continue across eastern parts of scotland in the north—east of england and those temperatures only around 10—13. sophie. thanks, darren. newsnightjust getting newsnight just getting under way newsnightjust getting under way but now it's time for the news where you are. good night. wars have laws. as a proscribed terror group, hamas isn't following them. is israel? after a second attack on the jabalia refugee camp, mark's here to look at whether israel's aerial bombardment could breach international humanitarian law. also tonight, medecins sans frontieres are here. they've been working in gaza for around 15 years and have 300 workers on the ground. plus, uk academics demand more freedom to express their opinions on social media when it comes to events unfolding in the middle east. we'll discuss the row between the science secretary and uk research and innovation, the body responsible for funding scientific research. and this. classic music plays. the orchestra whose musicians cross the divide between israel and the palestinians. we'll hear from the son of its israeli conductor, daniel barenboim, and the widow of its palestinian co—founder edward said. good evening. wars have laws. according to president biden, uk prime minister rishi sunak and others, israel is expected to follow the rules of war in its attempt to achieve its aim of eliminating hamas from gaza, after the group massacred 1,400 israelis on october 7th. there's no such compulsion on hamas, of course, designated a terrorist group by many western nations. hostage—taking, for example, is prohibited under international humanitarian law. hamas kidnappped around 230 people from southern israel, including a nine—month—old baby. five people have been freed thus far. what about israeli strikes on gaza? are they in line with international law? the un's human rights office posted on x today about tuesday's israeli air strike on the jabalia refugee camp: "we have serious concerns "that these are disproportionate attacks that could amount "to war crimes." the camp was targeted again today. according to the hamas—run health ministry, 8,700 gazans have been killed since october 7th. here's mark. yesterday's bombing ofjabalia is still resonating through the region. jordan recalled its ambassador in protest at the strike and the un secretary—general was said to be appalled by the toll. at least 50 were killed, though hamas has claimed it's in the hundreds and that seven israeli hostages were among those who perished. for their part, the israelis say that they were striking a hamas command bunker and tunnel system, and successfully killed a local commander. that was their intent, but was using such heavy ordnance in a built—up area reckless or even a war crime? the legal response is nuanced. so, the fact that civilians have unfortunately perished, doesn't necessarily mean or imply that israel has not complied with its obligations. what they have to do is, they have to weigh up the military advantage that they anticipate from the attacks, in other words destroying the tunnel, and eliminating the personnel inside tunnel, versus the expected civilian harm that this operation might cause. once they have weighed this up, they have to compare these two values, and they have to make sure that the civilian harm is not excessive in relation to the military advantage they seek to achieve. and hamas remains a mortal danger to the israelis, holding hundreds of hostages, and pledging itself, for example in interviews with arabic media, to carry on attacking israel with every means at their disposal. as for the methods israel uses to neutralise that threat, many have cited a protocol added in 1977 to the geneva conventions, setting out the legal position. it's all to do with a concept called proportionality, and binds an attacker in war "to refrain from deciding to launch "any attack which may be expected to cause incidental loss of civilian "life, which would be excessive in relation to the concrete "and direct military advantage anticipated" — the word "excessive" is key. in the hard light of day, the answer to that might seem obvious, but ultimately, the question of whether a war crime was committed would hinge on what the commander ordering the strike knew about the target and civilians around it at the time that order was given. during their campaigns in iraq and afghanistan, nato officers often had to make decisions about whether a requested air strike could be carried out legally. in addition to all the questions about who the target or targets were, what weapon would be used and whether the presence of civilians made it too dangerous, they had to balance also with questions of what might happen if you didn't strike. there were times when we were looking for bin laden or al-qaeda and there were legal conversations about whether we could actually take them out because of the proximity of civilian casualties. that them out because of the proximity of civilian casualties.— civilian casualties. that was a very emotive conversation _ civilian casualties. that was a very emotive conversation because - civilian casualties. that was a very i emotive conversation because more often as not we'd have to let the target go because of the risk to civilians. imagine if the very next day that leader had been responsible for 100, 100,000, tens day that leader had been responsible for100, 100,000, tens of day that leader had been responsible for 100, 100,000, tens of thousands of casualties. how would we reconcile that with the fact that we had the opportunity to take the target out? as to the wider question of whether war crimes are being committed, the head of the international criminal court is now in the region on a fact—finding trip. he will be gathering evidence both about palestinian actions on 7th october and israeli ones subsequently. so, the chances are clearly there that those directing this conflict will face war crimes charges. israel has not accepted... it is not a member of the international criminal court, it has not accepted the court's jurisdiction, however the court does have jurisdiction in gaza, so if idf personnel enter gaza, if there are allegations of misconduct, war crimes, or other crimes inside gaza, the icc would havejurisdiction. it's highly unlikely that israel would extradite its personnel. a lengthy legal argument is inevitable, then, even after the guns fall silent, particularly given the bitter nature of the struggle now under way in gaza. jason greenblatt was the white house envoy to the middle east when donald trump was president. thanks forjoining us. israel has said it has killed numerous hamas officials in that refugee camp. the un human rights office has said it has serious concerns that the attacks on jabalia has serious concerns that the attacks onjabalia could amount to war crimes. what