in europe since the second world war. thank you very much. applause what they achieved was a joint declaration affirming ukraine's right not to be invaded. but some, including saudi arabia and india, didn't sign up. volodymyr zelensky is still hailing a great success, arguing the world must meet russia's full—scale invasion with full—scale diplomacy. are you worried that international support for ukraine on the battlefield, to win this on the battlefield, is weakening, and that's why you're talking peace? translation: it is not because we are weakerj that we are talking about peace. we have always called for peace. at the peak of wall we were talking about peace. we wanted the world to pressure russia to end the war and stop killing us. but ukraine's forces are under pressure on the battlefield. and ahead of the summit, vladimir putin issued his own peace proposal that was, in fact, a call for capitulation. instead, kyiv is trying to seize the initiative. the talks here focused on the easier issues to agree on, like the need to return soldiers and civilians from russian captivity. i was beaten and tortured every day, twice. maksym was held for 11 months, but he told me attempts to hammer out a peace plan now is not about abandoning the fight. we have enough people. we have enough brave to fight. and we just need weapon. ukraine didn't get the unreserved support here it was hoping for, but it did get the chance to stress its key message — that russia only understands strength on the battlefield, or in diplomacy. for more on this i spoke with andrew d'anieri, a resident fellow at the atlantic council's eurasia center. andrew, thank you forjoining us here on bbc news. now, one of the aims of this summit was to engage countries, perhaps, with closer ties to russia. but looking at the final joint communique, which was signed, you've got countries like india, saudi arabia, for example, south africa are not signing it. what did you make of that? i mean, it's really interesting. we saw — i think it was — about 101 countries, international organisations and observer states join for this peace summit, which really takes the name from ukraine's peace formula, and the main focus of the summit wasn't to come up with some agreement, but was to get broad agreement on three principles, which was ukraine's rights, not only to territorial integrity, but for nuclear safety in ukraine, especially with the largest nuclear reactor in europe, there. to advocate for the release of all prisoners, and the exchange of prisoners and the release of ukrainian children who are in russia, in addition to safety of navigation in the black sea and an agreement against the weaponisation of grain. all of which russia has done. so i think we saw similar dynamics — countries like india, countries like brazil, have sat on the sidelines for quite a while, here. india, for example, taking advantage of russia and being able to buy their energy at lower prices. it is disappointing to see india and brazil and other countries not sign on, but that shouldn't distract us from 78 other countries signing onto this agreement from ukraine. let's unpack a little bit the different iterations and versions of his plans. before the start, the president came out saying essentially they could be peace if ukraine were to withdraw its own troops from areas that russia has occupied. volodymyr zelensky saying today instead that if russia pulled out all the troops there could be peace talks on monday, he said. both men appear pretty immovable in their stances. what do you think that says overall about where any potential for peace could be? how far away from that point we could be? it is interesting. you hear analysts and experts and politicians on both sides of the atlantic and around the world saying "we should have peace in ukraine, come to some compromise" — but as putin laid out, that compromise is giving him a loaded gun and having him promise not to shoot. it hasn't worked in the past, and it doesn't appear that vladimir putin would make good on that sort of agreement. and so the ukrainian position is, basically, "we want peace, we want all our territory that is rightfully ours from international border from 1991" and to not have russian soldiers and weapons on their territory, which, under international law, is a perfectly reasonable way to go about defending oneself from an aggressive war. so the main thing we should take from all of this is that putin's designs on ukraine haven't diminished. he still aims to subjugate ukraine and could go further than that. and on the ukrainian side, they just want to defend their territory and their people, because they know the horrors that exist under russian occupation. let's touch a little on the situation on the battlefield. president zelensky said at the summit, speaking to reporters, that he believed this situation had stabilised in kharkiv. but are you concerned that russia could launch an offensive on another front? absolutely. and we should keep a watchful eye on the kharkiv battlefield, the kharkiv direction, there. just because the situation has stabilised doesn't mean russia is not a threat. we have seen that russia can launch these so—called �*glide bombs' that are difficult for air defences to defend against, in civilian areas, especially. the way to blunt any further russian offensive is to give ukraine more license to strike russian