welcome to hardtalk. i'm stephen sackur. where does israel's military assault on gaza go from here? signals are mixed. daemonic efforts to broker ceasefire have intensified, as have idf preparations for a big push into rafah were more than a million displaced palestinians are sheltering. no matter what happens next, there are still no sign of a plan for what happens when the fighting, the death and destruction do finally end. my guest is ami ayalon, former chief of israel's shin bet security agency, now a fierce critic of the netanyahu government. it is israel fighting an unwinnable war?

ami ayalon, in northern israel, welcome to hardtalk.- ami ayalon, in northern israel, welcome to hardtalk. thank you for invitin: welcome to hardtalk. thank you for inviting me. _ welcome to hardtalk. thank you for inviting me. great— welcome to hardtalk. thank you for inviting me. great to - welcome to hardtalk. thank you for inviting me. great to have - for inviting me. great to have you on. you have a long, distinguished career at the top of the israeli security forces. obviously that and sometime ago. you have been watching israel's military assault in gaza from afar. has it unfolded in the way you expected? yes, it has unfolded in the way i expected but not in the way that i thought it should be. there is a huge tension between

the way that i see this war and the way that i see this war and the way that the government define it, and the problem is, and i have set it from the very beginning, that this war is a war without any political goal. and what happens to this type of war, that the war becomes the end and not the means in order to achieve the aisle but a political goal. 50 order to achieve the aisle but a political goal.— order to achieve the aisle but a political goal. so the answer is es a political goal. so the answer is yes and _ a political goal. so the answer is yes and no. _ a political goal. so the answer is yes and no. is _ a political goal. so the answer is yes and no. is in _ a political goal. so the answer is yes and no. is in the - is yes and no. is in the strategic sort of aim to destroy hamas as a fighting force and to completely eliminate it as a governing force in gaza, isn't that a clear political strategic ambition?— clear political strategic ambition? ., , ., ambition? no, absolutely not. it is a military _ ambition? no, absolutely not. it is a military goal, _ ambition? no, absolutely not. it is a military goal, it - ambition? no, absolutely not. it is a military goal, it is - it is a military goal, it is not a political goal. we have

to understand that when we discuss the whole concept of war, the idea is to create a better political reality. the battlefield or the military forces are just the means in order to achieve it, but what you mentioned to dismantle hamas and its military capabilities and its leadership is an achievable military capability and achievable military goal, but it is just a military goal, but it is just a military goal, but it is just a military goal, it is not a political goal. d0 military goal, it is not a political goal.— military goal, it is not a political goal. do you think that today's _ political goal. do you think that today's generation - political goal. do you think that today's generation of| that today's generation of military commanders from the very top down, those in uniform, have their own doubts about the strategic goals they been set by the political leadership, of course led by prime minister netanyahu? first of all, i prime minister netanyahu? first of all. i have _ prime minister netanyahu? first of all, i have to _ prime minister netanyahu? first of all, i have to remind - prime minister netanyahu? f "st of all, i have to remind to you and the people who listen but i do not represent the state of

israel and probably not the people of israel but if you ask me, yes, i believe that all the generals, by the way, not only in israel, i think that almost worldwide, i know that america and in britain, we know that in this type of war, which is a war between a state and an organisation, we call it, you know, low intensity or asymmetry or whatever we call it, hybrid war, we have to change the definition of victory. we are fighting two types of wars in two dimensions. one is a military war, is a battlefield, and this war, is a battlefield, and this war should have a military means. it war should have a military means. , war should have a military

means. _, means. ifi may, let me come in and ask you _ means. ifi may, let me come in and ask you a — means. ifi may, let me come in and ask you a simple _ means. ifi may, let me come in and ask you a simple question. | and ask you a simple question. this war cannot, will not go on forever. wars do and. when it ends, do you believe... mat ends, do you believe... not this war- — ends, do you believe... not this war. this _ ends, do you believe... not this war. this will _ ends, do you believe... not this war. this will not - ends, do you believe... iirrt this war. this will not end. this is not exactly a war, it is something between, when we say hybrid, the real meaning is it is between crime and what we used to see as war. let it is between crime and what we used to see as war.— used to see as war. let me finish my — used to see as war. let me finish my thoughts. - used to see as war. let me finish my thoughts. you . used to see as war. let me | finish my thoughts. you are saying it is not a war as we think of them in the traditional sense, think of them in the traditionalsense, but think of them in the traditional sense, but if i accept your premise that it isn't necessarily going to and, isn't necessarily going to and, is it, day by day, week by week, as we see the civilian death toll rise, as we see talk of famine in gaza, is it strengthening or weakening hamas? it strengthening or weakening hamas? , , hamas? it is strengthening hamas? it is strengthening hamas step _ hamas? it is strengthening hamas stop because - hamas? it is strengthening hamas stop because we . hamas? it is strengthening hamas stop because we doj hamas? it is strengthening -