do you say? the attacks on jabalia could amount to war crimes. what do you say? the un has zero credibility _ war crimes. what do you say? the un has zero credibility when _ war crimes. what do you say? the un has zero credibility when it _ war crimes. what do you say? the un has zero credibility when it comes - has zero credibility when it comes to israel especially when the secretary—general tried to justify the atrocities committed by hamas. i'm going to say what he said. he said he absolutely did not try to justify them and he was pretty serious towards those people who said he had suggested that. yes. serious towards those people who said he had suggested that. yes, he said he had suggested that. yes, he said that after _ said he had suggested that. yes, he said that after he _ said he had suggested that. yes, he said that after he was _ said he had suggested that. yes, he said that after he was criticised. - said that after he was criticised. initially he tried to contextualise, as many are trying to come contextualise the atrocities. regardless, they have very little credibility on this war and when it comes to israel generally. i spent three years working with the united nations. irrespective of that, israel, like the uk and the us, well understand obligations in warfare and take these things very seriously. if there are accidents, there are accidents but i'm confident they will prosecute the war as best as they can to comply with the law. d0 war as best as they can to comply with the lava— war as best as they can to comply with the law-— with the law. do you think us su ort with the law. do you think us support for— with the law. do you think us support for israel— with the law. do you think us support for israel is _ with the law. do you think us i support for israel is open-ended with the law. do you think us - support for israel is open-ended and support for israel is open—ended and unconditional? i’d support for israel is open-ended and unconditional?— unconditional? i'd like to think so. i'd like to think — unconditional? i'd like to think so. i'd like to think that _ unconditional? i'd like to think so. i'd like to think that they - i'd like to think that they understand the predicament that israel is in, notjust trying to figure out and get at the people who perpetrated the atrocities but as many people know, hamas's charter and continues to say that they are out there to destroy israel. this was just 0ctober seven was going to be part one, there will be part two and part three etc. i think the us understands said and why israel has to do what it does. the region should understand that and i believe they do. hamas is notjust an energy of the —— and enemy of the region, it is controlled by iran, and enemy to the region. it is controlled by iran, and enemy to the region-— it is controlled by iran, and enemy to the region. they said they would re eat the to the region. they said they would repeat the october _ to the region. they said they would repeat the october attack - to the region. they said they would repeat the october attack until - repeat the october attack until israel is annihilated, the existence of israel is illogical. if israel is annihilated, the existence of israel is illogical.— of israel is illogical. if the audience _ of israel is illogical. if the audience hasn't _ of israel is illogical. if the audience hasn't seen - of israel is illogical. if the audience hasn't seen it i i of israel is illogical. if the _ audience hasn't seen it i recommend they watch it because there's a lot of talk about the war and that gets to the heart of the issue. this is hamas's purpose, to destroy israel and that's why israel has to do this. it has no choice. i’m and that's why israel has to do this. it has no choice. i'm going to brina in this. it has no choice. i'm going to bring in our _ this. it has no choice. i'm going to bring in our adult _ this. it has no choice. i'm going to bring in our adult guest, _ this. it has no choice. i'm going to bring in our adult guest, we - this. it has no choice. i'm going to bring in our adult guest, we have. bring in our adult guest, we have finally made contact with her. —— our other guest. let's talk to senior fellow and director of conflict resolution at the middle east institute randa slim. hamas claimed seven hostages were killed in the diwali at struyck. if true that implies that the hamas infrastructure was there —— were killed in the jabalia strike. israel must destroy this infrastructure, mustn't they?— mustn't they? that is the stated ob'ective. mustn't they? that is the stated objective- their _ mustn't they? that is the stated objective. they must _ mustn't they? that is the stated objective. they must take - mustn't they? that is the stated i objective. they must take lessons from american experiences in iraq and afghanistan. if you take lessons from israel was my experience in lebanon, it went in in 1982 to remove plo and who came in, hezbollah, who are an even bigger threat. is the objective achievable, literally? politically, it isn't. it is an ideology that has popularity within a certain segment of the palestinian people. i'm not saying i condone the ideology but it is popular with a segment of the palestinian people. militarily the question is, the objective is to prevent it from reconstituting itself. previous experience has shown that one, it is hard to do and if it is done, who is going to replace them? we may see a more extremist organisation replacing hamas. d0 extremist organisation replacing hamas. , ., ., hamas. do you accept that? hamas may be wi ed hamas. do you accept that? hamas may be wiped out _ hamas. do you accept that? hamas may be wiped out by _ hamas. do you accept that? hamas may be wiped out by israel— hamas. do you accept that? hamas may be wiped out by israel but _ hamas. do you accept that? hamas may be wiped out by israel but they - hamas. do you accept that? hamas may be wiped out by israel but they will - be wiped out by israel but they will potentially regenerate. that's the lesson from history, isn't it? other than the guest _ lesson from history, isn't it? other than the guest not _ lesson from history, isn't it? other than the guest not condemning - lesson from history, isn't it? other than the guest not condemning it, | lesson from history, isn't it? other| than the guest not condemning it, i more _ than the guest not condemning it, i more or— than the guest not condemning it, i more or less — than the guest not condemning it, i more or less agree. i agree it is an ideology— more or less agree. i agree it is an ideology and — more or less agree. i agree it is an ideology and the idea of eradicating them is _ ideology and the idea of eradicating them is a _ ideology and the idea of eradicating them is a tough battle but israel has no _ them is a tough