Sanctions on ICC: Trump’s new world order is nasty, brutish, and dystopian

The International Criminal Court in The Hague: Facing a death blow from the Trump administration

Explaining the state of nature that existed before governments emerged, British social contract theorist Thomas Hobbes described the resulting lawless disorder as selfish, nasty, brutish and short.

Fast forward to 2026. Lawless disorder is no longer a hypothesis advanced by a 17th-century political philosopher. We are hurtling towards the very dystopia Hobbes envisaged to explain the conditions that necessitated the formation of government in the political evolution of human society. And the country most responsible for this reverse journey is the United States, whose very foundations, paradoxically, were built on liberty, justice and the rule of law.

The peace-loving global community was shocked last week and remains concerned by US efforts to institutionalise a lawless international order in which might is right, violence is the international currency for resolving disputes, oppression is normalised, and injustice is regarded as a virtue.

In yet another step towards the global order’s plunge into lawlessness, US President Donald Trump’s administration last week imposed financial sanctions on the International Criminal Court (ICC), in keeping with its pledge to dismantle the court. It mattered little to the Trump administration that the court was established pursuant to the Rome Statute, which was signed and ratified by states concerned about growing impunity for crimes against humanity.

In its preamble, the Rome Statute affirms that grave international crimes must not go unpunished. It also emphasises the duty of states to bring perpetrators to justice.

Now who, other than criminals, would call for the abolition of the police station in a town? By taking harsh steps to dismantle the ICC—established as a permanent institution to help end impunity, uphold the rule of law, and contribute to peace and international justice—the Trump administration has once again proved its criminal credentials.

The ostensible reason is to protect Americans from the ICC’s jurisdiction. But the undeclared reason was to shield Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and some of his hardline cabinet ministers from ICC prosecution on charges of genocide in Gaza since October 7, 2023.

Of late, the US political establishment has shown little concern about its international standing being tarnished by its foreign policy decisions. Not only the Trump administration but also its predecessor, the Joe Biden administration, has demonstrated that the United States would go to great lengths to support the war crimes of Netanyahu, who, along with two former cabinet ministers, is the subject of ICC arrest warrants.

That the United States is a textbook example of global hypocrisy was vividly illustrated by its rush to embrace the ICC’s 2023 arrest warrant for Russian President Vladimir Putin, describing it as “fully justified” under President Biden, and its denunciation of the same court as a “rogue court” under President Trump.

Last Friday, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio, acting more like a conceited global bully than a composed diplomat committed to promoting US interests while upholding a peace- and justice-based global order, vowed to “dismantle the ICC piece by piece” and declared: “Either the ICC will end its threats, or we will end the ICC.”

“We will ban transactions with this rogue court, cutting off its resources and crippling its ability to operate against us. Because our message is clear: the United States and the American people are not subject to the jurisdiction of this fake ICC ... we don’t want that court and we don’t want it,” he said in a video post on X.

The financial sanctions are now in force, while US companies dealing with the Hague-based court have been given a 180-day period under a Treasury licence to wind up their dealings with the court. The Trump administration had earlier sanctioned more than a dozen judges and prosecutors, preventing them from accessing US-linked financial services.

The US and Israel are not parties to the Rome Statute, but when the treaty was being negotiated in the wake of the genocides in Rwanda and Bosnia during the 1990s, then US President Bill Clinton backed efforts to punish those who commit crimes against humanity. But when the treaty was opened for signature, the US backed out.

Washington’s allies condemned the sanctions, albeit in toothless statements that bark but do not bite. In response, the ICC said the move was an “assault on the rule of law and on the very foundations of the international legal order”. It called on its 125 member states to defend the institution.

“The Court cannot stand alone. Its fate now rests also in the hands of the states that created it,” the ICC said in a statement. “This is not just about defending a single institution, but about safeguarding the international order grounded in the rule of law. History will judge this moment.”

UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres was “deeply alarmed”, while UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Volker Türk called for immediate measures to protect the ICC.

The ICC has convicted several suspects for crimes against humanity, and all of them were from Africa, drawing criticism that it lacks the courage to go after war crimes suspects like Netanyahu. But now that it has issued an arrest warrant for Netanyahu, it is facing near death rather than a global outcry to reinforce it in the greater interest of preventing crimes against humanity.

Last month, Netanyahu visited the United States to address the UN General Assembly sessions, flying over Greece, Italy, France, and Canada—all state parties to the Rome Statute—but none had the courage to force his flight down and arrest him, as the Rome Statute demands.

What is next? Will the US impose similar sanctions on the International Court of Justice (ICJ)—probably the last vestige of global justice—because it is hearing a case against Israel? The court has also delivered several judgments against Israel, which dismisses them in utter contempt for the court and still brags before the international community that it is the only civilized nation with a working democracy in the entire Middle East.