hamas stop because we do not understand that there is a huge gap between our major achievement on the battlefield and in the battlefield we are winning every day. if we measure military winning by the number of military instructor, infrastructure, and command centres, and how many warriors or hamas terrorists are we killing, we are winning the war. but the real victory will not be achieved in the military battle in the military battle. it is on the other dimension because the war against terror is a war against an ideal and there is no way to destroy or to defeat an idea by the use of military power.— to defeat an idea by the use of military power.- most - military power. so... most times it — military power. so... most times it is _ military power. so... most times it is totally - military power. so... most| times it is totally different. it is the opposite. there is ——

the mau power use, the deeper the mau power use, the deeper the roots of this ideology within society. so today hamas is increasingly his popularity and his influence within the palestinian society, within the arab society, and within the muslim society.— arab society, and within the muslim society. you know and i know that _ muslim society. you know and i know that the _ muslim society. you know and i know that the international - know that the international court ofjustice has already had a case brought by south africa under the genocide convention. israel rejects any talk of genocide but nonetheless that court is now considering that case. we also in recent days have had reports that international criminal court may be about to indict some seniorfigures in israel on the basis of alleged war crimes. it is indeed possible benjamin netanyahu himself might be named in an icc indictment. how much do these legal manoeuvrings and machinations matter right now?

it does matter. you can see it in israeli newspapers during the last two or three days, it is a major issue. but i'm not sure that it will change the policy of our government. you have to understand that it is a trap. on one hand, we are, after 7 october, the horror, the violence, the way that hamas terrorists celebrated, i don't know, i'm not sure that i have the english vocabulary 80 to describe what we saw and it will take us years to understand what happened to us on 7 october, so we had to respond because the reality on which, in which hamas are

leading more than 2 million palestinians on one side of the fence and we are living on the other side is not acceptable, not acceptable any more. this i not acceptable any more. as i understand — not acceptable any more. as i understand it, _ not acceptable any more. as i understand it, you _ not acceptable any more. as i understand it, you said something important, you've try to capture the horror of what happened to israel 7 october and there is no doubt that israelis were obviously traumatised by that and remain so, but you also right now are saying it would be entirely wrong for is really forces to go into rafah where it is believed that senior hamas commanders and quite possibly yayha sinwar himself who appears to have been the mastermind of 7 october are hiding in the tunnels. you say, no, we shouldn't push with full force into rafah and you also say that there should be a prolonged ceasefire, the prisoner releases should be organised to get the hostages out of gaza, the israeli hostages, who would we believe there are still more than a

hundred, you say that as part of a deal murrawong by gouti who has been imprisoned for so many years now should be released back into the west bank. wouldn't your approach be handing a clear victory to hamas?— handing a clear victory to hamas? ., ., ., , ., ~ handing a clear victory to hamas? ., ., ., ~ ., hamas? no. totally not. we have to understand _ hamas? no. totally not. we have to understand that _ hamas? no. totally not. we have to understand that the _ hamas? no. totally not. we have to understand that the only - hamas? no. totally not. we have to understand that the only way i to understand that the only way to understand that the only way to defeat hamas. hamas is an ideology with an organisation. the military wing of hamas is only the military wing of this ideology. in order to defeat the ideology, we have to present a better ideology. we are fighting in a war of ideas, and the only way to defeat the horror, the violence and the concept, the ideology of hamas which is to create a muslim