battle but israel has no choice. they either stand down _ has no choice. they either stand down and — has no choice. they either stand down and let it happen again and let the atrocious murder... israel has to do— the atrocious murder... israel has to do it _ the atrocious murder... israel has to do it. whether there is a new ideology, — to do it. whether there is a new ideology, there is no question that israel_ ideology, there is no question that israel is _ ideology, there is no question that israel is going to have to have a better_ israel is going to have to have a better security architecture which is going _ better security architecture which is going to cause more heartache for the palestinians. these are hamas and their_ the palestinians. these are hamas and their supporters, they represent and their supporters, they represent a certain_ and their supporters, they represent a certain percentage of the palestinian population. nobody knows how many— palestinian population. nobody knows how many but i'd like to think it isn't _ how many but i'd like to think it isn't a _ how many but i'd like to think it isn't a high _ how many but i'd like to think it isn't a high population when you consider— isn't a high population when you consider the millions of palestinians. this is a tough choice israel— palestinians. this is a tough choice israel has — palestinians. this is a tough choice israel has to — palestinians. this is a tough choice israel has to make, to try and eradicate _ israel has to make, to try and eradicate it even if it is true, what — eradicate it even if it is true, what your— eradicate it even if it is true, what your guest has said and i think i am mostly— what your guest has said and i think i am mostly correct.— i am mostly correct. israel has no choice? it — i am mostly correct. israel has no choice? it has _ i am mostly correct. israel has no choice? it has a _ i am mostly correct. israel has no choice? it has a choice, _ i am mostly correct. israel has no choice? it has a choice, it - i am mostly correct. israel has no choice? it has a choice, it has - i am mostly correct. israel has no choice? it has a choice, it has a l choice? it has a choice, it has a choice? it has a choice, it has a choice in _ choice? it has a choice, it has a choice in how _ choice? it has a choice, it has a choice in how it _ choice? it has a choice, it has a choice in how it goes _ choice? it has a choice, it has a choice in how it goes about - choice? it has a choice, it has a i choice in how it goes about doing that. a military campaign that has killed already, you know, more than 8000 civilian children and women is not the right way to go about that. i mean, israel has proven in the past it is able to go after perpetrators of violence against it in a more targeted way, without doing this bombing. israel has a choice but it is choosing to go after this with a spirit of revenge and to be very honest, what's the strategy? that's the question now of the united states and people who are critics of israel. not only among the under 35 but people in the democratic party and administration. what's the objective? what's the strategy about achieving the objective? what is the day after and who is going to be there after hamas is obliterated? who is going to control it? these are questions that i don't think the israelis are asking themselves and more importantly, you know, they have already lost the support of the global south and they are starting to lose the support of most of the countries in the global north. they are losing the support of important constituents in the global north. look at the demonstrations around the world. israel has a choice but it's choosing not to respect international humanitarian law. with due respect to my guest, a campaign like that being conducted today without any regard for proportionality, any regard for civilian casualties, i cannot be convinced that israel is respecting international humanitarian law. it isn't walking the walk.— international humanitarian law. it isn't walking the walk. thank you, both. as israel continues its ground operation in the north of gaza, in the south, the rafah crossing from gaza to egypt opened today for the first time to some civilians since israel's siege began more than three weeks ago. 335 foreign passport holders — some of them british — and 76 injured gazans were able to leave. the crossing is also expected to be open tomorrow. obviously there are more than two million people still there. and we know many of them wouldn't want to leave or cede ground that they think they may never return to. here's joe inwood. for more than three weeks, gaza has been sealed off from the world. today, for the first time, a small number were allowed to leave. dual nationals, their names said to be on a limited list, made theirjourney on foot. translation: it's enough. we've endured enough humiliation. it is unprecedented. we lack the most basic human needs. no internet, no phones, no means of communication. not even water. for the past four days we haven't been able to feed this child a piece of bread. others were allowed out for medical treatment, taken across the border to a waiting egyptian field hospital. but the numbers getting out are a fraction of those in need. more than 2 million people live in this tiny strip of land. but now an active war zone. israel's unprecedented military operation is aimed at destroying hamas, retaliation for the atrocities of october 7th. but ordinary palestinians are paying a heavy price. so, how bad is the humanitarian situation? there used to be 35 hospitals in gaza. now, only 13 remain operational. those still open are operating with less than one third of their normal staff and are running out of supplies. | translation: this is the final call| regarding the shutdown of the main generator in al—shifa hospital. if this generator stops, the next announcement will be the deaths of babies in incubators as well as the deaths of patients on ventilators in the icu and in the operating rooms. the numbers being killed and injured are contested. hamas runs the health ministry and provides the data. they say more than 8500 have been killed. israel say hamas are terrorists and their figures cannot be trusted. the un says there is no indication they're false. whether you believe, large numbers of civilians are being killed and injured. food is also said to be in short supply. it's thought only one un bakery and eight local ones are still operating. some aid is now being allowed yesterday nearly 60 trucks carrying food, water and medicines entered gaza, taking the total tojust over 200. but before the recent conflict the figure used to be around 500 everyday. and none of those supplies include fuel, meaning that gaza remains under a full electricity blackout. there's also been vast