The US move to render the ICC defunct also raises fears that after the October 27 Israeli elections and the US midterms on November 3, the US will unleash a new wave of attacks on Iran and the use of MOAB (mother of all bombs), causing large-scale human casualties, which may be construed as crimes against humanity. It is also feared that the Zionist regime will begin the second phase of the genocide in Gaza. The perpetrators may legitimise their crimes as a lesser evil, just like Washington legitimised the use of atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, claiming it did so to end the war, which, if continued, could have killed many more people than the atomic bombs did.

Undermining international law and international institutions set up to uphold global justice will only expedite the United States’ fall from grace. It will morally disqualify itself from being the number one global power. Trump believes international law is whatever he deems it to be. He once said, “I don’t need international law” and that the only thing limiting his power was “my own morality, my own mind.” When powerful countries are not restricted by international mechanisms such as the ICC, the ICJ, and international agreements, we will soon inherit a primitive world order where only the fittest will survive.

Gone with Trump’s decision to sanction the ICC are humanity’s collective efforts over centuries to usher in a world order where the norm is to respect human rights, international law, and state sovereignty.

The politics of gratitude: The corruption no one sees

by Karam Nama

A general view of the Etihad Stadium, home of Manchester City, in Manchester, United Kingdom, on October 7, 2026. [Loannis Alexopoulos – Anadolu Agency]

Not all political corruption begins with money. Sometimes, it begins with success. Public imagination has long been trained to look for corruption in suitcases of cash, shady contracts, and secret deals. Yet some of the most consequential distortions of political judgment emerge from a far subtler source: a politician’s emotional attachment to a project they helped create.

This hidden dynamic lay beneath the recent controversy surrounding Andy Burnham’s comments on Manchester City. After initially suggesting that the club deserved fair treatment before later reaffirming that no institution stands above the rules, Burnham found himself at the center of a debate that extended far beyond football.

At first glance, the story appeared to involve a politician defending a football club or perhaps its wealthy owners. In reality, something more interesting was taking place. Burnham was defending, consciously or otherwise, part of his own political story.

The transformation of Manchester over the past two decades has become one of Britain’s most celebrated urban success stories. Manchester City’s ownership was not solely responsible for that transformation, but it undeniably became part of it.

Investments around the Etihad complex and across large sections of East Manchester helped reinforce a narrative of renewal that politicians, civic leaders, and business interests collectively embraced. For Burnham, separating the success of modern Manchester from his own political identity has become increasingly difficult.

This is not primarily an ethical problem. It is a human one.

People instinctively defend the institutions, ideas, and projects that have given meaning to their lives. Politicians are especially vulnerable to this tendency because politics is ultimately a profession obsessed with legacy. Few enter public life merely to exercise power. Most hope to leave behind a lasting achievement. The moment that achievement comes under scrutiny, criticism of the project begins to feel like criticism of the self.

Britain has witnessed this phenomenon before.

Tony Blair spent years trapped within the narrative of “New Labour” and the promise of a modernised Britain. The project was initially so successful that its architect struggled to recognise its deeper flaws. This became most visible in the Iraq War.

Blair’s persistence was not simply a matter of defending a policy. Over time, the war became intertwined with his broader conception of leadership and international responsibility. Retreat no longer meant revising a political decision. It meant acknowledging that one of the defining chapters of his public life may have been built upon a profound misjudgement.

A similar pattern can be observed in Boris Johnson’s relationship with Brexit. Long after leaving office, Johnson has remained attached to the project not merely because he believes in its outcomes but because Brexit became inseparable from his political identity. It delivered power, fame, and a place in history. To distance himself from it would require a form of self-criticism that few politicians are willing to undertake.

Yet this phenomenon extends beyond individuals.

Governments fall in love with their achievements. Cities fall in love with their redevelopment schemes. Nations fall in love with the narratives they construct about themselves.

At a certain point, success ceases to be a project and becomes a creed.

And that is when the trouble begins.

The paradox is that failure often encourages self-examination, while success produces the illusion of infallibility. A failed policy invites scrutiny. A successful one tends to acquire defenders. The more celebrated an achievement becomes, the more difficult it is to assess honestly.

The true responsibility of a statesman is not to adore achievements but to question them. It is not to protect them from criticism but to subject them to it. A good engineer is not the person who loves a building most. It is the person who knows where it might collapse.

Modern politics, however, rewards precisely the opposite behaviour. It rewards the conversion of political accomplishments into heroic narratives. Eventually, the narrative becomes more valuable than reality itself. Protecting the legacy becomes more important than examining its weaknesses.

This is why one of the most dangerous forms of political corruption is not financial corruption but what might be called the corruption of gratitude.

A politician becomes indebted to a project, a business leader, an idea, a movement, or even an electorate that helped create their success. Once that bond is formed, impartial judgment begins to erode. Not because of bribery or coercion, but because emotional loyalty quietly replaces critical distance.

The politician who takes a bribe can be exposed.

The politician imprisoned by personal success is far more difficult to detect.

