US and Iran agree two-week ceasefire

BBC Sounds Music Radio Podcasts. Hello and welcome to News Hour from the BBC World Service. We're coming to you live from London. I'm James Menendez. In the end, the world didn't have to wait to see what would happen when President Trump's ultimatum to Iran to make a deal expired at 8pm Washington time last night. He had warned of a whole civilization dying, but about an hour and a half before the deadline came this announcement on the President's Truth Social Network, which has been voiced by one of our team. Based on conversations with Prime Minister Shabazz Sharif and Field Marshal Asim Maneer of Pakistan, and wherein they requested that I hold off the destructive force being sent tonight to Iran and subject to the Islamic Republic of Iran agreeing to the complete, immediate and safe opening of the Strait of Hormuz. I agree to suspend the bombing and attack of Iran for a period of two weeks. This will be a double-sided ceasefire. The reason for doing so is that we have already met and exceeded all military objectives and are very far along with a definitive agreement concerning long-term peace with Iran and peace in the Middle East. We received a 10 point proposal from Iran and believe it is a workable basis on which to negotiate. Well, his post acknowledging there the role of Pakistan, which has been mediating between the US and Iran over the past couple of weeks. And interestingly, the Pakistani Prime Minister Shabazz Sharif has said that the ceasefire is effective everywhere, including in Lebanon. Although as we'll be hearing, there's been no let-up in Israeli attacks on Iran's proxy force Hezbollah in Lebanon today. The Israeli military is calling them the largest coordinated strike so far. Well, this is how news of the ceasefire was announced on Iranian state TV. To the honorable, great and heroic nation of Iran, the enemy has suffered an undeniable, historic and crushing defeat in its cowardly, illegal and criminal war against the Iranian nation. And crowds of people took to the streets of the Iranian capital, Tehran, to cheer the announcement, presumably many of them encouraged by the government, which maintains a tight grip on public gatherings. Well, within the past hour, the US Defense Secretary Pete Hegzeff has been speaking in Washington, D.C. Operation Epic Fury was a historic and overwhelming victory on the battlefield. A capital V military victory. By any measure, Epic Fury decimated Iran's military and rendered it combat ineffective for years to come. You see, in less than 40 days, one of our combatant commands, Central Command, Cent Com, using less than 10 percent of America's total combat power, dismantled one of the world's largest militaries. Well, let's talk to the BBC's Washington correspondent, Ioni Wells, who joins us live. And Ioni, President Trump has also been commenting on the next steps following this announcement of a ceasefire. What's he been saying? Yeah, that's right. We've had a couple of different posts from Donald Trump saying, for example, that there will be 50 percent tariffs imposed on countries who supply military weapons, for example, to Iran, also saying that Iran will have no nuclear material. Something that we heard from Pete Hegceth as well is this idea that we've heard from from Trump, too, that they're essentially going to get Iran to hand over nuclear material, nuclear dust, as they call it, to the United States. Now, they haven't been particularly specific about what that might entail. But Pete Hegceth seemed to suggest in this press conference that if Iran doesn't do that, then they know exactly what Iran has and where it is and that they will essentially go in and take it out. Now, it isn't clear where negotiations may be about this, but we do know from what Donald Trump has said previously on this matter that the US understands any enriched uranium that Iran may possess is buried, for example, deep under rock and underground on the mountains in some cases, and therefore would be pretty difficult to extract. So I think the suggestion seems to be that if Iran doesn't simply hand it over, there could well be quite significant for the military action in future. Yeah, and on the negotiations more broadly, I mean, there is this ten point plan that Iran has put forward that's been circulating. I mean, at the moment, both sides look a long way apart. Is that fair? Yeah, I think so. I think in the short term, this ceasefire has achieved what the US initially wanted, which was the straight of Hormuz being reopened. But we have to remember that is a benefit that existed before this war even started. Iran only closed the straight of Hormuz as leverage in response to attacks from the US and Israel. So while Iran has significantly been weakened following weeks of this war, the US and Iran are now negotiating things that Iran wants and didn't really have leverage on in the way it does now. These include things like providing compensation to Iran, lifting sanctions on Iran, ending not just this war, but other conflicts. Also allowing Iran to maintain control over the straight of Hormuz going forward. Yes, Iran has agreed as well not to pursue a nuclear weapon, but that has always really been Iran's position publicly. Now, it's not clear if the US and Iran will agree to any of these points at all, meaning we could just be back to square one, back to where we were last night again in two weeks time. I think the next two weeks, though, are going to be really key to show who gives or takes more in these negotiations. But also if this ceasefire holds, because both rounds