military installations within russian borders. we saw the us and other allied countries allow ukraine to strike russian positions with some weapons, but they haven't given the go—ahead on all the weapons that we have provided, especially long—range rocket systems. like atacms. they could strike exactly at these types of russian training centres, tank battalions, as well, and the locations from which russia is sending bombs at women, children, and families. lastly, andrew, looking at the week that was for g7, some key commitments for ukraine, including the security deal for the united states. but also looking at comments we have heard from donald trump at a rally this saturday saying that, essentially, he would make sure that when it comes to us support, he would have that settled, were he to be in office once again. how much of a concern do you see that as being for ukraine? it is absolutely a concern. trump has gone back and forth on what he thinks about ukraine to some extent. we had back when we were battling it out in congress for the ukraine supplemental, donald trump tweeted that ukraine — support for ukraine was important to the united states, allowing the package to go through. then we saw his comments most recently about, which are along the lines of his quote that he would end the war in one day. trump is someone who is long on rhetoric but is always uncertain in his actions. i think it's unlikely that us policy would improve dramatically under a trump presidency, but we don't know exactly what the contours of that would look like. but in any case, the prospect of a trump presidency does, i think, place a premium on getting ukraine the support they need right now that they need to defend themselves and defeat russia and kick russian soldiers out of ukrainian territory. around the world and across the uk. this is bbc news. let's look at another story making news. the uk shadow health secretary, wes streeting, has said he would have liked more ambition in labour's plans for social care. in an interview on sunday, he acknowledged that successive governments of all parties had failed to deal with problems in the care sector. a leading health think tank warns the nhs is facing its tightest spending limits in decades. the bbc�*s hannah miller has more on the major parties�* spending plans. both labour and the conservatives have signed up to a plan to bring in thousands more staff to the nhs, requiring funding to increase significantly, to almost £200 billion by 2028. but this is the level of funding they've allocated in their manifestos — around £20 billion less. the nuffield trust says it amounts to tougher spending plans than during austerity. the liberal democrats have put slightly more. but the pledged figure from the liberal democrats for nhs spending doesn't include their seperately costed pledge to provide free personal care for older or disabled people. you're live with bbc news. australia's prime minister anthony albanese and chinese premier li qiang are meeting in canberra. it's part of a first visit to australia by a chinese premier in seven years. the two leaders are discussing trade and diplomatic ties, along with regional security issues. earlier, mr li made an offer at adelaide zoo to send australia two new pandas. two pandas already at the zoo are due to return home. the chinese premier's trip has also included a tour of winemakers in the famed barossa valley in south australia. beijing recently lifted tariffs on australian wine. now live to katy watson joining us from sydney australia. very good to have you, katy. what more can we expect from the visit? i what more can we expect from the visit? ~ , , m the visit? i think this visit is about _ the visit? i think this visit is about a _ the visit? i think this visit is about a resumption - the visit? i think this visit is about a resumption ofl the visit? i think this visit | is about a resumption of a normal relationship between the two countries. up to 2017 the leaders used to visit each other. we haven't seen that for the last few years. this is very significant. the two leaders have just been very significant. the two leaders havejust been in high—level talks in the capital, canberra, before going in there, premier li wrote in the' book that the relationship between the two countries was evergreen. the two countries rely on each other. it is a relationship that will endure. so it is best to try and make it work. some experts have been calling this a charm offensive to build the relationship and make a better one.- make a better one. talking about the _ make a better one. talking about the charm _ make a better one. talking about the charm offensive, make a better one. talking . about the charm offensive, we have just seen the two leaders sit down at a table as they meet in canberra. what appears to be coming through is some kind of thaw between the two countries in recent years. what you think has led to that? well, talking about the thaw it might be worth talking about the freeze. in 2017 china was accused of interference here in australia. trader responded by ending diplomatic visits. then in 2020 the previous government here in australia wanted an investigation into the origins of covid—19 and that angered china and china responded by banning certain imports such as wind, as you said, and beef, and that has been, you know, they have been trying to get back on track. with prime minister albanese, when he came in, he said he wanted a more stable relationship, not ignoring some of the more difficult issues such as human rights issues and that is something that he has maintained he will be talking about. and certainly trying to rebuild the relationship and make it work as best as possible, given that china is australia's largest trade partner, and china wants to have a relationship with australia when it comes to issues such as natural resources. the two countries want to try to make this work. katy, i am curious, where do you think this, and australia, and its relationship with china, potentially leaves the australian relationship with the united states?