american officials argued such a move would be "divorced from reality". every other member of the council backed the resolution — apart from the uk, which abstained. there's been a chorus of outrage from other countries, charities and human rights groups. israel has thanked the us, saying a ceasefire would give hamas — which is classed as a terror group by many western governments — a chance to regroup. our middle east correspondent hugo bachega reports. "in gaza, there's no safe place," says the un secretary general. "the health care system is collapsing, "hospitals have become battlegrounds, and "palestinians have no shelter "and everything else needed to survive," he says. this was the scene in khan younis in the south yesterday in the aftermath of an israeli airstrike as the military pushes ahead with its war against hamas. hours later, at the un in new york, the secretary general called for a ceasefire and had this warning. there is a high risk of the total collapse of the humanitarian support system in gaza, which would have devastating consequences. we anticipate that would result in a complete breakdown of public order and increased pressure for mass displacement into egypt. i fear the consequences could be devastating for the security of the entire region. but the us, which has veto power, ignored his calls and voted against it. our goal should not simply be to stop the war for today. it should be to end the war forever, break the cycle of unceasing violence, and build something stronger in gaza and across the middle east so that history does not keep repeating itself. britain abstained in the vote. every other member of the security council backed the ceasefire. we call for further— and longer pauses to get aid to palestinians and allow space for further hostage releases. . but we cannot vote in favour. of a resolution which does not condemn the atrocities hamas - committed against innocent israeli civilians on the 7th of october. in gaza, the situation for civilians grows more dire by the day. the world food programme is warning of widespread famine and says nine in ten gazans are not getting enough food. "our life is extremely difficult", says hassanein, another displaced gaza resident, now in rafah. "there's not even water. "this is what we face every day", he says. as the fighting continues, more people are being killed and the suffering of survivors is getting worse. israel says it is taking steps to protect civilians in gaza, but the world is asking, is it enough? hugo bachega, bbc news, jerusalem. joining me now is dr mustafa barghouti, president of political party palestine national initiative. thank you forjoining us, and you have spoken strongly ahead of the vote at the un security council calling on the us and uk to support it. what is your reaction to the fact that they did not do that? the fact that they did not do that? the fact that they did not do that? the fact that the _ fact that they did not do that? tue: fact that the united fact that they did not do that? tte: fact that the united states of america and britain did not support a ceasefire means they are participating in this crime. they are covering up the terrible crime of genocide that is happening now in gaza and the terrible other crime of ethnic cleansing that the israelis are conducting against the people. and the collective punishment is depriving people from every possibility of having a normal life. we have representatives on britain saying they want to condemn the killings of israelis and we do not want any israeli or palestinian to be killed, but why is she saying that the killing of 32 children should be condemned while she is saying the israeli killing of 7500 palestinian should also be condemned. that is a double standard. it sends a very negative message to the whole world that from now on we don't live in the world is not living according to international law but according to the law of the jungle. anybody who has power can do whatever they want to human beings. tt’s has power can do whatever they want to human beings.— to human beings. it's important to sa that to human beings. it's important to say that israel _ to human beings. it's important to say that israel strongly _ to human beings. it's important to say that israel strongly refutes - say that israel strongly refutes those claims of genocide and ethnic cleansing in particular. i wanted to ask you specifically and you touched on in there, what the us and uk were saying at the un security council. they said a ceasefire now does not provide a lasting resolution to this. what is your suggested path forward to make sure hamas does not provide an ongoing threat to israel while also protecting palestinian civilians in gaza?— civilians in gaza? hamas was reactin: civilians in gaza? hamas was reacting to — civilians in gaza? hamas was reacting to what _ civilians in gaza? hamas was reacting to what israel - civilians in gaza? hamas was reacting to what israel was . civilians in gaza? hamas was - reacting to what israel was doing. i'm notjustifying anything, but to think that the world... let me finish. , ., , . , ., think that the world... let me finish. , ., , , ., ., finish. these were massacres on that da . you finish. these were massacres on that day- you are — finish. these were massacres on that day. you are saying _ finish. these were massacres on that day. you are saying they _ finish. these were massacres on that day. you are saying they were - day. you are saying they were reacting and notjustifying it, but it's important to say that these were brutal attacks. we should make that point. you were brutal attacks. we should make that oint. ., , ., ., ., ., that point. you should allow me to answer yom _ that point. you should allow me to answer you. can _ that point. you should allow me to answer you. can i _ that point. you should allow me to answer you. can i answer - that point. you should allow me to answer you. can i answer you - that point. you should allow me to . answer you. can i answer you please? can i answer?— answer you. can i answer you please? can i answer?_ i— answer you. can i answer you please? can i answer?_ i am - can i answer? please do. i am uuuotin can i answer? please do. i am l quoting the secretary general of can i answer? please do. i am - quoting the secretary general of the un who no one can doubt is a good man, and he said things did not happen from a vacuum. we have been oppressed by the israeli occupation for 56 years. 70% of the population of gaza have been subjected to ethnic cleansing by israel in 1948, 75 years ago. the people in gaza were put under complete and total siege for 17 years by israel. 