of talks of nuclear talks in the past year between the US and Iran, the both direct and indirect ones, have been interrupted by military escalation, by strikes on Iran, by the US and Israel. Are these going to be face to face talks? Well, we understand that Pakistan is acting as the mediator. There are there are it isn't clear yet necessarily whether these are going to be indirect or all done through mediators. We are still waiting for sort of further timeline schedules for some of these talks to understand how they are going to proceed. At the moment, what we do have, as you as you mentioned, is this sort of 10 point plan, which Iran State Media has broadcast about the terms under which they want to negotiate, saying that, you know, these are the terms under which they've agreed to a ceasefire. Now, as I say, it does seem unlikely at this stage that the US will agree to all the points that Iran has set out. If that's the case, there is a bit of a question mark over over whether all these talks will be able to continue. And just briefly, I mean, has there been has there been a political cost for the White House over over this war? I mean, there has been criticism from from many points on the on the political spectrum, hasn't there? Yes, that's right. I think increasingly as the war went on, there were Republican voices, voicing dissents as well as Democrat criticism, too, largely because of the economic cost of the war, the impact we saw domestically on gas prices, on stocks, the markets reacting, the impact that had on the cost of living at a time that Donald Trump's ratings have been have been slipping more generally in a year where he does face midterm elections. I think also there were concerns among some Republicans about his promise not to engage in more foreign wars, not to when he was campaigning to be reelected. And then, of course, the US engaging in this one. So I think there has been a political cost, I think also internationally, while a ceasefire has now been agreed at least temporarily, I think many of the US's allies won't forget the language that Donald Trump used last night, threatening that a whole civilization would die if a deal wasn't reached. That is a language that is more extreme than he has used previously in their conflict. And I think we'll trouble a lot of his allies going forward. Aine, thank you very much indeed. The BBC's Aine Wells in Washington. Well, Katie McFarlane was President Trump's deputy national security adviser at the start of his first term in office, and she joins me on the line. Now, welcome to News Hour. Was President Trump looking for an off-ramp out of this war? And is the ceasefire that off-ramp, do you think? Well, I think he was offering an off-ramp to the Iranians into this new Iranian regime, and I think they've taken it. Is it an off-ramp for both of us? Yeah, but the United States goal, President Trump's goal throughout, has been pretty consistent. No nuclear weapons, no missiles, no support for terrorist proxies, open the Strait of Hormuz. And so far, those things seem to be either we've achieved them already or they're in negotiation. You know, in negotiation, James, is not unconditional surrender by one side or the other. It's a negotiation that goes back and forth. And Donald Trump, Art of the Deal, is one of the greatest negotiators in business that the United States has in this century. So the fact that he thinks that it's a good negotiation and opportunity, he thinks that we'll be going back and forth, we'll find an agreement at the end of two weeks, I think is a pretty significant success for the United States, for Iran, for the world. Yeah. Interesting you use that phrase, unconditional surrender. I mean, President Trump said this war would end with Iran's unconditional surrender, but that hasn't happened, has it? You know, the thing I mean, I know President Trump for a number of years and I've worked very closely with him in the White House, always take what he says seriously, but don't necessarily take it figuratively. When he says unconditional surrender, that means Iran is going to agree to our terms. And I think they will agree to our terms. If not, as Secretary of War Pete Texas said just a few minutes ago, American forces are going to remain in the region to make sure that Iran does agree to the terms. And if it doesn't, or if it cheats, or if it violates, or if it walks away, we have the military option. And the military option we have going forward is quite significant. We have not deliberately not targeted their energy infrastructure, their oil production capabilities. We could do that and that would destroy the Iranian economy. But it is an option for us. And I think that that's one of the things that brought the Iranians to the negotiating table. Yeah, it's not the same Iranians. It's not the same regime. Well, you said you talked you talked about a new Iranian regime and Donald Trump's talked about complete and total regime change again. I mean, that hasn't happened. The regime is still institutionally intact, isn't it? But not the same individuals. You know, it's never about getting it was always about. I think the Venezuela model is what President Trump keeps referring to, that you remove the top people in the regime. And then the second tier of people are ones that you can work with. Although some analysts say that, in fact, that the people who survived who haven't been killed are even more hard line than the ones before. Well, then why are they agreeing to this agreement? Why are they just agreed to a ceasefire if they're more hard line? So what next? I mean, you