we'll have to wait until the effects of climate change become really tangible before the world recognises that it needs to take action. i think we've got to that point. even back at the start of this year, the problem that weighed most heavily on ukraine's president zelensky was will his western allies stay the course? i remember how frank he was about the need for ukraine's counteroffensive to go well. well, it certainly hasn't gone badly but it's never produced the major victory that ukraine needed and that its supporters prayed for. explosion now, hungary is deeply sceptical about backing ukraine. an openly pro—russian politician has just topped the poll in the elections in slovakia. the polish government, with an election coming up, has chosen to criticise ukraine. and most serious of all, the political infighting in washington means that its hugely valuable aid to ukraine can't be funded as before — at least for the time being. so, what does all this add up to? well, vladimir putin's sharp—minded, sharp—tongued press spokesman, dmitry peskov, is pretty clear in his own mind. in moscow the other day, speaking of western support for ukraine, he said the fatigue will grow. have we reached some kind of tipping point? i sought the views of the bbc�*s europe editor, katya adler. first of all, slovakia held parliamentary elections this weekend and who got the biggest number of votes? robert fico. what's he known as? a defender of vladimir putin. what did he campaign saying? that military aid for ukraine should be stopped. at the same time, you had a big row in congress over a short—term funding — government funding bill. it's bipartisan. and the only way it could get passed was by dropping this next tranche of aid for ukraine, which was being discussed. that is a worrying sign from washington. we've got us elections coming up next year and there is a very real possibility that donald trump could be returned to office as president. and what will that mean for support for ukraine? up until now, the us has donated the largest amount in terms of military aid for ukraine, but europe is surpassing that in terms of financial support and other support. so, is it going to have to fill a shortfall in the us at a time when we know that populations in europe, they're worried about the cost of living, we're heading into a winter where people are worrying about heating bills again, there's talk of migration and things that need to be done about that. that is putting pressure on governments, it's putting pressure on european unity as a whole. and so, yes, looking forward to ukraine, there are question marks with ukraine not having performed as speedily against russia as had been hoped in the west and its counteroffensive, whether that was realistic or not, about how long this is all sustainable. how important is, say, slovakia in this? does it matter if they don't help ukraine any longer? a lot of this is politics. so, we've heard certain things being said in the lead—up to slovakia's elections. we've heard things being said in poland in the lead—up to its election in two weeks�* time. and up until now, poland has been pretty much the most outspoken and active country in ukraine's support against russia. however, what we can see the possibility of in the eu is a build—up of an awkward squad, because who clapped their hands when robert fico came top of the parliamentary elections? in neighbouring hungary, prime minister viktor orban. prime minister viktor orban, who has been permanently difficult when it's come to imposing new sanctions. we're also looking, of course, ukraine is very anxious to be given very strong signals now about joining the eu. it's been given candidacy statement, but what it wants by the end of this year is for real negotiations to start on that path to membership. and let's look at poland — what's poland's position? so, poland holds a general election in mid october — on sunday, 15th of october. and there's been this extraordinary row in the recent couple of weeks between poland and ukraine. and i say "extraordinary" because even before russia's full—scale invasion, poland was up there — imean, prime minister morawiecki saying again and again to partners inside the european union and nato, "watch out because putin has expansionist plans here. "he's got his eye on ukraine — and more, by the way." and he and the baltic states, they had the feeling they were being dismissed, really, as sort of being post—soviet paranoid. no longer, of course. and poland has been key in putting pressure on other allies inside nato about supplying fighter jets, for example, tanks. i mean, really leaning on germany at the time when you remember that germany was reluctant to provide any tanks. when you look at it, the two main parties here vying to win these elections, both of them want to push russia back. both of them believe that if russia is not stopped in ukraine, then vladimir putin will not stop there. and that will be destabilising not just for that neighbourhood in europe, but for europe as a whole. however, there has been a row over grain. now as we know, that's