damage to gaza's housing stock. the un claims more than 35,000 housing units have been destroyed. israel accuses hamas of hiding amongst civilian populations and hoarding supplies. the un says there is a looming humanitarian catastrophe in the gaza. in the last few hours it was announced that the rafah crossing would open again tomorrow, allowing more dual nationals to leave, along with the most severely injured. but as long as the conflict continues, the numbers seeking and needing escape will only continue to rise. let's speak now to dr natalie roberts, executive director of medecins sans frontieres in the uk — msf have been working in gaza for 15 years and have 300 staff in gaza. what have they been telling you? since the 7th of october, it has escalated to an unprecedented scale, there are bombs dropping across the gaza strip, in the north and the south. some of our staff did flee to the south when they were ordered to by the israeli military. they are staying in very rudimentary shelters, sometimes sleeping outside and struggling to access clean water and struggling to access clean water and they still have the bombs dropping around them, so they don't feel they are in safety. other members stayed behind in the north, stayed behind near the hospital is to provide medical care. they are describing horrendous, terrifying situation where they constantly feel they will be killed at any moment. they are trying to work in the hospitals, being overwhelmed by wounded patients, overwhelmed by dead bodies every time there is a bomb dropping. when the last bombs dropped on the camp, huge numbers of people injured but dead people arriving. trying to work in hospitals that are running out of supplies and running out of fuel and they are struggling to provide even basic medical care.— basic medical care. were some of our staff basic medical care. were some of your staff able — basic medical care. were some of your staff able to _ basic medical care. were some of your staff able to go _ basic medical care. were some of your staff able to go across - basic medical care. were some of your staff able to go across the i your staff able to go across the rafah crossing today?- your staff able to go across the rafah crossing today? yes, some of them did cross _ rafah crossing today? yes, some of them did cross today _ rafah crossing today? yes, some of them did cross today but _ rafah crossing today? yes, some of them did cross today but that - rafah crossing today? yes, some of| them did cross today but that leaves behind more than 300 palestinian staff who have no option but to stay indoors. ~ . , , i. . staff who have no option but to stay indoors. ~ . , , . . , indoors. which is why you are many others are calling _ indoors. which is why you are many others are calling for _ indoors. which is why you are many others are calling for a _ indoors. which is why you are many others are calling for a ceasefire - others are calling for a ceasefire and the argument from some, as you know, a ceasefire would benefit high mass —— hamas because they wouldn't lay down their arms. and they have given an interview today saying they would attack them over and over, israel needs to be annihilated. yes. israel needs to be annihilated. yes, we talk about _ israel needs to be annihilated. yes, we talk about the _ israel needs to be annihilated. yes, we talk about the laws _ israel needs to be annihilated. yes, we talk about the laws of _ israel needs to be annihilated. yes we talk about the laws of war and trying to protect medical centres and medical health workers and mitigate civilian harm. they have dropped more than 11,000 bombs in three weeks in gaza and that is a scale we didn't see in aleppo or ukraine. it is an unprecedented scale of bombing and on such a small piece of land it is impossible to avoid civilian harm. as medical humanitarians, we cannot say this is impossible to continue, we will see unprecedented levels of death and injury. at the same time, many governments, including the uk government are saying aid needs to go into gaza. aid is not going into gaza. we are seeing very limited number of tracks crossing into gaza, including no fuel at all, so it is impossible to provide medical care inside gaza. at the same time we have teams in egypt wanting to cross into gaza to support our palestinian colleagues. even if they were allowed to cross into gaza, it is difficult to ask people to go in there under that context and sit under the bombs and now they have an extreme risk to their life. the idea of this war continuing as it is todayis of this war continuing as it is today is not possible for us to consider. . ., today is not possible for us to consider. . ,, , ., today is not possible for us to consider-— today is not possible for us to consider. . ,, , ., ., , consider. thank you for being with us. how free are uk academics to express their opinions on social media when it comes to events unfolding in the mmiddle east? last weekend, the science secretary michelle donelan wrote to the body responsible for funding britain's scientific research to express her �*disgust�* and �*outrage' that it had had appointed people to its advisory group on equality, diversity and inclusion, who ms donelan claimed had shared "some extremist views". it's reported that one professor for example had tweeted on october 8th — the day after the hamas massacre in southern israel — "this is disturbing" above a newspaper article headlines "suella braverman urges police "to crack down on hamas support in uk." later in her letter, ms donelan goes on to write that her "strong preference" is that the edi advisory group should be immediately closed. 2,700 academics have since signed an open letter saying they are "deeply concerned" by "attempts at censorship led by the government". today, multiple academics have resigned in protest, not at the secretary of state's intervention, but at the way the uk research and innovation have responded to the letter. the boss of ukri has suspended operations of the equality diversity and inclusion advisory group for research england. nick's here. what is the latest? there has been a cuick what is the latest? there has been a quick resoonse _ what is the latest? there has been a quick response to _ what is the latest? there has been a quick response to the _ what is the latest? there has been a quick response to the letter. - what is the latest? there has been a quick response to the letter. the - quick response to the letter. the chief executive of ukri wrote to michelle donnellan yesterday to say she was deeply concerned and that you said, she is suspending the operations of research england's diversity group and is launching an investigation. michelle donnellan was a by social media post by two members of the body. the first one was the post by professor kate