talked about Pete Hexeth, you know, he mentioned a victory on the battlefield. I was interested in those words. I just wonder, though, is it a strategic victory given that Iran still has that control over the Strait of Hormuz? Well, we'll see the Strait of Hormuz. I think the first ship just went through a few minutes ago. It is open the Strait of Hormuz. Where the end result of who controls it, who patrols it, who guarantees that there is safe passage for everyone. Well, the Iranians think it's going to be them, don't they? Decision. It's not going to be them. I mean, they think it is. They think it's going to be the Iranian military that controls it. I mean, that's that's in their ten point plan. That's why it's a negotiation. But I mean, ultimately, they could still close it at any point. I mean, you said the U.S. could relaunch military action, but so could Iran, couldn't it? And using cheap drones to close the Strait again. You know, they're always going to have they're always going to hold that leverage over that choke point. Except they may not have the military capability to have that leverage over that choke point. Well, have all the drones been destroyed? Not all of the drones have been destroyed. Almost all of the drone manufacturing capability has been destroyed. Almost all of the missile production capability has been destroyed, whether every missile is done, whether every drone is gone. The assumption is and was Secretary of Hexeth and the chairman of our Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Kain, just said that 75, 85 percent of their drones have been destroyed. OK, we'll have to leave it there. Thank you. We're out of time. But Katie McFarland, thanks for being with us here on News. And still to come on the program, we'll be heading to Zimbabwe, where critics are saying that the longstanding president is trying to change the Constitution to extend his term in office. This is a cool, a slow cool that is unfolding in Zimbabwe. Mr. Nangago and his government against the people's will are endeavoring to manufacture force consensus to create a brand new constitution that consolidated power in him. More on that coming up in the second half of the program. Let's just recap our main news this year. The US and Iran both say they're ready for further negotiations after agreeing a two week ceasefire. And as latest remarks, President Trump said the US would work closely with Iran and that there would be no enrichment of uranium. This is James Menendez with News. And as I mentioned earlier, despite the ceasefire, Israel has continued pummeling what it says a dozens of command centres belonging to Hezbollah, Iran's proxy force in Lebanon. A sound of one of those strikes a little earlier. A statement from the Israeli military said this was its largest coordinated strike. The Lebanese government's reporting hundreds of casualties from the attacks that dead and wounded with hospitals struggling to cope. Dr. Najat Un Saliba is an independent Lebanese MP. She spoke to the BBC about an hour ago. As far as air strikes are concerned, we just had over 100 strikes in in less than 10 minutes all over Beirut, the south and the Bekaa. And it's devastating because all the hospitals are now calling for support and blood and calling their staffs to join the hospitals. So right now we're still understanding the aftermath of these 100 strikes. Well, let's go live to Beirut and talk to the BBC's Lena Sinjab. And Lena, just give us an idea, an idea of the scale of the strikes. Dr. Un Saliba talking there about 100 strikes. Strikes, what have you been seeing and hearing? Well, actually, I could hear and feel the strikes because when they were launched, it felt that, you know, was very close to my building. My building was shaking. My windows were rattling. And later, when we were just trying to understand what happened, we've understood that there were 100 attacks almost simultaneous across the country, mainly in the south and here in Beirut. There are dozens of them in many residential areas. Two of them happened at the time. Very close to me. One in one street up from my main street and the other is 10, less than 10 minutes walk towards the seaside in Aynem Reisi. And, you know, and the list is long of areas that are residential, condensed with the normal people going around their daily businesses. Buildings that were targeted in residential areas. These came without any warning, without any evacuees, people were taken by surprise. Of course, those who stayed alive after these attacks. And as you said, you know, the sound of ambulances is everywhere in the city. And hospitals are not able to cope with the, you know, with the number of injured arriving, but also rescue operation to the sites. You know, many people are stuck on the rubbles and the news is still coming in after these these strikes because they were attacked by the police. After these these strikes, because really it took the country by shock and and and and we're still trying to figure out the number of casualties and the damage that these have caused. Yeah, it's shock because what people assumed that the the the attacks were going to stop because of the announcement of a ceasefire ceasefire between the US and Iran. Not necessarily, actually, in the morning, people, you know, received the usual daily routine evacuation orders, you know, saying that you have to leave this area, exit street or this building. And this is what the Israelis, especially with the Spokesperson of Iqai Adroy, would issue every single day. And there were warnings in the morning, you know, for areas in