26/11/2015 World News Today


The latest national and international news, exploring the day's events from a global perspective.

Similar Content

Browse content similar to 26/11/2015. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



This is BBC World News Today. The headline. David Cameron sets out the


case for the UK bombing the so-called Islamic State in sites


area. He told a parliamentary debate that doing so it's not only morally


right but also in the interests of national security. We have to hit


these terrorists in their heartlands right now. We must not shirk our


responsibility for security or hand it to others. In Moscow the French


President is meeting Vladimir Putin to push for a stronger Coalition


against Islamic State. Coming up... Pope Francis celebrates Mass in


Nairobi, thousands braved torrential rain to see him and Donald Trump is


under fire at this time for marking a disabled New York Times reporter.


Hello and welcome. Efforts to build a stronger Coalition against the


so-called Islamic State have been given a new urgency following the


Paris attacks. In London David Cameron told MPs that Britain has a


moral duty to do more and leading the charge for stronger military


action against IS militants, the French President is on a


globetrotting mission. He is in talks with President Putin in Moscow


who says their interests coincide. Francois Hollande began on Monday


with two meetings in Paris, the first with David Cameron and after


that he received at the President of the European Council. On Tuesday, he


flew to Washington with that Racal for talks with President Obama. He


was then visited by Angela Merkel and earlier on Thursday he met the


Italian feminist. Bringing in the current Moscow trip, the French


President will have met three different leaders in four days. As


we mentioned, the British Prime Minister has been making the case


for UK military action in Parliament. The reason for acting is


the very direct threat that IS poses to our country and our way of life.


Isil have attacked Ankara, Beirut and Paris as well as the likely


blowing up of a Russian plane with 224 people on board. They have


already taken the lives of British hostages and inspired the worst


terrorist attack against British people since July the 7th on the


beaches of Tunisia. Crucially they have repeatedly tried to attack us


right here in Britain. In the last 12 months, our police and security


services have disrupted no fewer than seven terrorist plots to attack


the UK. Every one of which was either linked to Isil or inspired by


the propaganda. I am in no doubt that it is in our national interest


for action to be taken to stop them and stopping them means taking


action in Syria because that is where their headquarters is. Within


the past hour or so the Leader of the Opposition Labour Party, Jeremy


Corbyn has issued a statement saying he cannot endorse REF air strikes in


Syria and his stand is soaring up something of a furious row in Labour


and throws into doubt the timetable for any British involvement. If that


does happen, what impact good British military action have and


would it make this country a bigger target for terror attacks? Ask your


tea correspondent has this assessment.


Syria hasn't always been at war. Just five years ago it was a popular


tourist destination. Ruled by a largely unpopular regime.


Then came the Arab Spring. It started as a peaceful protest by


unarmed civilians, calling for an end to ash tear arrests and torture.


But President Assad's regime responded with bullets and tanks and


more torture. By April 2011, the popular up rising was already


turning violent. New rebel groups emerged, including radical


It became a Civil War. In 2013, Assad's forces were widely


blamed for a mass poisonous gas attack. Over 1,000 people died. In


2014, the so-called Islamic State seized large parts of Iraq and


Syria. US-led air strikes on the group began. Britain joined in but


only in Iraq. So does it make military sense to now extend British


action into Syria? The military plan is credible in military terms and


Britain does have something to contribute as the weapons are


accurate, they can be used in a discriminating way. But Britain is


not in a position to add huge numbers of aircraft or sorties.


Syria has had air strikes for more than four years as rival forces


battle for control of territory. The Syrian government is clinging to


pockets of land shown in red. Then the rebel groups, moderate and


radical, shown in light red. The Kurdish forces in yellow, have been


fighting against Islamic State, their forces are shown in orange,


they are spread across the border into Iraq where Britain is already


bombing them. In Syria, the RAF can only conduct surveillance. If


that now changes to British air strikes in Syria, what could go


wrong? Many things could go wrong. There are so many steps that have to


follow in sequence and as we have seen with the downing of the Russian


warplane, that is the kind of thing that can occur and throw


off plan. Then there is the terrorist threat


here in Britain. IS already want to target this


country. But after such a public debate over


air strikes, they are thought likely to want to step up their efforts.