- australian relationship with the united states? look, the geopolitical— the united states? look, the geopolitical shift _ the united states? look, the geopolitical shift in _ the united states? look, the geopolitical shift in the - the united states? look, the| geopolitical shift in the dance around the superpowers is something that australia always has to negotiate. china is, as i said, the largest trading partner of australia. at the same time a very important political and military ties with the us. trying to rebuild the relationship with china is important to australia. it doesn't diminish the relationship with the us. at the same time, the powerplay, the same time, the powerplay, the dominance in the pacific region is something that is an ongoing tension. but the two countries are hugely important to australia.— countries are hugely important to australia. our correspondent in sydney. _ to australia. our correspondent in sydney. katy _ to australia. our correspondent in sydney, katy watson, - to australia. our correspondent in sydney, katy watson, thank| in sydney, katy watson, thank you. the us conference of catholic bishops has issued a formal apology, for the church's role in mistreatment and trauma inflicted on native american communities. from 1819 to 1969, a us government programme of forced assimilation saw hundreds of thousands of indigenous american children taken from their families and sent to boarding schools, dozens of which were run by the catholic church. survivors have reported mental, physical and sexual abuse. in a document released on friday, the us conference of catholic bishops acknowledged the harm the church caused to native americans, writing "the family systems of many indigenous people never fully recovered from these tragedies, which often led to broken homes harmed by addiction, domestic abuse, abandonment and neglect". for more, i spoke to christine diindiisi mccleave, former ceo of the national native american boarding school healing coalition. christine, thank you for taking the time to be with us here in bbc news. you are the descendent of boarding school survivors. what does this apology from the us conference of catholic bishops mean to you? it — it is an acknowledgement that is a long time coming, but, frankly, doesn't mean anything without any actions behind it. and in terms of those actions, what is it you would like to see? i think that there needs to be a true acknowledgement of the harms that were done. i briefly read through the document and a lot of what they are talking about is the doctrine of discovery, spanish conquistadores, and there is no acknowledgement of the real abuses that happened in catholic boarding schools. and that is a lack of accountability and a lack of true justice. it can be difficult to talk about some of those abuses, but if you don't mind, could you tell us about what members of yourfamily, other people in the community, have had to endure? yes. i've heard many boarding school survivors�* stories, and my grandfather, who went to a catholic indian boarding school, was subjected to something that is pretty common from survivors to talk about, called the �*belt line', where they had to run down of the middle of two rows of students holding belts. those students were forced to hit the child running down the middle with their belts. and my grandfather was subjected to that same punishment. i understand there is also concern — concern has been raised about sexual abuse, also, going on, in these boarding schools. is that something you have heard about, talking to people in the community? absolutely. my grandfather actually really didn't want to talk about boarding schools, and what happened to him there, so i don't know if he experienced sexual abuse, but i've certainly heard many boarding school survivors talk about that and, frankly, it seemed more significant, more prolific, within these boarding schools that were run by the catholic churches and other churches. so you said that this acknowledgement, it doesn't go far enough, and you would also like to see further actions. just tell us more about what accountability would look like in your mind. i think, in terms of the catholic church holding itself accountable, that is difficult. but there is a way in which they can participate in truejustice. i think turning over their records and letting — letting those be shared, participating in the current investigation that is taking place, through the department of the interior. i think there really needs to be accountability in terms of the abuse that their staff — either nuns or priests — subjected the children to. and right now, all we have is the survivors�* accounting. and in so