south of Beirut. And the Israelis have made it clear that Lebanon is not included in this ceasefire, only to be surprised in the afternoon, probably around 2 p.m. Local where these strikes hit various locations. You know, in the collective memory of the Lebanese, this is a reminder of these kind of massive brutal attacks that come unannounced in big numbers. Exactly the same pattern that the Israelis have followed in the last war in twenty twenty four just before the ceasefire was announced. So on one hand, people are. I think we lost the line to Lena Sinjar about a correspondent in Beirut. Well, let's turn to Israel now. Let's talk to Neri Zilber, who's a correspondent for the Financial Times, based in Tel Aviv. Neri, very good to have you with us here on the program. Pakistan had said that the ceasefire includes Lebanon. What's the government in Israel saying then? Good afternoon, James. Good to be about with you. That's right. Early this morning, when the ceasefire between the US and Iran was announced, Pakistan had said Lebanon is included in the deal. Benjamin Netanyahu, the Israeli Prime Minister, came out quite quickly and said Lebanon was not included in the deal. And so there was a bit of confusion. The IDF put out a vague statement a few hours later, but there was a it was open to interpretation, whether Israel would be allowed to continue its offensive against Hezbollah in Lebanon, in light of the ceasefire in Iran. And we obviously got a resounding response earlier this afternoon with these waves of airstrikes all across Lebanon. Yeah. And a very intense wave of airstrikes. I mean, the Israeli military saying it was their most intense so far. So what's going on? Is it Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu thinking that, given the ceasefire between the US and Iran, that time at the very least is running out for Israel's own offensive? So I'll say a couple of things. Number one, from the very beginning of the war with Iran, Israeli officials that I spoke to and that my colleagues spoke to were very clear that even once the Iran front ended, that Lebanon would continue and that Israel would actually free up military assets, primarily air assets devoted to Iran to then be directed towards Hezbollah in Lebanon. So that was the thinking for what, five weeks now. But again, the uncertainty this morning kind of clouded that. So in and of itself, this escalation by Israel against Hezbollah in Lebanon was not a surprise. What was a surprise was that this was not included in the overall ceasefire deal between the US and Iran that is now at least going to last for two weeks. And so it seems that Netanyahu was given a free hand by the Trump administration to do exactly as he wanted to do. And then the third thing I will say, the domestic politics behind this here in Israel, there was a lot of concern this morning that Netanyahu had been forced to stop not only the war against Iran, but also against Hezbollah, at least on one front. He got his wishes. I mean, is the war still what Israel's doing? Is it still popular in Israel? I believe so. I mean, according to opinion polls, even a week ago, the majority of the public, especially the Jewish Israeli public, wanted Israel to continue the war against Iran and against Hezbollah in Lebanon. And so right now there's look, I'll hedge it slightly. It's a Jewish holiday today. So the overall official public reaction has been quite muted, muted. We'll get a likely more deliberate response from the Israeli government later this evening after the holidays over. But I think especially for northern Israeli residents, the fact that the offensive against Hezbollah was not halted as part of this overall ceasefire with Iran is actually good news. They've been demanding a more forceful military response against Hezbollah to, in their words, put a stop to the threat emanating from Lebanon. But obviously the toll on the Lebanese side only growing. And again, it remains fairly clear that Israel was given a green light by the Trump administration to actually escalate in Lebanon. Neri, if the the ceasefire negotiations do bear fruit over the next couple of weeks, I mean, will there be some disappointment in the Israeli government that the way that things have been left? I mean, there has been no regime change in Tehran. Will that be a disappointment to the prime minister? I think privately, he'll undoubtedly be disappointed. Publicly, he'll put on a good show and try to spin this in his favor, as he always does. And then, yeah, who's a master in rhetoric and spinning the narrative. But look, just on the facts of the matter, at the outset of this war against Iran, five weeks ago, Netanyahu laid out three primary goals. Number one, eliminating Iran's nuclear program. Number two, its missile program. And number three, creating the conditions, as he put it, for toppling the regime. None of them have been completely met at all. And so undoubtedly, even for him, it'll be difficult to spin this as a overwhelming victory if the two weeks ceasefire turns into something more permanent. Yeah, Neri, thank you very much. As ever, Neri Zilber, correspondent for The Financial Times, joining us from Tel Aviv, there is a live page as ever up and running with all the latest updates, bbc.com forward slash news. But this is a story we'll be returning to in the second half of the program. Don't go away. Welcome back to News Hour. It is one of the fastest growing disability sports around the world. Power, chair, football, a version of the game designed for people who use electric wheelchairs. The governing body for the