:00:09. > :00:10.Hello, I'm Ros Atkins, this is Outside Source.
:00:11. > :00:12.Russia and the West are at loggerheads over
:00:13. > :00:14.who was responsible for the Syria chemical attack that
:00:15. > :00:23.The turning point of the use of chemical weapons in Syria
:00:24. > :00:25.was the establishment by the previous US administration
:00:26. > :00:31.If Russia had been fulfilling its responsibility, there would not
:00:32. > :00:40.even be any chemical weapons left for the Syrian regime to use.
:00:41. > :00:41.We've also heard from President Trump.
:00:42. > :00:44.I will tell you, it's already happened, that my attitude
:00:45. > :00:47.toward Syria and Assad has changed very much.
:00:48. > :00:49.Mr Trump's controversial chief strategist Steve Bannon has
:00:50. > :00:52.been removed from the US National Security Council.
:00:53. > :00:56.We'll be live in Washington to find out why.
:00:57. > :00:59.The European Parliament has set out its priorities for Brexit.
:01:00. > :01:02.And there were some heated exchanges along the way.
:01:03. > :01:05.We'll talk to Chris Morris about that.
:01:06. > :01:08.And don't forget you can get in touch with questions about any
:01:09. > :01:15.of the stories we're covering using the hashtag #BBCOS.
:01:16. > :01:26.All our contact details are on screen throughout the programme.
:01:27. > :01:28.Faced with the horror of Syrian children dying
:01:29. > :01:31.from a suspected nerve agent, the world's most powerful countries
:01:32. > :01:36.have not been spurred into unified action.
:01:37. > :01:42.This video show scenes the world was supposed to have
:01:43. > :01:56.Those affected by this chemical attack in northern Syria are given
:01:57. > :01:58.assistance. According to one monitoring group,
:01:59. > :02:00.72 people were killed. The argument here is not about
:02:01. > :02:04.whether there was an air strike. It's not about whether
:02:05. > :02:06.or not the suffering It's about where those
:02:07. > :02:11.chemicals came from. And America and Russia,
:02:12. > :02:13.with all their might and all their intelligence
:02:14. > :02:15.operations, have two quite distinct The Americans blame
:02:16. > :02:20.the Syrian government. And they can't agree on a UN
:02:21. > :02:37.Security Council statement. So no response to the horrors we
:02:38. > :02:48.have seen in these videos. Let me play you the views of all sides,
:02:49. > :02:53.first Donald Trump. At attack on children yesterday had a big impact
:02:54. > :02:57.on me, a big impact. That is a horrible thing. I have been watching
:02:58. > :03:03.and seeing it and it does not get any worse than not. And I have a
:03:04. > :03:08.flexibility and it is very, very possible, and I will tell you, it
:03:09. > :03:18.has already happened, that my attitude towards Syria and Assad has
:03:19. > :03:22.changed very much. This is the US ambassador to the UN. How many more
:03:23. > :03:30.children have to died before Russia cares? The United States sees
:03:31. > :03:34.yesterday's attack as a disgrace at the highest level, an assurance that
:03:35. > :03:39.humanity means nothing to the Syrian government. The question members of
:03:40. > :03:45.this council must ask themselves is this -- if we are not able to
:03:46. > :03:50.enforce resolutions preventing the use of chemical weapons, what does
:03:51. > :03:55.that say for our chances of ending the broader conflict in Syria? What
:03:56. > :04:01.does that say of our ability to bring relief to the Syrian people?
:04:02. > :04:06.If we are not able to enforce resolutions preventing the use of
:04:07. > :04:07.chemical weapons, what does that say about our effectiveness in this
:04:08. > :04:09.institution? The ambassador to the UK said that
:04:10. > :04:12.Syria had humiliated Russia by making a mockery of the peace
:04:13. > :04:15.process it had brokered. The Syrian government denies ever
:04:16. > :04:36.using chemical weapons. TRANSLATION: Everything is geared,
:04:37. > :04:39.everything is guided by the need to change regime. This obsession with
:04:40. > :04:45.raging changes what hinders the work of the Security Council. -- this
:04:46. > :04:49.obsession with regime changes. You're trying to have the Security
:04:50. > :04:56.Council give the cover of legitimacy to your illegitimate plans.