Let us get more about those who are seeking to step up their efforts,


the current meeting of the French and Russian presidents, both dealing


with the aftermath of terrorist attacks. I have been talking to our


Moscow correspondent about what Francois Hollande and Vladimir Putin


are trying to achieve. Acting work closely together is what they are


trying to achieve and that is what both men said as they spoke before


they headed into their meeting. President Putin talking about Russia


being ready to work together with France as part of a broader


Coalition in Syria against Isil militants. He said that was


necessary and Russia's position and that of France: Side. Both men


highlighting the fact that both countries have been victims of


serious terrorist attacks in recent weeks. Russia suffered an attack on


a plane from Egypt and France saw the attacks in Paris. They stress


that that compelled them to unite forces against what has been


described as a common threat and President Putin describes it as a


common evil. What they can actually do in practical terms, it is


difficult to know exactly how much intelligence could be shared, how


much proper coordination on the ground there could be, particularly


as we know there are such differences particularly between


Russia now and Turkey. The situation with Turkey shooting down a Russian


fighter jet involved in Syria has complicated the situation. The talk


between Ankara and Moscow is very strong, the rhetoric extremely


strong, Russia including -- accusing Ankara of siding with terrorists. I


think that makes things more complicated even though President


Putin says he is committed to a common fight against IS. You are


right to point that out. It has been complicated to talk about peace


efforts in Syria but I suppose this is a meeting where the two men will


agree that there needs to be a transition, a post President Assad


Syria, at least pictured and some common ground there. That is


something that Moscow has been working towards for some time.


Certainly the Syrian Foreign Minister will be here tomorrow


meeting with the Russian Foreign Minister. Russia has been pushing


for a political solution inside Syria and the problem is over recent


months about how the sides see that. I think it is important to point out


that Russia has been stressing that it is not wedded to President Assad


as the only possible solution in Syria. It has been saying quite


clearly that there needs to be a transition there and that President


Assad can go. That brings Russia closer to the position of the West


if you like and of the French President who previously said that


there was no way that President Assad could stay in power because he


has been described as a rallying force for jihadist inside Syria.


Position seem to have come together in terms of the future of President


Assad but it is to move towards any kind of peace and to decide who will


be around the negotiating table for any kind kind of political talks. As


world leaders talk about Syria and intensifying the air campaign


against IS, a big question remains about what follows. I heard from our


chief international correspondent that it is doubted that an air


campaign without ground troops can succeed. There has been an air


campaign for the past year. It has made a difference in the sense that


the Pentagon says that 20,000 members of the so-called Islamic


State have been killed including top commanders. They had taken some


territory but they have not pushed back Islamic State. The head of the


campaign said it is a battle of ideas and the idea of Islamic State


is no less brilliant for those who want to follow, its brutal tactics


and anti-American and Arab state rhetoric. What can we do? You cannot


win from the air, the air campaign is not intensive enough and they


have not been hitting and they have not been hitting enough all at the?


It is more intensive since the Paris attacks and the Russian airliner was


brought down. You need boots on the ground but who will lay the? Western


countries do not want boots on the ground but Arab states have not been


lining up. The problem is everyone has a different enemy. Yes Islamic


State is an enemy of all, but are lot of the Arab Gulf leaders are


saying we are more worried about Iran and Yemen. Our battles are


there. They are engaged in the war in Yemen. Turkey is worried about


the Kurds. This is it. I spoke to some senior American officials and


said who are you going to use? They said the Kurdish fighters who have


been affected against IS on the Turkish border. If the Kurdish


forces move down, Turkey is going to protest about that as will other


opposition groups who are very well armed, because it is not just


Islamic State on the battlefield, there are a number of groups linked


to Al-Qaeda as well as the so-called moderates. Religious tolerance, that


is what Pope Francis is calling for as he continues his tour of Africa.