because of russia's actions in the black sea — ukraine has been unable to send its grain that large parts of africa and the middle east rely on across the sea. and so, there was an agreement reached by which the grain was able to cross european countries on its way out to the wider world. just because of logistics, a lot of that grain ended up sort of sticking, hanging, in countries like poland, hungary or slovakia, and that has pushed down local grain prices. and that is a big problem in countries that rely on agriculture. so, the eu agreed that those countries could have a ban on that grain for a limited period but recently, it lifted that ban. and poland, hungary and slovakia have said, "you know what? "we're just going to continue regardless." president zelensky was characteristically critical, even though he didn't name poland, and poland reacted furiously, absolutely furiously, even suggesting — the government, even suggesting that it would halt military aid to ukraine. but again, these are worrying signs. these are worrying signs inside europe — although i have to emphasise again, john, that we have to be careful about being too black and white about it. it's not a knife—edge but it is concerning. less than three years ago, the vast, landlocked state of niger, mostly desert, predominantly muslim and with a population of 25 million, seemed in pretty good shape politically. despite a history of five coups d'etat in 60 years, its president stepped down constitutionally after finishing his second term and mohamed bazoum was elected to succeed him in february 2021. but three months ago, bazoum was arrested by his presidential guard and a new crisis began. since the military transition in this country, friday prayers... the bbc�*s mayenijones hasjust come back from meeting niger's new rulers. i think the reason why niger was seen as a beacon of democracy is because the region isn't great. the sahel region at the moment is suffering from a democratic deficit. you've seen coups in burkina faso, in mali, which are both neighbouring countries, slightly further afar in chad and also in guinea. so niger, in comparison to those other countries, seemed fairly democratic. they had elections last year that went pretty well. president mohamed — deposed now, deposed president mohamed bazoum was a friend of the west, particularly of france. he worked closely with them. he was seen as somebody who was willing to take input from foreign powers, as somebody who was willing to collaborate in order to develop his country. but this is a country, niger, that has seen a lot of coups since its independence of france. it's had multiple coup attempts, five successful ones. and so, it was interesting, speaking to people in niger, because military takeovers aren't foreign to them. and a lot of people told us, "actually, we have a long history of military takeovers. "we trust our military. "usually, what they come in and do is, "if there's a political crisis, they come in, "they clean things up and they leave". and so, a lot of people we interviewed in niger seemed to believe that this latest military government would do the same thing. how responsible was french ham—fistedness for the coup and for the atmosphere that exists in niger now? or did the french — were they on a hiding to nothing? could they have done nothing different? this coup, just to give a bit of context, was initially just an internal dispute between members of the presidential guard and president bazoum. they weren't happy with some of the decisions he was taking, particularly when it came to funding and budgets. and so, they staged this uprising. but it became a bigger thing about sovereignty for niger and anti—french sentiment when france then took a stance that it wouldn't deal with this new military government. many nigerians were like, "well, wait a minute". you know, "president macron went to n'djamena, "the capital of chad, when they had a military coup "and embraced their new military leader." recently, there was a coup in gabon that france condemned, but seemed to kind of have a less strong diplomatic rhetoric towards. that's when you started seeing the big protests, the french embassy being targeted and french troops being asked to leave. and does that principle apply to other countries in the region? i mean, other countries perhaps that have had military coups. the factors that start those coups in each country is incredibly different. in burkina faso, you had these young soldiers who are the forefront of the war against the terrorists, terror groups affiliated with the so—called islamic state and al-qaeda. they were the forefront of the battle. when they came into power, they said they were frustrated with the way that the government at the time in burkina faso was handling the country's security crisis and they wanted to change things around. in mali, there were separatists that were fighting the governments that wanted independence for their regions, and that led to an escalation in violence in niger. —— and that led to an escalation in violence. in niger, it was, as i mentioned, an internal