:04:57. > :05:00.You should not try to introduce discord to our relationships with
:05:01. > :05:04.the people of Syria, the people of Iraq and others in the Middle East.
:05:05. > :05:10.I thought big UK had long ago abandoned these tactics. So once
:05:11. > :05:13.again I repeat that without truly uniting our efforts through
:05:14. > :05:17.collective action, we will not resolve the problem of the Syrian
:05:18. > :05:23.conflict or the problem of sectarianism.
:05:24. > :05:32.These are long-standing issues at the UN, given fresh urgency by this
:05:33. > :05:36.attack. After a suspected chemical attack in 2013, President Obama said
:05:37. > :05:40.a red line had been crossed. That led to an argument with Russia for
:05:41. > :05:45.Syria to destroy its stockpiles of the weapons. This is a BBC article
:05:46. > :05:51.from 2014 about all of the weapons supposedly removed from Syria.
:05:52. > :05:57.Evidently someone still has some. Nada Tawfik is live from the UN.
:05:58. > :06:01.Let's take it from the Russian side, Howard a defending their repeated
:06:02. > :06:08.blocking of any resolution on this? -- how are they defending? The UK
:06:09. > :06:11.Ambassador Matthew Wright Croft as the Russian ambassador back
:06:12. > :06:17.question. He said what is Russia's plan now after, as you say, repeated
:06:18. > :06:23.resolution vetoes, the seven vetoes in the Security Council. The Russian
:06:24. > :06:28.ambassador said their plan is to continue to fight terrorism, that is
:06:29. > :06:34.how they have been framing what they see as a key problem in the Syrian
:06:35. > :06:38.conflict. That is in direct conflict to the Western powers on the
:06:39. > :06:41.Security Council who say that this attack and other chemical weapons
:06:42. > :06:49.attacks have the hallmark of President Assad. We heard a dramatic
:06:50. > :06:54.statement from the US ambassador, Nikki Haley, who got up out of her
:06:55. > :06:58.seat in the UN security council and held pictures of children who had
:06:59. > :07:02.died chewing this attack and said we cannot look at these faces and
:07:03. > :07:08.ignore that problem any longer. She turned directly to the Russian
:07:09. > :07:12.ambassador and said how many children have to died before Russia
:07:13. > :07:16.cares. It was a really powerful moment but is again showed the deep
:07:17. > :07:22.divisions that we continue to have on the security council and any
:07:23. > :07:27.progress on passing a resolution which would hold those responsible
:07:28. > :07:33.for these attacks and recount. With the American said black and the
:07:34. > :07:38.Russian said White, who at the UN thrashes out what actually happens?
:07:39. > :07:43.It means that nothing happens. We continue to have the inaction we
:07:44. > :07:46.have had, this conflict is entering its seventh year. US Ambassador
:07:47. > :07:51.Nikki Haley basically warned at the end of her statement that if the UN
:07:52. > :07:56.cannot collectively, and decide on the unified approach, it would be
:07:57. > :08:00.time for the US and other members on the Security Council to take their
:08:01. > :08:05.own action. We have heard a lot from member states who have said that
:08:06. > :08:08.Russia, Iran, those who have basically said they are the
:08:09. > :08:18.guarantors of the ceasefire in Syria had to continue to use their sway on
:08:19. > :08:21.President Assad. Others frame this in the case of fighting terrorism,
:08:22. > :08:27.but all of those unilateral actions and I think the key here will be how
:08:28. > :08:31.President Trump approaches the Syria conflict. He has criticised
:08:32. > :08:36.President Obama this setting a red line and emboldening President Assad
:08:37. > :08:40.by not doing much. This chemical attack has certainly changed his
:08:41. > :08:44.calculus, President Trump has said that but his foreign policy is still
:08:45. > :08:51.unclear and lots of people at the UN are hoping to see a stronger US
:08:52. > :08:53.response. We appreciate that. Thanks for taking us through that.
:08:54. > :08:57.The attack happened in the town called Khan Sheikhoun.