sport in England has said that many more people could be playing at an elite level if they knew the sport existed. The power chair, football, World Cups taking place in Argentina later this year. And England is one of the favourites. The BBC's disability correspondent, Nikki Fox, has been to meet some of the country's star players. Every person needs to have some sort of sport in their life. I don't have a weekend anymore. This is my weekend. These are incredibly talented players, highly skillful and it's not easy. Fast, competitive and technical. This is a sport that enables people who use powered wheelchairs to play football at a very high level. I've represented my country. I've won a European Championship. Been to Australia to comment on the World Cup. There's no other feeling in any other part of my life that you get from scoring a much changing goal. You know, that euphoria. I don't think there's anywhere else where I'd feel well. For many of these players, other types of disability sport aren't an option. I've always loved sport from a young age. But I never could quite really get involved with it. I get to competing in sport that I actually want to be in, without any other carer or assistant help with me. I can't imagine my life without it. It started out as an improvised game back in the 80s. Now there's a championship and a premiership where all the big clubs compete at weekends like this one in Nottingham. When I first started playing, we were playing in everyday chairs that had been adaptive for the sport. And we had like a rubber bumper on the front. It did the job, but it wasn't as good as the chairs we're playing now. I've heard that you are one of the most well, you are the most decorated player. Female player, yeah, in England. Well, Europe, yeah. I've got a similar disability to a lot of these players and find it hard to play any kind of sport. So I was not expecting to be training with an England head coach. This is so like sensitive. Oh, my goodness. Absolutely. Try and get as nice and close to the cones as you can, but not hit the cones. Go, Nikki, go. Wow. I'm probably not going to be scouted any time soon. But when it comes to internationals, England are on top. We're one of the best power tier teams in the world. We have that high level of expectation, quality of players. We're trying to win Europeans and obviously World Cups. Later on this year. Wes Brown spent most of his career playing for Manchester United and he's a big supporter of the club's foundation. He's joined the players at their weekly training session. In my head, it looks very easy, but the movement of the obviously the chairs and the stick can have different sensitivities on it. I put mine at the top straight away, stupid, but these guys are playing the highest, the quickest they can go. So exciting. There are many opportunities that come with power, chef football. But as the players will tell you, it's the winning that counts. That was the BBC's Nikki Fox reporting there. You're listening to news. This is the BBC in London. You're listening to news hour and I'm James Menendez. Let's return to our main story today, that announcement of a ceasefire between Iran and the United States. We're going to hear some reaction from inside Iran. Now the BBC's Persian service received these messages today. This woman was supportive of the regime in Tehran. Clearly gaining control of the state of Hormuz was the most brilliant military achievement of this war. And it is precisely this that made Iran the winner of the war. The rest of the killings and explosions are insignificant in comparison. This man, though, asked what the war had changed. I think the unfair situation in Iran will continue. Things will become normal, but unfair. The war will end. But I have a few questions for those who support the war. Has the Islamic Republic been overthrown now? Has freedom arrived? I've been speaking to Abbas Aslani, who's a political analyst at the Center for Middle East Strategic Studies in Tehran, and as such is sympathetic to the Iranian government. With the 10-point plan being built as a starting point for negotiations, does he think there's any chance that the US will agree to lift sanctions on Iran? They have been described as the framework that the future talks can take place. To what extent they can agree on the lifting of the sanctions remains to be seen. But the point is that this is somehow different from previously the United States had proposed, but I think they will try to secure the lifting of the sanctions in a way that they can benefit because the country will need a reconstruction. And it has been under the sanctions. So to make sure that they will have enough revenue to reconstruct is also the question. So that's why I think they will insist on lifting of the sanctions. Yeah, interesting. You talk about revenue. Would you think any agreement will see Iran saying, look, we reserve the right to control the flow of tankers through the Strait of Hormuz and demand payment for ships going through? Is that what Iran wants out of this? Well, we are witnessing a new status quo in the region, including the Strait of Hormuz. And that's why Iran insisted that the US needed to recognize the new realities on the ground. One of them is the new protocols or regime in the Strait of Hormuz. And this will be controlled in a manner that could be safe and free passage for the other ship spot with new, let's say, arrangements in place. And I think one of the issues for Iran could be to compensate the losses which happened in the recent war. Iran now know that this is an asset or