sang. she linked to this article in the guardian that appeared the day after the hamas massacre on the 7th of october. swell braverman is urging 0ctober. swell braverman is urging police to crack down on hamas support in the uk and the professor described that as disturbing. let's look at the second post that was highlighted and that was by doctor patel. doctor patel had amplified a post that condemned violence on both sides of the conflict but then it made reference to genocide and apartheid. so let's look at the fundamental point that michelle donnellan is making in her letter. there it is. she is talking how academic freedom of free speech within the law are sacrosanct. but she goes on to say that public bodies cannot be seen to take political positions or promote extremist ideologies, particularly true when tensions are inflamed. she talks about, this is especially true, the standards must be upheld by those individuals who are members of a group dedicated to supporting equality, diversity and inclusion. so what is she seeking to do here? as we saw there, support for academic freedom within the law, but then she says members of public bodies cannot take political positions. michelle donnellan sent her letter out one day after a paper by the policy exchange think tank, which has very strong links to the conservative party. that paper highlighted those exact tweets by those exact academics. but there is an interesting difference in language between that paper and what michelle donnellan said. so the policy exchange paper talked about how members of the academic advisory group had shown support for anti—israeli views and it talked about how they had deeply politicised these. michelle donnellan went further and accuse those academics of sharing some extremist views on social media. she accused professor sang of expressing sympathy or support for hamas, which is prescribed by the uk as a terrorist group. then just before citing doctor patel�*s post, she talked about how academics cannot promote extremist ideologies. as we had, doctor patel retweeted a post which made reference to israel's genocide and apartheid. that is a highly contentious view, which is strongly rejected by israel and by many other countries across the world, including the uk. but in the open letter signed by the academics you mention, they say it is wrong to characterise such views as extremist. the government is currently reviewing its definition of extremism and lunch that before the events in the middle east. but this is the definition of extremism by the government in 2011. vocal or active opposition to fundamental british values, including democracy, the rule of law, individual liberty and mutual respect and tolerance of different faiths and beliefs. essentially what those academics are saying, that definition of extremism does not cover academics, even when they are promoting contentious views. . ., they are promoting contentious views. e, ~' , ., , . we tried to contact the relevant academics and haven't yet heard back. let's speak to another academic — professor tanja bueltmann, chair in international history at the university of strathclyde who resigned from uk research and innovation talent peer review college this morning, which reviews funding applications. and ian mansfield from the centre right think tank policy exchange, he's their director of research. welcome to both of you. professor, why have you resigned today? for me, three concerns — why have you resigned today? for me, three concerns but _ why have you resigned today? for me, three concerns but i _ why have you resigned today? for me, three concerns but i would _ why have you resigned today? for me, three concerns but i would like - why have you resigned today? for me, three concerns but i would like to - three concerns but i would like to just say briefly, we are discussing this within a particularly complex context. the reporting you have presented makes that clear. my reasons are the following, first of all i am concerned about the individual singling out of academics by secretary of state. if there were concerns we have processes that can be followed and i think they should have been followed. the second point is, this was then conflated with the questions around equality, diversity and inclusion. ithink questions around equality, diversity and inclusion. i think this is concerning particular because there are wider issues around this. you may recall at the beginning of october, the tory party conference, there was at some point a discussion about picking the bulk out of academia and this is a translation of those discussions into actions and this, ifind of those discussions into actions and this, i find very concerning. and then finally, there is a wider point that goes beyond that that while we as academics are taking action in this particular context, over the last few months we have heard a number of other examples of where the government has taken actions i think are questionable at best. from files in education expert observer investigation reveal, to attacks on lawyers, particularly immigration lawyers. michelle donelan said it was unacceptable for anyone to be expressing sympathy or support for hamas. was kate sang doing that when she quoted from the guardian? i would go back to what policy exchange said, that these are politicised and contested views. you wouldn't go — politicised and contested views. gm. wouldn't go as far as michelle donelan went in her letter? i wouldn't want to comment on that, i'm not— wouldn't want to comment on that, i'm not a _ wouldn't want to comment on that, i'm not a lawyer in that respect. this— i'm not a lawyer in that respect. this is— i'm not a lawyer in that respect. this is not— i'm not a lawyer in that respect. this is not about freedom of speech, it is about _ this is not about freedom of speech, it is about suitability to serve any public _ it is about suitability to serve any public committee advising on 2 billion— public committee advising on 2 billion pounds of taxpayers spend. it is absolutely right that academics come in their role as academics, _ academics come in their role as academics, can say whatever they like but _ academics, can say whatever they like but if— academics, can say whatever they like but if you put yourself forward on a committee, especially about equality— on a committee, especially about equality and diversity, public bodies — equality and diversity, public bodies should select people who can command broad confidence and bring the community together, not those who are _ the community together, not those who are pushing highly contested views— who are pushing highly contested views such as that israel is committing genocide for example. how do ou committing genocide for example. time? do you respond? isn't that what michelle donelan mentioned when she talked about the nolan principles of objectivity, impartiality and being fair to all? , . , ., objectivity, impartiality and being fairto all? , . , ., , fair to all? this relates to my first point- — fair to all? this relates to my first point. we _ fair to all? this relates to my first point. we have - fair to all? this relates to my i first point. we have processes. fair to all? this relates to my - first point. we have processes. if there are concerns, these actions could have been taken but why is the secretary of state interfering in the way that she has, singling out two individuals, the welfare of whom nobody seems to be concerned about? i find that shocking. it is nobody seems to be concerned about? i find that shocking.