:08:58. > :09:03.It's in Idlib province which is held by the rebels.
:09:04. > :09:04.Medics say the victims' symptoms are consistent
:09:05. > :09:15.And this is a tweet from a UK-trained doctor,
:09:16. > :09:18.Shajul Islam, who is in Syria as an aid worker.
:09:19. > :09:20."Do u still doubt that #Sarin is being used on us?
:09:21. > :09:34.I'll show you what he means - he also posted this video.
:09:35. > :09:36.This person has very, very small pinprick pupils.
:09:37. > :09:38.Pinprick pupils are a common symptom of exposure
:09:39. > :09:42.The horror of this attack - and the international row
:09:43. > :09:44.that's followed it - has overshadowed a conference
:09:45. > :09:59.in Brussels aimed at funding and co-ordinating aid for Syria.
:10:00. > :10:09.Chief international correspondent Lyse Doucet, who has recently been
:10:10. > :10:14.in Syria, was there. The meeting was arranged before the
:10:15. > :10:19.latest atrocity to be discussing the future of Syria, including the very
:10:20. > :10:23.delicate question about when can funds start to be provided, to start
:10:24. > :10:28.rebuilding Syria. What has happened in the last 24 hours has emphasised
:10:29. > :10:32.again that it is very hard, if not politically impossible, to start
:10:33. > :10:34.rebuilding when the war continues and with such devastating effect.
:10:35. > :10:40.One after another the world leaders arrived this morning, the
:10:41. > :10:42.consequences of the chemical attack, the repercussions of it, the
:10:43. > :10:47.casualties it has caused was at the top of their minds, they have called
:10:48. > :10:50.for a thorough investigation and warned there will be consequences,
:10:51. > :10:54.the same thing will happen tonight in New York at the UN Security
:10:55. > :10:57.Council, but the fundamental question is what will be done about
:10:58. > :11:01.it. What will be done to make sure this time will be done rather than
:11:02. > :11:10.the other times when nothing happened.
:11:11. > :11:15.Thanks, Lyse Doucet. Steve Bannon is one of Donald Trump's most trusted
:11:16. > :11:16.advisers, his chief strategist, no less.
:11:17. > :11:18.Steven Bannon has been removed from his position
:11:19. > :11:21.His original appointment to the council was met
:11:22. > :11:26.Jeff Stein is the national security correspondent at Newsweek.
:11:27. > :11:33.Thank you for your time, many people predicted this, did you see it
:11:34. > :11:37.coming? No, I don't think many people saw it coming but there is a
:11:38. > :11:44.lot of chaos in the White House so we just can't predict, day to day or
:11:45. > :11:48.hour to hour, what will happen. Trump's some time confidant, Roger
:11:49. > :11:54.Stone, had been tweeting or writing in the last 24 hours that Jared
:11:55. > :12:02.Kushner, the son-in-law of the president, had been trying to oust
:12:03. > :12:08.Bannon from the security committee, I think you have the right church on
:12:09. > :12:13.the wrong pew. It appears to be the general McMaster, the head of the
:12:14. > :12:18.National Security Council, got a piece of gum out of his hair in
:12:19. > :12:21.removing Steve Bannon from the principal's committee of the
:12:22. > :12:25.National Security Council. Some people would describe this as
:12:26. > :12:31.flexibility and willingness to listen from the president, others
:12:32. > :12:36.say it is weakness in his inability to hold a position. What is your
:12:37. > :12:43.analysis? I don't buy into that. I would say this change somewhat
:12:44. > :12:48.cosmetic. It removes some annoyance, the International Security Council,
:12:49. > :12:55.in that Bannon could sit in and bring a political points. He will
:12:56. > :12:59.still be up political adviser in the Oval Office and know what is going
:13:00. > :13:02.on in the NSE. Moreover the White House is putting out a cover story
:13:03. > :13:06.about this saying that he never attended any of the National
:13:07. > :13:11.Security Council meetings, they say that his work was done there, his
:13:12. > :13:15.principal job was to keep an eye on the ousted national security adviser
:13:16. > :13:22.Michael Flynn. Why he needed to keep an eye on general Flynn is not
:13:23. > :13:27.explained. It is hard to pass. I think we will have to let the dust
:13:28. > :13:31.settle and see how this plays out. Some would see this as the latest