state, the sharia is the composition which is not acceptable by the majority of palestinians, is to present a better political horizon for us and for the palestinians. which is the future of two states living side—by—side. so unless we shall do it, it is not, you know, it will not help us. if we shall kill all the hamas leaders, if we shall kill all hamas activists, or the day after, to two palestinians will take a knife and anything to kill and israeli orgy.- kill and israeli orgy. your idea of the _ kill and israeli orgy. your idea of the only - kill and israeli orgy. your idea of the only way - kill and israeli orgy. your idea of the only way out | kill and israeli orgy. your. idea of the only way out of this, which is the two state solution, it is the idea that

drove paris and rabin and arafat to the oslo accords in the early 1990s. it was the dream to live side—by—side in coexistence and that dream conclusively died. you are trying to resuscitate something which is dead.— which is dead. no, it is not. it is which is dead. no, it is not. it is not- — which is dead. no, it is not. it is not. you _ which is dead. no, it is not. it is not. you just _ which is dead. no, it is not. it is not. you just have - which is dead. no, it is not. it is not. you just have to i it is not. you just have to listen to the american president. you have to listen to all the european leaders. you have to listen to all the arab leaders. you have to read the arab peace initiative. so it is a dad only among us in israel. it is only living concept of the welcome acceptable by china, by russia, ijy acceptable by china, by russia, by all the political, you know, community worldwide. so we did not give the answer why it did not give the answer why it did not work, yes, it did work. but

it is because we did many mistakes and the palestinians did many mistakes and we do not analyse, with not try to understand what were the mistakes. the last prime minister who really try to achieve viable solution was sent to jail for corruption. the thing is, you speak with the authority of a very senior member of the security elite, but you don't speak as a guy who appears to have the israeli public on his side. if you look at all the polling of israelis since 7 october, overwhelmingly majority crosstalk show opposition to any notion of an independent palestinian state. visit the netanyahu is clearly opposed to it, his entire cabinet is opposed to it. ida.

cabinet is opposed to it. no. you are totally _ cabinet is opposed to it. firm you are totally wrong. cabinet is opposed to it. i457. you are totally wrong. since 7 october, in all our poles, and i imagining not all of them, we have a poll of about two months ago that says that 83% of the israelis want to see or even demand to see a border between us and the palestinians. so if it will come, it is not because theyjoined the zionist movement or because we love palestinians or we believe that they deserve something, it is because we decided that the option of one state, because we had so much one another, so this another nearly three quarters of a millionjewish israelis live beyond this war that you are imagining as the

border between israel and a palestinian state. and there is no israeli government on earth which appears to have the intent or the will or the capacity to remove those jewish settlers. just a moment. first of all, if you read the last agreement that were not signed between the promised and mahmoud abbas as the palestinian president, the idea is that the border will be based on the green lines, the lines of 1967, and with exchange of territories. so more than 80% of the israeli jews who are living in settlements not far from the borders will be living in the state of israel as a result of this exchange of territories. in addition the mark i know, this is the plan you've worked on with palestinians many years

ago stop i'm not working on anything. this is a planet was accepted by all the arab league states in the arab peace initiative. it was agreed between minister and mumbled a bus as the president of the palestinian authority, and in addition there were, even the statutes and the number of settlers who will decide, who would prefer to stay in palestine once palestine will be created. mr palestine once palestine will be created-— be created. mr netanyahu doesnt be created. mr netanyahu doesn't frame _ be created. mr netanyahu doesn't frame the - be created. mr netanyahu doesn't frame the current| doesn't frame the current security challenge facing israel as a challenge about the palestinians. he does say that if a palestinian state would be a fundamental threat to israeli security, but what he framed it as is part of much bigger picture, existential struggle with iran. i would put it to you that as we just saw days

and weeks ago, direct hostilities between israel and iran, right now the netanyahu narrative that we can only understand hamas as part of and access based in tehran, but is something which is working for him politically inside your country even if you don't like it. , ., ., ~ it. first of all, i don't like it, but this _ it. first of all, i don't like it, but this is, _ it. first of all, i don't like it, but this is, this - it. first of all, i don't like it, but this is, this is - it. first of all, i don't like it, but this is, this is not| it, but this is, this is not important. netanyahu is over. 75% of israelis believe that he should retire, he should leave his position, but yes, among them, several believe he should do it only after the war. and this is why this war will not and because this is the only way for mrs netanyahu to stay in power. but let me say something about iran. we have to understand that there israeli, palestinian conflict is not a conflict between israelis and palestinians anymore. i've said before. it a