a tool or leverage the country can use. Iran also can make sure that you can use this in order to make sure that there will be no future attacks or if there's any that will be costly for the other sides. For that reason, the US and indeed its allies in the Gulf, I mean, they're not likely to accept that Iran has that leverage in the months and years to come, are they? Well, this might seem a surprise to many, but this was a term which was mentioned by the plan Iran proposed and the US President said that seemed to be a workable framework. So this in the case that there could be maybe progress in this regard, this was not the case before the aggression. Iran takes this issue very seriously and I think they will proceed with the idea of new protocol and regime in the Strait. It seems something non-negotiable from the Iranian perspective. Tehran, the regime in Tehran seems to be portraying the ceasefire agreement and it is just a first stage, but it seems to be portraying the ceasefire as a victory for Iran. But I mean, the truth is this war has been a disaster for the country, hasn't it? Politically, militarily, economically? Well, we have been seeing the country in its suffering from damages, pain and blows, but it didn't relent and we have been seeing that the US and Israel, they wanted to bring a regime change to destroy Iran's military capabilities and make Iran to surrender. None of this has happened. Iran is able to respond militarily against the attacks. No regime change has happened, but in action what we're seeing is a rally around the flag and pipe. Is that really true? I mean, there are particularly still millions of people who want to see the end of the current regime. This is interesting that even those who protested against the government, you know, maybe a few weeks or months ago, some of them were recently present in the streets in order to condemn the foreign aggression and to support the establishment because they didn't see this as solely limited against Islamic Republic, but they see that as a threat to entirety of the country and their own security. Well, it may have survived, but I mean, you wouldn't disagree that the regime has been severely weakened given four weeks of enormous bombardment by the US and Israel, a huge blow to the economy, which was already very weakened. And presumably those people who are opposed to the regime will see that weakness. And at some point, those street protests that we saw at the beginning of the year will begin again. How Tehran sees the recent developments is like rising up again. And it is like the wounded or injured that doesn't kill you will strengthen you. And this is bringing a new self confidence back into Iran that they can somehow turn the immediate threat into long term strategic interests and opportunities. Even though the senior leadership has all been killed. There were big losses, the highest ranking political official or leader in the country and high ranking military commanders, they were killed. But Iran has tried to create an architecture whereby the system outlasts the individuals. There was no collapse in the system. They didn't surrender. And they are hopeful that they can achieve even more because Iran thinks that there is a new reality ahead. The political political analyst about us, Aslani speaking to me from Tehran. Well, the two weeks ceasefire will come as a relief to many, not least to Iran's Arab neighbors in the Gulf who've endured several weeks of attacks by Iranian drones and missiles. Let's speak to the BBC's Lorna Gordon who joins us from Dubai in the UAE. Lorna, good to have you with us. There are still reports of some strikes hitting the Gulf region. Why is that happening? Yeah, you know, both Kuwait and the UAE have said they've continued to deal with drones and missiles fired from Iran in the hours since the ceasefire was announced. The attacks on Kuwait authorities have caused significant damage to oil and power infrastructure and water desalination plants. It's not clear why it's been happening. It is possible that the message hasn't filtered through to the Iranian forces on the ground because, of course, regional commanders in Iran were given the power to order attacks. So perhaps it is a matter of waiting for that message to trickle through. But in the meantime, yes, these attacks have continued. Even if the ceasefire holds, can it ever be business as usual for a country like the UAE? Well, the authorities here, you know, I spoke to a senior advisor to the UAE president. He insisted that the UAE will bounce back, that the fundamental, the basics here are strong. And it is true to say that their defences have been quite impressive that most of the attacks and there have been a great number of attacks on the UAE, hundreds of missiles, Iranian missiles targeting the Emirates, thousands of drones, most of them have been intercepted. But there, of course, there has been damage from those interceptions from falling debris. But it is true to say, I think, and fair to say that the number of flights coming in and out of the airport here, this huge international hub, have been much reduced. It's picked up since the start of the war, as the war has progressed. They have picked up from a very low at the beginning of March, but they are still down on normal numbers. People have left the area. They will be waiting to see if they feel comfortable enough to return. And I think the authorities, except while they say, they'll bounce back, that they do have some work to do both in building back infrastructure that has been damaged in attacks and building back confidence