:13:32. > :13:35.stage in an interesting relationship between Mr Trump and the security
:13:36. > :13:38.establishment and the Republican establishment. Would this be one
:13:39. > :13:45.push back the security establishment? I think there is
:13:46. > :13:52.almost giddy joy right here in the swamp, which is to say the permanent
:13:53. > :13:53.establishments in the intelligence community currently intelligence
:13:54. > :13:59.agencies and the Department the feds. There is some relief on
:14:00. > :14:05.Capitol Hill, mainstream Republican senators like John McCain will be
:14:06. > :14:12.overjoyed at this news. It is a pushback. There is an intense desire
:14:13. > :14:16.on behalf of mainstream Republicans, not to mention Democrats, to bring
:14:17. > :14:22.order and cohesion to the national security question. Lots of that will
:14:23. > :14:27.depend on the president, what he tweets, if he quiets down and lets
:14:28. > :14:30.the normal process of diplomacy and the deliberations of the National
:14:31. > :14:38.Security Council take their course, as per usual. This shake-up, as it
:14:39. > :14:41.has been called, I'm not sure if it is to return to the status quo here
:14:42. > :14:52.in Washington. Thank you for your time. In a couple of minutes we will
:14:53. > :14:57.look at some of the heated exchanges in the European Parliament, not so
:14:58. > :14:58.much featuring Jean-Claude Junker Bert Nigel Farage and Guy
:14:59. > :15:00.Verhofstadt. Labour's ruling body
:15:01. > :15:01.the National Executive Committee will review Ken Livingstone's status
:15:02. > :15:04.in the party after his comments about Hitler and Zionism
:15:05. > :15:06.and his suspension for another year. been grossly insensitive,
:15:07. > :15:16.and he has caused deep offence But Jenny Manson, a Labour Party
:15:17. > :15:20.member who is Jewish, and gave evidence at Mr Livingstone's
:15:21. > :15:23.tribunal says she doesn't think the former London Mayor's
:15:24. > :15:37.comments were anti-Semitic. There is a Jewish tradition of
:15:38. > :15:42.justice, and a very important national tradition of free speech.
:15:43. > :15:47.In my view, nothing Ken Livingstone has said or done has been
:15:48. > :15:51.anti-Semitic. As to mentioning Hitler and Zionism, it may offend
:15:52. > :15:56.some people, but I have been offended by something is such as
:15:57. > :16:00.describing their being rampant anti-Semitism in the Labour Party.
:16:01. > :16:08.-- I have been offended by some things such as.
:16:09. > :16:11.This is Outside Source live from the BBC newsroom.
:16:12. > :16:15.Russia and the West have clashed over who is responsible for a deadly
:16:16. > :16:21.gas attack in Syria which left 70 people dead.
:16:22. > :16:27.The Russians blame rebels, the Americans and the allies blame the
:16:28. > :16:29.Syrian Government. Russia's Supreme Court
:16:30. > :16:31.is considering whether to ban the Jehovah's Witnesses religious
:16:32. > :16:32.movement. They would be the first registered
:16:33. > :16:35.religious movement since the Soviet Ecuador's President-Elect has told
:16:36. > :16:45.Julian Assange to stop meddling in the country's politics
:16:46. > :16:47.after he mocked a rival candidate who had vowed to expel him
:16:48. > :16:54.from the London embassy. Pepsi have removed their brand
:16:55. > :16:57.new commercial from YouTube and are halting any further roll-out
:16:58. > :17:00.of the campaign following The ad featuring Kendal Jenner drew
:17:01. > :17:04.criticism from some civil rights advocates said it trivialized recent
:17:05. > :17:16.unrest across the US. The European Parliament has set
:17:17. > :17:21.out its non-negotiables on Brexit. They include equal rights
:17:22. > :17:34.for EU citizens in the UK If you want to get full details,
:17:35. > :17:42.there is a press release on this website. It tells that it has ruled
:17:43. > :17:45.out making any decision on trade with the UK ahead of settling other
:17:46. > :17:48.terms and Brexit. Some of the Parliament's main
:17:49. > :17:51.characters were to the fore - You think we are a
:17:52. > :18:19.hostage, we are not. TRANSLATION: I am trying to give you
:18:20. > :18:23.the chance to speak and 71 to say, that if you're going to speak about
:18:24. > :18:31.the matter, I find that unacceptable.