He held a mass at the university of Nairobi amid tight security with


police and soldiers deployed and he met Muslim and Christian leaders in


Kenya. Our correspondent reports from Nairobi. There was an energetic


welcome for Pope Francis, despite the heavy rain and tight security,


which limited the number of people gathering for a mass at the


university of Nairobi. Thousands came to hear him speak, but not the


1.5 million bikini and government have been predicting. Does


nation-macro I am happy for the Pope to be in Africa and Kenya for the


first time. He has chosen the right time to be here were we are facing a


lot of challenges, corruption being one of them. It is his first trip to


Africa, Kenya is just the first stop in the three country pilgrimage


which will also take into Uganda and the Central African Republic. He was


received by the President and went on to make a live address, televised


the nation. All men and women of good will are called to walk for


reconciliation and peace. It was a theme that continued in his early


morning meeting with religious leaders from different faiths. He


made reference to the attacks by Islamist extremists in Kenya and


urged that religion not be used to justify hate and violence. He used


his master talk about family values, a popular theme in line with the


Conservative views of the African Catholic churches and he spoke to


the excesses of corruption. It has been 20 years since a Pope last came


to Kenya. Pope John Paul II came here and a lot has changed in the


world since then. Today the messages are about preventing young people


from being radicalised, about tolerance of religions and about


climate change. Just days before the Paris conference, he used his


longest speech of the day and his strongest words to address the


United Nations on climate change. TRANSLATION: We are confronted with


a choice that cannot be ignored, either to improve or destroy the


environment. Pope Francis will be visiting a slum and speaking at a


sports stadium on Friday before heading on to the next leg of his


trip to Uganda. As the Pope is very aware, diplomats and climate experts


are arriving in Paris next week the back key UN conference on climate


change. They will not be far from a country were global warming is


materialised in front of our eyes. Scientist warned that all of the


large masses of ice in the Swiss Alps will have almost vanished by


the end of the century if greenhouse emissions continue to rise at


current rates. Doctor David Vulcan explains why he believes the world


should be paying more attention. Hi. I'm an expert. Do not switch


off. Over the next couple of minutes I'm going to explain to you how this


great mass of ice behind me is melting at an alarming rate and why


the planet -- the people at the climate conference in Paris must sit


up and pay attention. So, let us start by looking at how this play


she has receded. This village is currently below but they sure but in


1600, the eyes came all the way to this point. By 1856 it had melted


back around 300 metres and by 2010 it had receded by around 2000


metres, all the way up to the off the rock on the mountain you can see


here. This photo taking in 1890, look again, now nothing is left but


a scar in the rock. So, what happens to all the melting ice? Take a look


at this. The glacial lake, it formed over the last ten years and holds 10


million litres of water, water that will add to the rising global sea


levels. You can hear water. So much water here. You can see here, a lot


of water at the beginning of November, it is not normal, it is


crazy. Here you can see, face-to-face, the climate change.


So, in conclusion, areas will have almost vanished by the end of the


century. Also diplomats in Paris will not be able to reverse rising


temperatures. They must negotiate a new agreement to cope with the


consequences of our changing climate. As part of the BBC's 100


women season today we are looking at the issue of child marriage and we


are meeting one young woman in Zambia who was forced into marriage


at 15 to a man who was 20 years older, despite years of abuse, she


does manage to change her life and this is her story. I am a child


marriage survive. I got married off by my father at the age of 15. This


is a district in Zambia. At that time, my father was experiencing


financial troubles and then he thought marrying me off would at


least be able to give him something to quench the problem that he was


going through. My payment was about 300 in our currency. That was my


bride price. By now it can be around 30 US dollars. I was married off, I


had to drop out of school and join my husband who was 20 years older


than me. My life in the hands of Batman was very miserable, because


he's subjected me to a number of abuses. Physical, emotional and


sexual. Sexual urges, he used to abuses. Physical, emotional and


painful. I resigned myself to abuses. Physical, emotional and


kind of life because I did not know what to do. This tradition puts us


down. You are taught never to raise your voice against a man, whether


they are treating you well or not. You are told to keep everything,


what ever you are going to -- went through, the beatings, whatever


you're going through in the matrimonial highs, you do not


disclose it to any person. You keep it to yourself, the moment I went


back to school, I saw, whatever may be, I was suffering because I did


not have an education. I really used to admire people who did. For that


reason, I thought, if I can have an education, what ever I am going


through right now, would come to an end. I wanted to go back to school.