80% of the educated people were unemployed. more than 70% of the people were under the line of poverty. people did not have a drinkable water. they were besieged from everywhere. that is the real reason of what is happening. i'm not advocating violence in any way, but i'm telling you, you cannot ignore the israeli oppression of palestinians. hamas is not governing the west bank. why do the israelis kill 273 palestinians since the 7th of october in the west bank, and why are israeli settlers allowed to attack palestinians everywhere in the west bank. why the israeli army have arrested in the west bank 3700 more palestinians. but the question i asked specifically what is, how you would suggest, what your preferred course of action would be, because hamas have said since these attacks that they would do it again and again. so how would you go about making sure that israeli civilians are protected from hamas while also making sure that palestinian civilians in gaza are protected from being surrounded by the more they find themselves in. how would you chart that course? t how would you chart that course? i will tell you what i suggest, but look at your terminology. i'm sorry to tell you that, anna, you say palestinians, israelis should be protected from hammers but palestinian should not be in the situation. why don't you say they should be protected from the israelis? the israelis are killing them. t israelis? the israelis are killing them. ~ ., , . ., israelis? the israelis are killing them. ~ . ., ., them. i think it was quite clear to them. i think it was quite clear to the oint them. i think it was quite clear to the point i _ them. i think it was quite clear to the point i was — them. i think it was quite clear to the point i was making. - them. i think it was quite clear to the point i was making. civiliansl them. i think it was quite clear to l the point i was making. civilians on both sides should be protected from the violence. find both sides should be protected from the violence-— the violence. and from israel. you should say — the violence. and from israel. you should say that _ the violence. and from israel. you should say that palestinians - the violence. and from israel. you | should say that palestinians should be protected from israel if you are fair and objective, but let me tell you. fair and ob'ective, but let me tell ou. ., , ., fair and ob'ective, but let me tell ou. fair and ob'ective, but let me tell you. palestinian civilians. i'm very ha-- to you. palestinian civilians. i'm very happy to say _ you. palestinian civilians. i'm very happy to say that _ you. palestinian civilians. i'm very happy to say that palestinian - happy to say that palestinian civilians should be protected from the israeli air strikes, they should be protected stop civilians on all sides should be protected. 0f be protected stop civilians on all sides should be protected. of course they should. sides should be protected. of course they should-— they should. thank you, and from israeli settlers _ they should. thank you, and from israeli settlers as _ they should. thank you, and from israeli settlers as well, _ they should. thank you, and from israeli settlers as well, but - they should. thank you, and from israeli settlers as well, but the i israeli settlers as well, but the solution is the following. t israeli settlers as well, but the solution is the following.- solution is the following. i still need to know _ solution is the following. i still need to know what _ solution is the following. i still need to know what your - solution is the following. i still need to know what your resolution is. . �* , need to know what your resolution is. ., �* , ., �* , ., need to know what your resolution is. that's what i'm trying to say. we need an _ is. that's what i'm trying to say. we need an immediate - is. that's what i'm trying to say. we need an immediate and - is. that's what i'm trying to say. - we need an immediate and complete ceasefire. people in gaza are dying from starvation, from lack of medicine. 350,000 people are now having infections. iam medicine. 350,000 people are now having infections. i am a medicine. 350,000 people are now having infections. iam a medical doctor and i know what that means, so we need an immediate ceasefire, we need an immediate supply of basic humanitarian aid to people which is not reaching them in the north or centre or the south. we need an immediate exchange of prisoners so all israelis will be released and all israelis will be released and all palestinians will be released, and we need the initiation of a true and we need the initiation of a true and real process that ends the causes of this problem which is the occupation of palestinian land. allow palestinians to have a state of their own, independent, free and peaceful and allow palestinians to practice the democracy they have been deprived of since 2006 because israel keeps obstructing our elections. how we had elections in 2021, we would not have had this situation and then the polls were showing clearly that either party... doctor, it's not only israel that has impeded those elections that have happened. again, it's myjob to be here and make those counterpoints as well. it's not only israel that are prevented elections happening in the west bank. you are prevented elections happening in the west bank.— the west bank. you will be surprised with what i tell — the west bank. you will be surprised with what i tell you _ the west bank. you will be surprised with what i tell you now, _ the west bank. you will be surprised with what i tell you now, i _ the west bank. you will be surprised with what i tell you now, i agree - with what i tell you now, i agree with what i tell you now, i agree with you, it's notjust israel, is the united states of america who were against elections and some regional powers who are against elections and it was the mistake of the palestinian authorities that cancel the elections. they should have proceeded with them and we could have done elections in east jerusalem despite israeli refusal and make it an act of the best form of nonviolent resistance. that was our code. and i tell you, had we had these elections, no single party would have had a majority. we would have been in a different situation today but israel does not want this. the israeli committee members are telling journalists that met them that their plan is to ethnically cleanse gaza completely and then come to the west bank and ethnically cleanse it and then go to lebanon and