dispute between the presidential guard and the president. in gabon, it's because you've had this family, the bongos, they've held the country, you know, in financial hostage for several decades now. and many people there in gabon feel that this family has been allowed to continue to stay in power because it benefits certain external powers. one thing that ends up happening after all of them is that all of those frustrations and the corruption and the ineffectiveness of the governments there, the poor economic performance of those countries, all of that gets funnelled towards france. what will be interesting to see is now that the french are leaving a country like niger, for example, what's going to happen? thejunta in power is going to have to show that it has a plan for the country's development. this is one of the poorest countries in the world, despite having minerals like uranium, despite having oil, despite having gold. is it going to make it easier for extreme islamists to operate? we're already seeing recently an escalation, an uptick in violence, with terror groups taking advantage of the power vacuum in niger to ramp up its attack on nigerian armed forces and drive down morale there. and it will be interesting to see over the next month, is the nigerian army able to turn the tide and show that it's in charge? because i think if it doesn't, if there are more civilian casualties, then ordinary nigerians will start to wonder if this was the right decision in backing them. one of the world's most complicated crises seems to have been sorted out the hard way, at least for now. nagorno—karabakh is one of those problematic territories left over after the collapse of the soviet union in 1991. a patch of land in the south caucasus, situated in azerbaijan but occupied mostly by ethnic armenians. last month, azerbaijan launched an attack on the territory and as a result, just about the whole armenian population, more than 100,000 people, has left. kian sharifi of bbc monitoring is based in the region. i asked him to explain how azerbaijan's president aliyev had succeeded in getting control of nagorno—karabakh. aliyev got exactly what he wanted. he completed his seizure of karabakh, and karabakh, the authorities there. they said they were dissolving the government and every government— linked institute by the end of the year. and that's pretty much the end of nagorno—karabakh's government as we know it. do you think that he also wanted the entire population to move out? he has always maintained that the ethnic armenians that lived in karabakh could stay there for as long as they wanted, they would be treated equally. but they didn't believe him. and for good cause, i mean, given their history with azerbaijan, it was very difficult for them to believe it. so the moment that they realised it's over, they started fleeing their homeland. and now more than 100,000 ethnic armenians from karabakh have moved to armenia, and they want refugee status, which means if they are granted a refugee status, they need to be paid by the government. that is not something the pashinyan government is capable of doing. he cannot do that because he just doesn't have the funds, the money. and this, some fear, is going to embolden the pro—russia parties in armenia. right now it's not looking very, very good for pashinyan. did russia have any involvement in this or did azerbaijan just do it while the russians weren't looking or what? russia didn't seem to be providing armenia with the support that armenia thought it was going to get from russia. and this time around, russia has beenjust a bit too busy with the war in ukraine. armenia doesn't really have anything to fight back. and armenia itself didn't really get involved with this last round of fighting. it stayed out of it, which angered a lot of people in armenia, there were protests for a good while against pashinyan�*s government, because they accused them of not helping ethnic armenians in karabakh. the other major power in the region with an interest there is iran. what's iran's view of what's happened? iran has been having to play a very delicate balancing act. since the very beginning it has always maintained that karabakh belonged to azerbaijan. but it never, ever could support azerbaijan because they've always had a lot of differences. there is a very strong ethnic azeri community in iran that wants to be a part of azerbaijan. they refer to it as southern azerbaijan. that's how much they want to secede from iran. and iran has always believed that azerbaijan, or at least elements linked to the government of azerbaijan, have helped to stoke that sentiment. then there is, of course, azerbaijan's very close relations with israel. it's, to the best of my knowledge, the only muslim nation that is very, very open with its relationship with israel, and it's a very strong relationship. iran's accused azerbaijan of even allowing israel to maintain a presence in azerbaijan, which borders iran. and iran just does not like that. iran has always been close with armenia, but think of the optics. iran backing a christian state against a