for people who previously lived or visited the region. Launa, thank you very much indeed. The BBC is Launa Gordon joining us live there from Dubai. And we're going to be hearing a bit more about the reaction of Gulf Arab States later in the programme with our Chief International Correspondent, Liste, who said that's in a few minutes time. But we're going to change tack for a moment and head to Zimbabwe, where a political row is growing over moves to change the constitution to allow the president to stay in office. Emerson Manangagwa is due to stand down in 2028, but his support is in government to try and to extend his term. The president's critics say the plan is illegal and are calling on parliament to withdraw the bill. From the capital Harare, Shingai Nyoka, sent us this report. I'm standing in the middle of this circular, dimly lit 4,000-seat capacity stadium, which has pecked to the rafters. Thousands and thousands of people have turned out from all walks of life to give their views. I support the bill in its entirety, this woman said. As the microphone is passed around, most echo this view. They agree with term limits being extended from five to seven years and allowing MPs to elect the president, they say, to reduce political toxicity. The ruling Zanapef party says these and other changes will entrench democracy, but suddenly familiar scenes of violence. The tension is building pretty chaotic scenes. People tussling as the mic moves towards those who oppose the constitutional amendment. Opposition member Fadzai Mahere was caught up in the melee. Zanapef thugs descended and started meeting us up, trying to snatch our phones and saying that you will not say anything at this hearing. So the whole point was to cause commotion in Bay 8 where we were all seated so that no opposing views say anything. In the lead up to these meetings, critics say their meetings were routinely banned and people attacked by unknown assailants. Former finance minister Tendai Miti is out on bail following his arrest for holding an unsanctioned meeting. This is a cool, a slow cool that is unfolding in Zimbabwe. Mr Nangago and his government, against the people's will, are endeavoring to manufacture false consensus to create a brand new constitution that consolidated power in him. In 2013, Zimbabweans overwhelmingly adopted a new constitution that sought to curb the excesses of former leader Robert Mugabe. It states that two referenda are needed to change term limits and secondly, to allow the incumbent to benefit. Former Justice Minister Zanapef's Patrick Chinamasa disagrees. The constitution provides that a presidential term is three years and more. Now the extension for two years is not three years and for that reason it has escaped the need to go to a referendum. We want to continue the economic development that is taking place since his excellency took over. The Zanapef-dominated parliament is set to debate the bill in the coming weeks. Its passing into law appears inevitable but many here still worry about the precedent this sits in a country still struggling to achieve political stability. Mr Nangago, reporting from the Zimbabwean capital, Harare. You're listening to NewsHour from the BBC World Service. A reminder of our top story today on NewsHour, President Trump has said Iran will no longer enrich uranium after agreeing to a two-week ceasefire. Both sides have claimed victory in the conflict and say they're ready for further negotiations. Earlier in the program we spoke to Katie McFarlane, President Trump's former deputy national security advisor who insisted the ceasefire with Iran would be on America's terms. Another headline, Greece has become the latest country to announce a social media ban for children with access to several platforms for under 15 set to be restricted from the start of next year. This is James Menendez with NewsHour live from the BBC. We're back to our main story now and the ceasefire announced overnight with both the US and Iran agreeing to stop the conflict for the next two weeks with me in the studio, our chief international correspondent and a long time around, watch Elise. Elise, I just wanted to pick up first of all with what we heard from our correspondent in Dubai, really about relief in the Gulf Arab states that at least for the moment the hostilities seem to have stopped. Yes, a sigh of relief from Dubai, from capitals right across the Gulf region, which who have been coming under on almost daily barrages of missiles and drones, sighs of relief right across the world. But for those in the neighborhood, if you like, they've given it a cautious welcome, but they have many questions. And when I spoke a short time ago to the diplomatic advisor to the UAE president, Dr. Anwar Gargash, I asked, are you confident that this ceasefire will hold? A lot of the details are not very clear. They're different statements coming out of Iran from Washington and from the Pakistani mediator. So we need to reconcile the details of these statements and understand exactly what is the way forward. Today, Kuwait was targeted, we were targeted by Iranian missiles and drones. So our air defenses are active. So clearly, there are a lot of questions that have to be answered. The foreign minister has made it clear that they will open the straight, but that Iran will continue to exercise its control. Is that acceptable to the UAE and other Gulf states whose economies depend on that straight? I think it's a precedent that many countries will not accept. If an act of hostile piracy will actually change the status here, should we actually look at