regional conflict with a global impact. so we have to understand that iran is taking advantage of our conflict with hamas. so what i suppose and what i suggest is exactly to accept the vision of america, the american president, a greater middle east, and to create and access that will enable us to confront iran and all its proxies. houthis in the south, has below in the north and hamas whatever it is. this is the only way for israel to maintain our security and identity as a jewish democracy. to do it, we have to be a majority in our state, so we have to divide this piece of land and we have to accept the

proposition that was proposed to us by the american president.— to us by the american resident. , �* ., ., president. isn't there another roblem president. isn't there another problem that _ president. isn't there another problem that you _ president. isn't there another problem that you face? - president. isn't there another| problem that you face? we've talked about whether your ideas are attractive to the israeli general public, but we also need to talk about whether your idea of a two state solution is any longer credible or attractive to the palestinian people. and it is interesting to me but again, polls taken 7 october across the west bank and gaza suggest the rise in support for hamas but a complete loss of confidence in the viability of a two state solution and there are many palestinians who would point to people like you and say it's all very well saying we have to return to the two state solution, it's the only option we have, they would say, no, fundamentaljustice, if we're fundamental justice, if we're really fundamentaljustice, if we're really talking about justice, requires us to go the heart of whether zionism is viable in the future, whether we actually have to have a full accounting for happened in 19118 and in

fact we have to have a one state future where jews and arabs live side—by—side in the land from the seat of the jordan river in a secular democracy. why are you laughing?— democracy. why are you laughing? this is a british kind of thought _ laughing? this is a british kind of thought or - laughing? this is a british kind of thought or at - laughing? this is a britishj kind of thought or at least west end. you have to understand thatjudaism and understand that judaism and islam understand thatjudaism and islam never were able to separate religion from statehood. from nationalism. this is part of our identity. we are not likely christians who fought for, i don't know, how many hundreds of years killing i don't know how many millions in the wars between the church and the kings or whatever. the church and the kings or whatever-— the church and the kings or whatever. , . . whatever. judaism... even if ou whatever. judaism... even if you think — whatever. judaism... even if you think it's _ whatever. judaism... even if you think it's impossible - whatever. judaism... even if you think it's impossible to i you think it's impossible to imagine a unitary state where jews and arabs live... because

i see... kuggeleijn. _ jews and arabs live... because i see... kuggeleijn. when - isee... kuggeleijn. when huntington during the 90s came with the idea of war of clashes between civilisations, it was very simplistic. too simplistic. what we see today is clashes within civilisations. in the middle east, to understand the lease, you have to understand that the major, major conflict in the middle east is not the israeli unsolicited conflict. it a conflict between the sheer and sony. we saw what happened in afghanistan, in error, we saw in lebanon, they are killing each other in syria —— shia and sunnl each other in syria —— shia and sunni. the israeli and palestinian conflict has nothing to do with it. people in the middle east are killing each other. so many reasons. for identities. we have to understand that the only way we are not losing, the only way

for all of us, for all palestinians, palestinians want to have a palestinian state and their identity, yes, most of them, 75, 80% of them, they want to see it as a democratic state. but they do not want to lose their identity, the symbols, the language. they're almost out _ symbols, the language. they're almost out of _ symbols, the language. they're almost out of time _ symbols, the language. they're almost out of time and - symbols, the language. they're almost out of time and i - symbols, the language. they're almost out of time and i have . almost out of time and i have to ask you one more basic question. you are three years older than the state of israel. right now the state of israel is not listening to voices like yours. do you believe that your own country right now is on a pathway to potential self—destruction? if it continues on the path it's on right now? if continues on the path it's on right now?— right now? if it continues on the path. — right now? if it continues on the path. yes- _ right now? if it continues on the path, yes. this- right now? if it continues on the path, yes. this will- right now? if it continues on the path, yes. this will be i right now? if it continues on i the path, yes. this will be the end of the zionist dream. i am saying it, iam end of the zionist dream. i am saying it, i am writing about it. the zionist dream is the creation of the state of israel as a jewish democracy. and if

we shall lose our identity and we shall lose our identity and we shall lose our identity and we shall lose our security, this is the end. of the zionist dream. so for me, this is what i am trying, look, israel was created by dreamers who were very, very pragmatic. it was an unusual combination with people who knew how to dream but they knew how to deal with the reality. we are losing, we are losing the idea of how to compete with the reality. and since, we do not know how to dream, we are losing our ability to dream, and we are losing our ability to compete with the reality. and this is a kind of messianic concept that will bring israel to attend.