muslim country. now, the major issue, of course, is the zangezur corridor. it was first brought up in 2020. armenia agreed to allow the establishment of a corridor along its border with iran. iran has always been opposed to this because as far as tehran is concerned, if that corridor is established, it will completely sever its very short land link with armenia. and that is a very strategic corridorfor iran because it's a very reliable route connecting iran through armenia to georgia and beyond. beyond being potentially, of course, russia. azerbaijan insists on wanting to establish that corridor because it will connect mainland azerbaijan to the exclave of nakhchivan and through that to turkey. the entire issue of nagorno—karabakh, do you think it's over now? the idea of karabakh is always going to be in the background of relations between armenia and azerbaijan. it's never going to go away. it may have an effect on future relationships between the countries in the region, but karabakh, as we know it, is probably not going to be a thorn in anyone�*s side because the government there will cease to exist in three months. lastjuly was the hottest month our planet has experienced in recorded history. fires raged on three continents. people fled their homes in hundreds of thousands, some of them swelling the numbers of migrants into europe and north america. but how are governments around the world shaping up to meet this threat of accelerating global warming? i asked justin rowlatt, the bbc�*s climate editor. you see different societies making different kinds of decisions. so you see particular, i mean, the exemplar of this would be china making kind of long—term investments with a kind of 100—year plan, maybe even a longer plan, looking ahead and saying, what do we need for our future? what future do we want for our society? democracy is frankly finding it much harder to do that long—term planning and stick to decisions that have been made. it's very interesting here in britain, you know, there was a climate act passed in 2008 and the idea was to bind future governments to commitments made kind of now about how we're going to cut carbon. we're still sticking to those targets. but it was quite interesting very recently, the prime minister here, rishi sunak, changed his position on, or appeared to change his position. it was a little bit more nuanced than it seemed, but appeared to change his position on how rapidly he wanted britain to approach net zero, reduce carbon emissions to the point where we're not adding any additional emissions to the atmosphere. and that's a very kind of democratic response in that he's thinking, well, lots of our motorists here in britain aren't going to like some of the policies that we've got, and if we water them down with an election coming up, maybe we'll do a bit better with the electorate. so you see these very different responses from different types of political structures. but britain is a small problem compared with china, isn't it? well, and it's in a way, a profoundly optimistic story. the investments china began to make decades ago, in the �*90s, recognising that solar power and wind power were really, potentially really useful technologies, and crucially technologies that i think china recognised that if they invested early, they could get a march on the rest of the world. and in a way, i mean, look, this would be disputed, i think, by analysts around the world, but in a way, this unbelievable act that president biden brought in, the inflation reduction act, which has subsidies totalling, it's $397 billion of potential subsidies, that, in a way, is a response to the recognition in america that in lots of these really crucial future technologies, wind, solar batteries, electric vehicles, all of that kind of thing, china is way, way ahead. we actually do have the wherewithal to switch our energy system to more renewable sources. and actually, it's largely thanks to those investments and that effort china made to industrialise renewable power that means that prices have fallen as dramatically as they have. but what about all the use of coal—fired power stations and so on in china? i mean, that's a real problem, isn't it? they are building lots of coal—fired power stations. the way that... there's an issue with renewables which isn't that often talked about, which is the intermittency of them. so they're not available all the time. it's slightly capricious. at night when you've got no solar power and the wind isn't blowing, you need an alternative supply. the most readily available, easiest supply is from fossil fuels still. that's actually true of decarbonising in places like america and in europe and in the uk. and what about india? it says it, like the west, which used obviously fossil fuels to build its riches over the last 200 years or 250 years, it says we're going to use fossil fuels. and when we feel that we've reached a point where the population is sufficiently well off, or that it becomes cheaper to transition to renewables, we will then make a wholesale transition to renewables. but, you know, india is