changes also in Gibraltar? Should we look at streets that are extremely essential in the Far East? This is an aspirational claim by Iran to benefit from the war. Iran is already working with the Gulf state of Oman. They seem to have come up with an arrangement that they will share the responsibility for patrolling and then also to share the tolls that Iran now said to be charging $2 million a tanker. That seems to be Iran's new red line. It will never go back. You talked about going back to the status quo. It won't go back. This is totally unacceptable, because if you create that precedent, then you will have many, many vital choke points in the globe with some aspiring regional power trying to change facts because of events. I think this is going to be extremely dangerous, and I don't think at the end of the day it will fly. Is your message then to President Trump that he should not end this war until the Street of Hormuz is open? I mean, our message was always not to go to war. We chose to defend ourselves because we had to. We had to prepare. This was a worst case scenario for us in our sort of planning of an Iranian sustained attack against the UAE. We've proven that we can defend ourselves. But of course, we don't want to be in the state. We think that this is the time to address many of the issues that have been at the core of instability in the Gulf. Dr. Amwa Agagash, a diplomatic advisor to the President of the UAE. Lees, we heard earlier the US Defense Secretary proclaiming victory, and I guess many people expected the Trump administration to do just that. What has the last five weeks of war achieved for the US? Well, President Trump was claiming victory even three days into the war. He said, we've won already. We just want to win a little bit more. They've been declaring 100 percent of Iran's military capabilities are destroyed, and that's clearly not true. It's not surprising when you agree a ceasefire is fragile as this one is that both sides will declare victory. They have to say that for their own constituents, and they want to tell the world that we're on the winning side. But the reason why it matters here is when the United States says we have won, you get comments that we just heard earlier in the program saying, well, Iran has to accept our dictates. We won, and they lost. They have to surrender. Iran feels this is not just propaganda. They have weaponized the Strait of Hormuz, as we've just heard. They feel that they've not just survived, but they've been able to defend themselves and to make themselves, forcing the United States into a reckoning. So when you read their statement, they say that the United States has ended this on our terms, and the United States says Iran has ended it on their terms. And that isn't just one hint about how difficult these negotiations, if you can call them negotiations, these discussions are going to be. It was also at the outset of the war, I mean, it was said that this was to deal with the threat that Iran posed to the whole region. We heard the UAE talking there about, you know, the root causes of the instability in the Gulf. Is that region more unstable now than it was five weeks ago? Well, as you heard them, they feel proud in a way that they've been able to defend themselves. They've shot down, intercepted most of the missiles and drones, which came their way, but not all of them. They have suffered significant economic losses. It will take years and years for them to recover, even though they are very wealthy. But even as this war began, as the missiles started being fired, senior officials in the Gulf said to me, when there are talks, ballistic missiles now have to be on them. You'll remember that before the war, Iran had got the United States to agree that any deal would just be about the nuclear program. Ballistic missiles would have to be for another day. Now they are saying we have to deal with ballistic missiles now. And of course, the Strait of Hormuz too has to be on the agenda now. So it's far more difficult to and the UAE has taken the toughest of lines and saying we have to double down on our relationship with the United States. But there you have Oman saying, no, no, we want to work with Iran. Saudi Arabia has been playing a role in these mediation efforts. UAE didn't join them. Qatar, traditionally the mediator, they've not joined them. So there's some differences among the Gulf states. And what about the US's position in the wider world and its relationship with other allies? How will the rest of the world now see the US give them what has happened in those past five weeks? What is one to make of a country which did not consult its allies before unleashing this war and then insulted them, berated them, punish them for not joining a war, which was a war of choice and when became a war of necessity, they were then again, they were embarrassed, humiliated, criticized, derided for not joining the US efforts. What are they to make of President Trump with his what is being described as a genocidal tweet to destroy a civilization in a day, a commander in chief who changes his messages daily. I think this is just going to accelerate a process at least for European allies in Canada that they already realize they have to depend ever more on themselves while still trying to maintain a relationship with the mightiest army in the world. Please, as ever, thank you very much indeed. Our chief international correspondent, Lee's, do set there bringing us to the end of this edition of News Hour. Thanks so much for being with us. I'll be back at the same time tomorrow. Until then, bye-bye.