yes. �* ., . ~' will bring israel to attend. yes. �* ., ., ~ yes. ami ayalon, i thank you forjoining — yes. ami ayalon, i thank you forjoining me _ yes. ami ayalon, i thank you forjoining me on _ yes. ami ayalon, i thank you forjoining me on hardtalk. l forjoining me on hardtalk. thanks. . ~ forjoining me on hardtalk. thanks. ., ~ , ., hello, there. on monday we saw the first signs of some warmer weather, particularly across southeastern parts of the uk in the sunshine, and through the rest of the week it is going to be a warmer week. that's the good news. there is still going to be some rain around as well, mind you, and it's been across western areas, closer to low pressure and these weather fronts that we have seen some further rain, but across the east it is still looking dry on tuesday. see where the colder air is around the back side of that area of low pressure,

but ahead of it we are drawing in a southerly wind and that's going to push the warmth further north on tuesday. we've got a bit more rain though coming into southwest england, wales, for a while across northern ireland, just clipping western parts of scotland, many other eastern areas will be dry. it will cloud over a bit more in east anglia in the southeast, threatening one or two light showers. but with that southerly wind, it's going to be a lot warmer than monday was across the midlands into northern england, and also in scotland with temperatures possibly reaching 16 or 17 degrees here. the cloud coming into the southeast is on that weakening weather front that will push northwards, bringing a little bit of rain on tuesday night, should have moved away by the time we get to wednesday, so some sunshine around on wednesday, a few showers left over from some cold weather fronts, but there is thickening cloud coming in from the continent that will start to bring some rain across the english channel later on in the day. temperature—wise though, not looking too bad at all, really. it's a bit more like it for this time of year. we've got 17 degrees both in glasgow and also in burmingham on wednesday afternoon. but we're going to find an easterly wind picking up

and that brings the risk of some mist and fog around the east coast of scotland, north—east england. if a warmer wind but it's coming in over the cold seas, hence that mist and fog risk here. aside from that, some sunshine in scotland, northern england, perhaps northern ireland for a while, more cloud further south, the chance of a bit more rain around. always going to be a bit cooler on thursday in wales and the southwest of england. it will be cooler along the coast of eastern scotland, but for western scotland temperatures could reach 20 degrees in the highlands. still got that easterly wind as we head towards the end of the week. lower pressure to the south, mind you, and we could see some further pulses of rain or showers coming back into england and wales and into northern ireland. looking drier at this stage across much of scotland. again, that easterly breeze, so the highest temperatures will be again across western scotland, 18 degrees in glasgow, could get higher than that towards the west coast. but cooler where we've got that rain further south. as we head into the bank holiday weekend, this is where the forecast typically gets a rather more difficult. there is not a great

deal of consensus with the computer models. we may well see on saturday some showers or longer spells of rain coming up from the south across england and wales and a bit more cloud this time across western areas of scotland, so temperatures not quite so high on saturday. our preferred model is usually this one here which is going for a wetter scenario through the bank holiday weekend. it may be a little bit too extreme. it may be a little bit focusing on the rain too much but it is hinting at some lower pressure, so showers around probably over the bank holiday weekend. beyond that, we may see the weather changing back again and it may be turning a bit drier as well. and that's because the low pressures that we will see for a while tend to get pushed away and this blocking high pressure extends down from scandinavia. but a lot of uncertainty in the forecast over the bank holiday weekend.

live from london. this is bbc news. renewed hopes of a ceasefire in gaza as hamas say they'll

respond to israel's offer. columbia university begins suspending students involved in pro—palestinian protests. four police officers are killed after an hours—long standoff in north carolina. and king charles returns to public engagements today with a visit to a cancer treatment centre. hello, i'm sally bundock. we start in the middle east. there are renewed hopes of a breakthrough in the ceasefire negotiations between israel and hamas after weeks of stalemate between the two sides. a hamas delegation has reportedly left cairo and will return with a response to a gaza ceasefire proposal. it is unclear how many israeli hostages would be released

under this proposal — the israeli media has put