destroy hezbollah. these people are behaving in a fascist manner and have no respect whatsoever for us as human beings. absolutely not. thank ou for human beings. absolutely not. thank you forjoining _ human beings. absolutely not. thank you forjoining us _ human beings. absolutely not. thank you forjoining us on _ human beings. absolutely not. thank you forjoining us on the _ human beings. absolutely not. thank you forjoining us on the president of the palestine national initiative, really reflecting on the key development that we have about all morning, the vote at the un security council yesterday evening, a vote called by the un secretary—general who said he was concerned that the ongoing military action in gaza at the moment risked the security and stability of the wider region and wider world but as we've been reporting at the us and uk have used their veto and decided to abstain, say the resolution on the table, the draft resolution, did not fully address what would happen at the end of this military conflict and did not perhaps offer a lasting solution to this, but as we know, it's a conflict that's been going on for decades now and many people in that time have sought a resolution and, as we see from the events around us at the moment, it is still around us at the moment, it is still a very long way away. that's all for now and from here injerusalem, we will be back later in the day, but for now, let's head back to london with the rest of the days news. that's anna foster injerusalem bringing us the latest developments and context on bbc news. the uk prime minister is facing growing dissent from his own mps over the government's revised plan to send asylum seekers to rwanda, ahead of a house of commons vote on tuesday. the former immigration minister robertjenrick says the conservatives will face the "red—hot fury of voters at the ballot box" unless they do more to bring down levels of immigration. writing in today's daily telegraph he says, having "promised to do whatever it takes to stop the boats, the goal now "seems to have been reduced to delivering some symbolic, "half—filled flights, taking off "in the spring of next year." he goes on to say, clearly for the policy to work "we need individuals removed at scale, and within days "of illegally stepping on to our shores. "anything less than this and the boats will keep coming." 0ur political correspondent peter saull gave me background from the newsroom. robertjenrick, who resigned a few days ago, just hours after rishi sunak published the legislation which was designed to resurrect government plans to send some asylum seekers to rwanda for processing. clearly he believes that is not going to work. we had an exchange of letters at the time but in the daily telegraph this morning he gives a much more fulsome explanation for his decision to step aside. i have the paper here and he talks about the red—hot fury from voters if the government fails to act on this issue but fundamentally, he believes that what he calls the endless merry—go—round of legal challenges will not be stopped under the legislation that has been put forward by the prime minister. given that up until very recently indeed he was responsible for enacting that policy, he would appear regularly in the house of commons to defend the government's plan, a lot of conservative mps will pay close attention to his words. he ought to know what he is talking about. you said there, "what are his motivations?" some might suggest he might be positioning himself for a conservative leadership contest after the general election but really, this matter is in the here and now because there is a vote on legislation in the commons on tuesday, tory mps considering where to go on that. 0n the right of the party there are plenty who agree with the perspective of robertjenrick, that this doesn't go far enough. there is a group of conservative mps who have enlisted lawyers to go through it with a fine tooth comb. 0n the other wing of the party, the more moderate one—nation tories also concerned that this goes too far. rishi sunak, i suppose, trying to plot a middle ground and he says his is the only plan that will work. the people of rwanda would not have a dash accepted an attempt to circumvent international law. but it appears there is some significant dissent within his party over this. he may well be on the blower over the weekend to some tory mps to try and convince them to back him but the script that i mentioned who have enlisted lawyers probably will make their minds up on monday when rishi sunak happens to be in front of the covid inquiry, it never rains but it pours for the prime minister, a huge week ahead. how much support does the views of robertjenrick have? it's difficult to say but he is not considered a standard bearer for the right of the party, traditionally seen as moderate and loyal to various prime ministers. he was put up regularly to date media interviews because he was good at putting across the government line. he might not necessarily be that influential a figure himself but because he has been at the heart of decision—making, he ought to know quite a lot about the subject, that's why his words matter perhaps even more so than those of the former home secretary suella not always seeing eye to eye with rishi sunak but robertjenrick backing him for the leadership so i am sure rishi sunak reading the paper this morning will not be best pleased. now it's time for a look at today's sport with mike bushell. a busy day ahead. it is indeed. we start with basketball, and the nba, where in the eastern conference, the orlando magic continue to impress, this time beating the hapless detroit pistons. orlando had lost their two previous games, but shrugged off those losses, thanks in part to 2a points from power forward paolo banchero. franz wagner led the way with 27 points, as the magic registered their eighth win in ten. detroit, on the other hand, lost their 19th straight game. the nba record for defeats in a single season is 26, held by the philadelpha 76—ers. the nba's inaugural in—season tournament, comes to a conclusion in las vegas later on saturday, as lebronjames's la lakers take on the indiana pacers. saturday's winners will become the first winners, of the nba cup, and will give both sides a chance at silverware, given neither side is expected to be in contention come the nba finals next year. with the game taking place in vegas, it's likely to feel like a home game for the lakers. they are a pretty young team, very fast, _ they are a pretty young team, very fast, they— they are a pretty y