beginning a transition, but it's slower than china. i mean, slowness isn't really an option for the world, is it? we have to do something quickly. we also have to keep... ..societies on board. we have to keep countries on board with the effort. it's been a very hot year and it's a very hot year that comes at the beginning of an el nino year. so the heat that we got this summer was before the real intensity of heat you get from this oscillating weather pattern that happens in the pacific where essentially warm water rises from the ocean and delivers a blast of additional heat, about 0.2 degrees celsius to the global atmosphere. and we're expecting next year, 2024, to be even hotter. what is the point at which people say, i'm prepared to accept all sorts of cuts in my lifestyle because i can see the world is on fire around me? it depends on the individual, doesn't it? i mean, there will be people who look at what's happening and say, we need to take action now and i'm willing to make changes in my personal life now, you know, to help, but also presumably as an example to others. and there will be other people who are very reluctant to change. people would say, maybe we need to wait until the disaster scenario. we'll have to wait until the effects of climate change become really tangible before the world recognises that it needs to take action. i think we've got to that point. justin rowlatt, the bbc�*s climate editor, bringing this edition of unspun world to an end. as ever, it's been a real pleasure to have you with us. and until we meet again, goodbye. hello. the weekend weather brought some extremes to the uk. we had the very wet weather in scotland, and then on sunday, it was exceptionally warm across so many other parts of the country. in northern ireland, 22.6 celsius — the warmest october day since the �*60s. about 2a in wales — that's the warmest in over a decade. and in london, nearly 26 celsius — about the warmest day in october since 2018. now the rain from scotland is petering out, some areas have had about a month's worth of rainfall recently. and the overall weather pattern is still showing a dip in the jet stream here, which is shunting that warmer atmosphere from the south. so once again, it will be exceedingly warm, not just here in the uk, but across many parts of western and also central europe this week. so the headline is one of a warm start this week — but not completely dry, there is some rain on the way — particularly where we don't want it in western parts of scotland, but that's not until tuesday. so here's the forecast, then, for the early morning. a lot of bright weather around little dribs and drabs perhaps in the western isles. still relatively cool in the north of scotland, around 13—15, but look at that — northern ireland, wales, england, widely into the 20s, perhaps even the mid—20s, again in london and the southeast. now a cold front is approaching and will bring some fresher weather, but again, rain to parts of scotland on tuesday. look at that rain reaching the northwest first, then it spreads into central scotland. but still very mild, 17—18 here, snd we're still talking about the low—to—mid—20s on tuesday widely across the uk. and then, tuesday into wednesday, we'll start to see a change coming in from the north. so a weather front will spread southwards across the uk. it will bring some rain, stronger winds for scotland and much fresher, much cooler, if not even colder conditions in the very far north of scotland — temperatures here barely making ten degrees in lowick, 11 in stornoway, 1a in newcastle, but still warmth with some cloud and rain on wednesday in the south, about 20—23 celsius. the temperatures will return to close to the seasonal norm, at least towards saturday, sunday, but it's stilljust the other side of average. so warmer than average, i think, over the coming days. if this was the right decision in backing them. live from washington, this is bbc news. 700 israelis killed and more than 400 people dead in gaza as the conflict between hamas and israel intensifies. more than 250 bodies have now been recovered from the site of an israeli music festival raided by palestinian militants. gunfire. and israeli forces battle hamas fighters holding out in the south of the country with dozens of hostages still in captivity. hello, i'm carl nasman. the number of israelis and palestinians killed in spiralling violence continues to climb more than a day after hamas militants stormed into israeli territory from gaza. and we have now learned that several american citizens are also among the dead in israel — that's according to a us national security council spokesperson. you are looking at live images from gaza city. we've seen air strikes occasionally lighting up strikes occasionally lighting up the night sky with rolling blackouts in gaza and you can see the relative darkness there, making it challenging for hospitals to treat the wounded. more than 123,000 palestinians have been displaced, the numbers coming from the un office for co—ordination of humanitarian affairs. at least 73,500 sheltering in dozens of schools.