— i find that shocking. it is clear that the secretary _ i find that shocking. it is clear that the secretary of - i find that shocking. it is clear that the secretary of state - i find that shocking. it is clear that the secretary of state or| i find that shocking. it is clear. that the secretary of state or her officials... you obviously still have influence over her. i wouldn't sa that, have influence over her. i wouldn't say that. i'm _ have influence over her. i wouldn't say that. i'm in — have influence over her. i wouldn't say that, i'm in a _ have influence over her. i wouldn't say that, i'm in a completely - say that, i'm in a completely different— say that, i'm in a completely different role.— say that, i'm in a completely different role. ., _ . . different role. the policy exchange ublished different role. the policy exchange published your _ different role. the policy exchange published your note _ different role. the policy exchange published your note and _ different role. the policy exchange published your note and you - published your note and you highlighted these examples and 24—hour slater michelle donelan uses some of the examples in your note and write this letter singling out these academics. tote. and write this letter singling out these academics.— and write this letter singling out these academics. ~ , ., ~ ., . and write this letter singling out these academics. ~ ~ ., . . these academics. we, you know, are a chari and these academics. we, you know, are a charity and have _ these academics. we, you know, are a charity and have a _ these academics. we, you know, are a charity and have a public _ these academics. we, you know, are a charity and have a public interest - charity and have a public interest in singling — charity and have a public interest in singling out where we think, particularly where a public body is taking _ particularly where a public body is taking decisions that aren't in the public— taking decisions that aren't in the public interest, which is what research _ public interest, which is what research england did in that ill—advised selection of individuals collectively for a committee in a very sensitive role. it�*s collectively for a committee in a very sensitive role.— very sensitive role. it's singling them out the — very sensitive role. it's singling them out the right _ very sensitive role. it's singling them out the right way - very sensitive role. it's singling them out the right way to - very sensitive role. it's singling | them out the right way to do it? the secretary of — them out the right way to do it? the secretary of state is there are two represent — secretary of state is there are two represent the british public and is ultimately the steward of taxpayer funding _ ultimately the steward of taxpayer funding and if she thinks a public body— funding and if she thinks a public body has — funding and if she thinks a public body has made a grave mistake she should _ body has made a grave mistake she should ask— body has made a grave mistake she should ask them to change it. in her letter— should ask them to change it. in her letter she _ should ask them to change it. in her letter she rightly recognised it was for research england or ukri to take action— for research england or ukri to take action on— for research england or ukri to take action on that and in that, ukri say they have _ action on that and in that, ukri say they have suspended it and are investigating. ukri has grasped the metal— investigating. ukri has grasped the metal there and in that investigation it should possibly take advice for example from some of our top _ take advice for example from some of our top research universities and vice chancellors and bring a bit more _ vice chancellors and bring a bit more of— vice chancellors and bring a bit more of what has gone wrong in that selection _ more of what has gone wrong in that selection of — more of what has gone wrong in that selection of people who cannot command confidence. the}r selection of people who cannot command confidence. they couldn't command confidence. they couldn't command confidence, _ command confidence. they couldn't command confidence, professor. i command confidence. they couldn't i command confidence, professor. they shouldn't, essentially, have been appointed to this equality, diversity and inclusion group because of the views that were expressed. to put it bluntly, if you are on an advisory group for equality, diversity and inclusion, how can you express those views and be seen to be impartial and objective? i be seen to be impartial and objective?— be seen to be impartial and ob'ective? ~' ., objective? i think we need to rewind this a little bit, — objective? i think we need to rewind this a little bit, we _ objective? i think we need to rewind this a little bit, we are _ objective? i think we need to rewind this a little bit, we are prejudging i this a little bit, we are prejudging something that hasn't been fully investigated yet. i'm concerned about that, i have to say. this isn't appropriate and this is my point. we have due processes. they should be followed and we shouldn't be having this conversation in this way. ultimately in terms of your question, i would say that we have provisions and we should stay within them. there is a tension between academic freedom and freedom of speech, which is not the same thing. guidelines might be issued may be for a body and that's the right way to think about this but this discussion focused on two individuals, i think it is very concerning where we are going here. that's fair enough. i absolutely hear you. that's fair enough. i absolutely hearyou. let that's fair enough. i absolutely hear you. let me ask you about the open u signed and thousands of other academics which was sent to uk research and innovation. you were unhappy that they closed down this advisory group and have launched an investigation. in the open letter and i quote, you say, we wish to highlight the many internationally respected human rights experts including human rights watch, amnesty and others have concluded that israel is practising apartheid against the palestinian people. the letter goes on, even if that were not the case the academics would have the right to express that opinion. can you explain why? i’m opinion. can you explain why? i'm afraid i have _ opinion. can you explain why? i�*m afraid i have to correct you. i didn't actually sign the letter. i wrote my own letter so i'm not sure what that means for the question. there is an established view around this. the un also speaks in some of these terms. i don't know if you wish to change the nature of the question. ii wish to change the nature of the cuestion. , ., �* , question. if you didn't sign the letter, that's _ question. if you didn't sign the letter, that's my _ question. if you didn't sign the letter, that's my mistake - question. if you didn't sign the letter, that's my mistake and. question. if you didn't sign the i letter, that's my mistake and the question isn't relevant to you. what do you want to see uk research and innovation do?