I thought when I had an education, it would be better. He intensified


the abuse. He stripped me naked, beat the naked outside world by


everyone in the community would see. You hold a lot of talks to talk


about child marriage to a lot of people, what do you tell them? I


tell them about the dangers of child marriage. I for one, despite being a


survivor now, I was a child mother. I was a mother at the age of 15. I


had a prolonged and very painful Labour which had not been for the


intervention of God, I would have lost my life and the life of my


ties. It very bad. And to find out more about our series you can go to


our website. There are many more stories are about the fates of


daughters including young women in India and Afghanistan as well. At


the quality where risk group in the US is offering Donald Trump after he


appeared to mark a reporter US is offering Donald Trump after he


disability during a speech. He challenged recollections by a New


York Times journalist who has a condition that affects the movement


of his joints about the 9/11 aftermath. He has made


unsubstantiated aftermath. He has made


thousands of Muslims in New Jersey were seen celebrating the attack.


The Washington Post writes, an article, and one of the paragraphs,


it says, and by the way this was right after September the 11th, it


was September the 18th and right after, an amazing thing, right after


a couple of good paragraphs, talking about Northern New Jersey, draws the


eye, and neither per, you have to say this guy, I do not know what I


said, I do not remember. This was 14 years ago, they did not do a


retraction! 14 years ago, they did no retraction. Kathleen Hawkins are


journalist with the BBC disability unit told me that his behaviour is


simply ignorant. I think this is incredibly reductive behaviour from


Donald Trump. He is talking about a respected journalist, someone who


has won a Pulitzer prize, worked for a number of newspapers and he is


highlighting his disability as his defining feature. In his biography,


he does not mention his disability. He is very respected, and esteemed


journalist known for his work. I think if there was a personal


attack, Donald Trump should have focused on the journalism angle and


not the disability. When we thought about having this chart with you, we


thought should we draw attention to the remarks but do you feel it is


necessary for Donald Trump to be called out and for this to be spoken


about? I think if there was any good thing to come out of this kind of


behaviour it has been that people are vocally saying, this is not


acceptable in the modern society. It has been on social media all day and


widely shared and people are saying, this is not acceptable, parents of


disabled children say they are seeing this and look how it can


trickle down. How would my child feel if this happened to them? It is


so damaging because he is a public figure. He is a celebrity and he has


been seen by millions doing theirs. That is an important point to make,


he is a public figure and he is someone that a lot of people do see


and be picked up on his characteristics. It is not the first


time we have seen people in this position do these kind of things


about disabled people, John Lennon, there was footage of him in the


1960s, mocking people with learning disabilities and comments were


coming out about how this is unacceptable now. 50 years on from


that, you would think that would be more awareness, do we know how the


journalist has reacted? He said he is not surprised by Donald Trump's


behaviour and whether that is linked to personal feelings towards Donald


Trump and history there, that is unclear at the moment. I spoke to a


charity and they said it is not just outdated and outrageous, it is


bullying, disco monetary and extremely damaging and promotes


prejudice. Is it ever acceptable to call attention in the way that


Donald Trump as to disability like this? I think if you are in a


trusted group of friends and you know that is going to be acceptable


and received OK, then perhaps it would be OK, but for Donald Trump to


do this as someone who is in this position of authority and to do it


in such an mocking and comedic way is very irresponsible. Kathleen


Hawkins. Ever since Sebastien Coe became the President of world


athletics he has faced questions over his ambassadorial role with


Nikkei. He denied any potential conflict of interest but he has


announced that he is stepping back from the role. Lord Coe denied any


wrongdoing but he said the issue had become a distraction at a news


conference in Monaco, he insisted he wanted to focus on the issues that


currently face the world of athletics. You can get a lot more on


that story on the BBC Sport website and if you want to talk to me about


any of our stories, I am on Twitter. Thank you for watching.


Hello. Thursday, has been a fairly quiet weather day across the British


Isles. One or two spots, 14 or


Download Subtitles