:18:32. > :18:35.APPLAUSE I do understand, Mr President,
:18:36. > :18:37.National sensitivities. I will change it to gangsters. And
:18:38. > :18:40.that is how we are being treated. Next Mr Farage's long-time foe,
:18:41. > :18:52.European Parliament lead I am convinced in 100% sure about
:18:53. > :18:55.one thing, that there will be one day or another, dear colleagues,
:18:56. > :19:01.that there will be a young man or a young woman who will try again. Who
:19:02. > :19:06.will lead Britain again into the European family once again.
:19:07. > :19:12.APPLAUSE And a young generation...
:19:13. > :19:18.APPLAUSE A young generation that will see
:19:19. > :19:25.Brexit for what it really is. A catfight in the Conservative party
:19:26. > :19:33.that got out of hand. A loss of time, a waste of energy and, I
:19:34. > :19:34.think, a stupidity. Both men are nothing if not consistent.
:19:35. > :19:36.Guy Verhofstadt is the lead Brexit negotiator for
:19:37. > :19:40.Earlier I got some analysis from Chris Morris.
:19:41. > :19:42.I asked whether any of this mattered, given
:19:43. > :19:44.the European Parliament wouldn't actually be involved
:19:45. > :19:52.It matters that eventually the parliament has a real role in this.
:19:53. > :19:56.For the next 18 months or so you could say there will be shouting
:19:57. > :19:59.from the sidelines of it because they are not at the negotiating
:20:00. > :20:04.table when Britain and the EU sit in a room together. But eventually they
:20:05. > :20:10.get vote on the separation agreement, so smart people on the EU
:20:11. > :20:13.side and in the UK Government know they have to key Parliament onside
:20:14. > :20:18.because they can create trouble. They have just sent out a few
:20:19. > :20:22.warning shots saying we are watching this, this and this, don't forget
:20:23. > :20:27.us. Three elements of what was said, one is the insistence that we will
:20:28. > :20:30.negotiate the withdrawal and then the future relationship. In reality,
:20:31. > :20:36.aren't those two going to intertwine? To a future extent, but
:20:37. > :20:40.that there Adjapong is what we saw from the European Council, the draft
:20:41. > :20:45.guidelines produced by Donald Tusk. There is an insistence on the
:20:46. > :20:50.European side that we have to do those things first, look at money,
:20:51. > :20:54.the divorce Bill, the status of EU citizens in the UK and UK citizens
:20:55. > :20:58.in Europe. Ireland has been mentioned. You are essentially
:20:59. > :21:03.creating a new external border for the EU with what will be a third
:21:04. > :21:06.country, we know the sensitivities of the border between the Republic
:21:07. > :21:10.of violence in Northern Ireland as part of the peace process. If we
:21:11. > :21:14.can't create that sense of trust between the two parties, how can we
:21:15. > :21:17.know where we will go with the future relationship, not just on
:21:18. > :21:20.trade but on a whole host of other things? The UK want to talk about
:21:21. > :21:24.trade straightaway because that is what it is all about in the end, but
:21:25. > :21:30.I do not think the EU will stick to that. We saw another sharp exchange
:21:31. > :21:34.between Nigel Farage and some of his colleagues in parliaments, does any
:21:35. > :21:37.of that impact on how the parliamentarians do the British
:21:38. > :21:41.Government or do they see the two as quite separate which, of course,
:21:42. > :21:45.they are? I think they see them separately. We need to bear in mind,
:21:46. > :21:49.as the process goes on, we will get to massive stumbling blocks and
:21:50. > :21:52.crises but on both sides the governments genuinely want to reach
:21:53. > :22:05.a deal. Some people around the margins probably don't and probably
:22:06. > :22:07.would not mind if the whole thing fell apart, but the governments want
:22:08. > :22:10.to reach a deal and we should remember that when we talk about a
:22:11. > :22:12.crisis in the talks, they will push very hard to reach and sort of