— innovation do? ultimately i would like to see — innovation do? ultimately i would like to see that _ innovation do? ultimately i would like to see that we _ innovation do? ultimately i would like to see that we treat - innovation do? ultimately i would i like to see that we treat colleagues who are involved in ukri in a better way. following due process. that's at the individual level but generally also how can you immediately suspend the advisory group? does this reflect an absence of a commitment to diversity and inclusion? that is very concerning, a glance at social media shows the impact this has had on many academics, i see tangible fear across social media sites which is concerning and i'd like another confirmation of the position for ukri. is confirmation of the position for ukri. , . ., . confirmation of the position for ukri. , . , ., ukri. is it concerning, should viewers be — ukri. is it concerning, should viewers be concerned - ukri. is it concerning, should viewers be concerned that. ukri. is it concerning, should i viewers be concerned that policy exchange has this influence over the site secretary? i exchange has this influence over the site secretary?— site secretary? i don't think we have that _ site secretary? i don't think we have that influence, _ site secretary? i don't think we have that influence, we - site secretary? i don't think we i have that influence, we circulated the note — have that influence, we circulated the note and we spoke to the media. many— the note and we spoke to the media. many people would be quite shocked at the _ many people would be quite shocked at the views expressed by those individuals and i would say that suspension is actually appropriate, it isn't_ suspension is actually appropriate, it isn't disbanding the group. it is suspension — it isn't disbanding the group. it is suspension until an investigation has been — suspension until an investigation has been carried out and i think it needs— has been carried out and i think it needs to — has been carried out and i think it needs to be — has been carried out and i think it needs to be carried out and thoroughly and probably some mistakes on due diligence and so forth _ mistakes on due diligence and so forth. we — mistakes on due diligence and so forth. ~ , , . forth. we will see. there is an intui forth. we will see. there is an inquiry going _ forth. we will see. there is an inquiry going on- _ forth. we will see. there is an inquiry going on. thanks - forth. we will see. there is an inquiry going on. thanks for. forth. we will see. there is an i inquiry going on. thanks for your time. for more than 20 years, the west—eastern divan orchestra has brought together those divided by geography, religion and upbringing in the middle east. its website says: "we are not a political organization. "we cannot solve the middle east conflict. "but we believe that the destinies of palestinians and israelis "are inextricably linked and that we can help break barriers "considered insurmountable. "music makes people emotionally receptive. "the west—eastern divan orchestra opens up channels of communication. "0ur musicians don't just listen to music: "they listen to each other." the orchestra was founded by palestinian—american thinker the late edward said, and israeli—argentinian conductor daniel barenboim. their work has been carried on by daniel's son and edwards widow, who we wil speak to after you've heard the orchestra. classical music plays. i'm joined now by michael barenboim, daniel's son and edwards widow. mariam said. i wonder if the orchestra feels more important now than ever? michael, can i ask you if the orchestra now feels more important than ever?

Related Keywords

Winds , Areas , Morning , Waves , Afternoon , South East , Don T Go , Channel Islands , Rain , South , Showers , Gusts , Spells , 90 , 100 , Weather , Temperatures , Worst , Nothing , Home , Afternoon Winds , Hopefully Northern Ireland , Isn T , Wetter , North Sea , Thanks , Parts , North East Of England , Scotland , Sophie , Darren , 10 , 13 , Way , Newsnightjust , News , Israel , Hamas , Laws Of War , Wars , Proscribed Terror Group , It Isn T , Walk International Humanitarian Law , Attack , Bombardment , Jabalia Refugee Camp , Mark , Medecins Sans Frontieres , Gaza , Academics , Uk , Social Media , Middle East , Plus , Events , Opinions , Freedom , Ground , Workers , Row , 15 , 300 , Innovation , Body , Funding Scientific Research , Science Secretary , Orchestra , Classic Music Plays , Palestinians , Widow , Edward , Son , Musicians , Conductor , Divide , Daniel Barenboim , Biden , Others , Prime Minister , Rishi Sunak , Academic Advisory Group , War , Terrorist Group , Course , Compulsion , Attempt , Rules , Aim , Israelis On October 7th , 7 , 1400 , October 7th , People , Example , Strikes , Nations , Hostage Taking , Baby , Line , Hamas Kidnappped , 230 , Five , Nine , War Crimes , Concerns , Attacks , Fun , Air Strike , Refugee Camp , Jabalia , Office , Law , Human Rights , Region , Gazans , Camp , Hamas Run Health Ministry , Bombing Ofjabalia , 8700 , Secretary General , Strike , Hostages , Protest , Hundreds , Ambassador , Toll , Jordan , 50 , Seven , War Crime , Part , Israelis , Commander , Intent , Say , Built Up Area , Command Bunker , Ordnance , Tunnel System , Civilians , Response , Fact , Obligations , Doesn T , Advantage , Harm , Operation , Personnel Inside Tunnel , Words , Cup , Versus , Relation , Values , Danger , Holding Hundreds Of Hostages , Two , Many , Threat , Interviews , Protocol , Arabic Media , Disposal , Methods , Proportionality , Position , Concept , Civilian , Attacker , Setting , Loss , Geneva Conventions , 1977 , Concrete , Life , Word , Excessive , Answer , Light Of Day , Question , Target , Obvious , Questions , Decisions , Officers , Campaigns , Targets , Weapon , Addition , Order , Nato , Iraq , Afghanistan , Presence , Casualties , Conversations , Proximity , Times , Bin Laden , Al Qaeda , Conversation , Leader , Risk , Civilian Casualties , Civilian Casualties , Tens Day , For100 , Tens Of Thousands , Tens Of Day , 100000 , Head , Opportunity , Whether , Fact Finding Trip , Evidence , International Criminal Court , Conflict , Actions , War Crimes Charges , Chances , Ones , 7th October , Court , Jurisdiction , Member , Misconduct , Allegations , Idf Personnel Enter Gaza , Argument , Crimes , Guns , Would Havejurisdiction , Personnel , Nature , Struggle , Envoy , White House , Jason Greenblatt , Us , Officials , Donald Trump , Thanks Forjoining , Credibility , Onjabalia , Zero , Yes , Atrocities , Contextualise , Accidents , Things , Irrespective , Warfare , Three , Support , Unconditional , Predicament , Lava War , D0 War , Su Ort , Notjust , Charter , Energy , 0 , One , Enemy , Annihilated , Iran , Existence , October Attack , Heat , It , Hasn T , Audience , It Ii , Purpose , Talk , Issue , Heart , Lot , Choice , Guest , Adult Guest , Adult , Contact , Director , Conflict Resolution , Let S Talk , Middle East Institute Randa Slim , Infrastructure , Diwali , Jabalia Strike , Struyck , Objective , Lessons , Experience , Mustn T , Experiences , Ob Ective , Lebanon , 1982 , Hezbollah , Plo , Ideology , Segment , Popularity , History , Lesson , Ed Hamas , Extremist Organisation , D0 Extremist Organisation , More , Idea , Battle , Murder , Supporters , Security Architecture , Nobody , Population , Heartache , Israel Ideology , Percentage , Their , Millions , Isn T A High Population , Isn T A High , Ai Choice , Military Campaign , Women , Children , 8000 , Violence , Perpetrators , Bombing , Strategy , Revenge , Spirit , Administration , Democratic Party , Critics , 35 , World , Countries , Most , Demonstrations , Constituents , Global South , Respect , Regard , Campaign , Both , It Isn T Walking The Walk , Crossing , Time , North , In The South , Ground Operation , Passport Holders , Rafah , Siege , Gaza To Egypt , 335 , Some , Wouldn T , Them British , Joe Inwood , 76 , Two Million , Number , Nationals , List , Names , Made Theirjourney On Foot , Translation , Communication , Internet , Human Needs , Means , Humiliation , Phones , Piece , Haven T , Child , Bread , Treatment , Border , Waiting Egyptian Field Hospital , Four , Numbers , Strip , Need , Land , War Zone , Fraction , 2 Million , Military Operation , Retaliation , Hospitals , Situation , Price , Staff , Supplies , Call , Generator , Announcement , Shutdown , Generator Stops , Al Shifa Hospital , Injured , Deaths , Patients , Health Ministry , Babies , Operating Rooms , Icu , Ventilators , Incubators , Terrorists , Indication , Figures , Data , 8500 , Food , Supply , Bakery , Eight , Aid , Water , Medicines , Trucks , Tojust , 200 , 60 , Fuel , None , Figure , Blackout , Electricity , Damage , 500 , Hoarding Supplies , Populations , Housing Stock , Hiding , Housing Units , 35000 , Rafah Crossing , Catastrophe , Leave , Natalie Roberts , Msf , Escape , Bombs , Scale , 7th , Shelters , Gaza Strip , Israeli Military , 7th Of October , Members , Care , Hospital , Safety , Bodies , Bomb Dropping , Cross , Rafah Crossing Today , Cross Rafah Crossing Today , Cross Today Rafah Crossing , Ceasefire , Calling , Option , High Mass , Interview , Dover , Arms , Health Workers , Centres , 11000 , Humanitarians , Aleppo , Ukraine , Government , Governments , Death , Levels , Injury , Wall , Teams , Tracks , Egypt , Inside Gaza , Colleagues , Context , Sit , Todayis , Equality , Advisory Group , Donelan , Michelle Donelan , Ms , Some Extremist Views , Funding Britain S Scientific Research , Mmiddle East , Disgust , Outrage , Who , Diversity And Inclusion , Police , Professor , Newspaper Article , Hamas Massacre In Southern Israel , Suella Braverman , October 8th , 8 , Letter , Open Letter , Edi Advisory Group , Preference , Attempts , Censorship Led , 2700 , Research , Intervention , Secretary Of State , Inclusion , Ukri , Operations , England , Equality Diversity , Boss , Nick , Latest , Michelle Donnellan , Chief Executive , Cuick , Resoonse , Kate , Investigation , Diversity Group , Guardian , Article , Massacre , Swell Braverman , Urging , Urging 0ctober , Post , Doctor Patel , Point , Genocide , Apartheid , Sides , Positions , Extremist Ideologies , Speech , Sacrosanct , Tensions , Diversity , Individuals , Standards , Policy Exchange , Paper , Think Tank , Tweets , Difference , Links , Language , Conservative Party , Views , Extremist , Sympathy , S Post , Doctor Patel Retweeted A Post , View , Extremism , Definition , Opposition , Lunch , Fundamental British Values , 2011 , Democracy , Liberty , Beliefs , Tolerance , Faiths , Saying , Rule Of Law , Chair , The , Tanja Bueltmann , Peer Review College , Talent , Funding Applications , University Of Strathclyde , Mansfield , Individual , Reporting , Reasons , Following , Clear , Processes , Discussion , October , Tory Party Conference , Issues , Ithink , Discussions , Bulk , Academia , Ifind , Examples , Action , Files , Education Expert Observer Investigation Reveal , Best , Immigration Lawyers , Lawyers , Anyone , Wouldn T Go Politicised , Gm , Equality On A Committee , Public , Lawyer , Suitability , Freedom Of Speech , , Taxpayers , 2 Billion , Role , Confidence , Community , Nolan Principles Of Objectivity , Point Fair , Impartiality , My First Point , Objectivity , Secretary , Welfare , Whom , Shocking , Influence , Note , Wouldn T Sa That , Policy Exchange Ublished , 24 , The Public Interest , Charity , Singling Charity , Chari , Tote , Selection , Public Interest , Aren T , It S Collectively , Aren T In The Public , Mistake , Taxpayer Funding , Funding , Steward , Action On For Research , Bit , Advice , Vice Chancellors , Chancellors , Research Universities , Metal , Top , Cannot , Command Confidence , They Couldn T , Shouldn T , Something , Prejudging , Tension , Terms , Provisions , Thing , Guidelines , Thousands , Human Rights Experts , Amnesty , Human Rights Watch , Opinion , Case , Practising Apartheid , Goes On , Mistake Question , Question Ii , Wish , Cuestion , Hi , Level , Due Process , Commitment , Fear , Absence , Glance , Impact , Site Secretary , Viewers , Confirmation , Sites , Media , Suspension , Mistakes , Due Diligence , Isn T Disbanding The Group , Group , It Isn T Suspension , Isn T Disbanding , West Eastern Divan Orchestra , Inquiry , Going On , Forth , Intui Forth , Upbringing , Geography , Religion , Website , 20 , Music , Organization , Break Barriers , Destinies , Considered Insurmountable , Each Other , Channels , 0ur Musicians Don T , Palestinian American Thinker , Edward Said , Argentinian , Work , Classical Music Plays , Edwards , Michael Barenboim , Mariam ,