:22:13. > :22:15.arrangements. They are neighbours, they had to get on in the long term,
:22:16. > :22:17.they will not turn into enemies. It will be very hard disentangling this
:22:18. > :22:25.incredibly complex relationship, but they will try very hard to get it
:22:26. > :22:27.done. You will be aware that Donald Trump wants to build a wall along
:22:28. > :22:28.the border with Mexico. The deadline has passed
:22:29. > :22:30.for those companies wanting to build Donald Trump's wall
:22:31. > :22:32.on the Mexico border. It's reported hundreds of companies
:22:33. > :22:34.have submitted bids. Only a few will now be selected
:22:35. > :22:46.to build prototypes. Let's bring in Michelle Fleury, live
:22:47. > :22:51.from New York. The figures involved, the amount of money you could make
:22:52. > :22:56.from it are pretty sizeable? Estimates of the cost of the full
:22:57. > :22:59.wall range from $12 billion to more than 20 billion. To be clear, the
:23:00. > :23:04.part companies are bidding on right now, the deadline you are there
:23:05. > :23:10.into, this is to build a prototype and we are told by officials that it
:23:11. > :23:17.will be constructed in the San Diego area, that would cost closer to 200
:23:18. > :23:27.or five in bears and each, not the full sum of money. -- close to 200
:23:28. > :23:29.or 500,000 each. Several companies have lots of ideas about what the
:23:30. > :23:34.potential border wall could look like. How does that scale up to the
:23:35. > :23:45.point where the whole thing gets done? Just this small area, some of
:23:46. > :23:49.the ideas involved, from what we understand, because the process at
:23:50. > :23:53.the moment is fairly secretive, as is normal, I should point out, what
:23:54. > :23:59.we understand from some companies there is talk of a solar wall, a
:24:00. > :24:02.sustainable structure built out of recycled shipping containers. What
:24:03. > :24:07.that looks like translated across the whole border is hard to see.
:24:08. > :24:11.Forget the engineering challenges, you have the political challenges,
:24:12. > :24:20.who will pay for it? It is not yet clear, that has not been agreed.
:24:21. > :24:23.Donald Trump has made a huge deal about building a border wall on his
:24:24. > :24:25.campaign Trail but has not yet got agreement from legislators as to
:24:26. > :24:29.whether money will come from. There are lots of unanswered questions,
:24:30. > :24:35.the only thing we know for sure at the moment is the focus on the
:24:36. > :24:38.prototype, I guess it is one step at a time.
:24:39. > :24:39.Thank you, Michelle. I suspect we will talk about that for quite a
:24:40. > :24:42.while. German ministers have approved plans
:24:43. > :24:45.to fine social media firms up to $53 million if they don't remove
:24:46. > :24:47.fake news and hate The new law would give companies
:24:48. > :24:51.just 24 hours to block content Our technology desk editor
:24:52. > :25:04.Leo Kelion explains. Germany already has very tough laws
:25:05. > :25:08.against people who post hate speech. If you deny the Holocaust, for
:25:09. > :25:11.example, you can face a prison sentence. The issue is there is not
:25:12. > :25:17.a lot of prosecutions in those online cases and the Government once
:25:18. > :25:21.the social media companies to do more to take it down. Under the new
:25:22. > :25:24.rules, what you would find is that if something was obviously criminal
:25:25. > :25:32.they would have to take it down in a day, after seven days if the post is
:25:33. > :25:36.offensive but needs a little bit of investigation. That will take a lot
:25:37. > :25:41.of people to investigate. Facebook was saying they have around 700
:25:42. > :25:43.people in the country. The concern in the statement that they gave to
:25:44. > :25:48.us was that they should not be the ones judging what is or is not
:25:49. > :25:51.against the rules, but should be up to the courts or some other
:25:52. > :25:57.regulator. Thanks to Leo. I will be back in a couple of