In many cases, such individuals sincerely believe they are acting in the public interest. They do not recognize their own bias because they are not protecting a benefactor. They are protecting a cherished part of themselves.

Nor is this tendency confined to politics. Revolutionaries often become prisoners of the narratives they once created. Writers become captives of their most celebrated books. Leaders cling to decisions that history has already judged harshly because they can no longer separate the truth from their own reflection in it.

This is what makes the Burnham episode more interesting than Manchester City itself.

The fundamental question is not whether the club’s owners are good or bad, nor whether the club is guilty or innocent. The deeper question is what happens when a politician can no longer distinguish between the interests of a city and the story they tell themselves about their role in its success.

That is where the quiet tragedy of politics begins.

And it is also where the most elusive form of corruption emerges.

Not from the pocket, but from the heart.

Guterres in Islamabad: Genocide, cowardice, and the cage of Imran Khan

by Junaid S. Ahmad

Secretary-General of the United Nations Antonio Guterres held a press conference on Wednesday ahead of the UN General Assembly high-level week on September 16, 2026, in New York City, U.S. [Selçuk Acar – Anadolu Agency]

There are careers that end in triumph, careers that end in scandal, and careers that achieve the rarer distinction of staging their own final indictment. António Guterres has found his in Islamabad.

After nearly a decade as Secretary-General of the United Nations, he arrives in Pakistan in the twilight of his tenure and performs the ritual that has come to define him: smile warmly, praise generously, deplore abstractly, and avoid saying anything that might seriously inconvenience the powerful men standing beside him. His record is littered with eloquent concern, grave warnings and solemn appeals. What it has lacked, again and again, is the one quality that gives moral language meaning: courage when courage carries a cost.

In Islamabad, the performance is almost indecent. Guterres praises Pakistan as a source of “solidarity and solutions,” commends the “resilience” of its people, and assures them that the United Nations stands with them. Meanwhile, former prime minister Imran Khan remains imprisoned after the UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention declared his detention arbitrary.

UN experts have raised concerns about his treatment, prolonged isolation and conditions of confinement; the UN Committee Against Torture has separately highlighted broader allegations of politically motivated detention, torture, intimidation and repression.

Guterres does not need opposition politicians or troublesome journalists to brief him. He could simply read his own institution’s reports. But that would ruin the choreography.

So the Secretary-General moves through meetings with Pakistan’s political and security establishment while one of the country’s most popular and persecuted political leaders sits behind bars. Outside the diplomatic bubble, Khan’s supporters confront barricades, arrests and the familiar machinery of coercion. The Pakistani state, chronically incompetent at governing, once again discovers astonishing administrative efficiency when citizens decide to protest.

And Guterres praises their resilience. The euphemism is almost grotesque. A population is subjected to repression, institutional decay and coercive politics, and the world’s senior international diplomat congratulates it for enduring the experience. It is the diplomatic equivalent of praising a prisoner’s fortitude while refusing to ask who locked the cell.

But Islamabad is not a lapse in the Guterres record. It is the culmination of it.

The same moral evasion has defined his response to Gaza. For years, Guterres has described the catastrophe in increasingly apocalyptic terms: mass death, starvation, displacement, destroyed hospitals, shattered families, collective punishment and violations of international law. He has rarely lacked adjectives for horror.

What he lacked was willingness to name its most consequential possibility. Genocide.

When confronted directly, Guterres retreated into procedure, insisting that such a determination belonged to the courts. It was bureaucratic cowardice dressed as juridical sobriety. Apparently, a Secretary-General may describe the destruction of a people in exhaustive detail, denounce their starvation, mourn their children and warn of their dehumanization — but the moment the facts threaten to crystallize into the politically dangerous word, he develops an almost priestly devotion to institutional restraint.

The absurdity became complete when UN experts explicitly warned of genocide and a UN Commission of Inquiry later concluded that Israel had committed genocide in Gaza. The institution Guterres leads could say what Guterres himself repeatedly would not. This was not neutrality. It was evasion refined into method.

That is the essence of the Guterres tenure: moral vocabulary without moral escalation. He has perfected the art of sounding anguished while remaining politically non-threatening. His speeches travel bravely to the edge of the necessary conclusion, stare into the abyss, invoke international law, then retreat into another carefully worded appeal to governments that have already demonstrated their contempt for it.

Gaza became a theatre of catastrophic adjectives without commensurate political naming. Pakistan now becomes a festival of diplomatic compliments beside a prison cell.

The parallel is devastating. In Gaza, the UN system could document devastation while its Secretary-General recoiled from the word that carried the greatest political charge. In Pakistan, UN mechanisms can document arbitrary detention, abuse and repression while their chief shakes hands with the authorities presiding over the system they have condemned.

That is not merely institutional contradiction. It is leadership failure.

No serious person expects a UN Secretary-General to command armies, free prisoners by decree or compel governments into decency. But the office possesses one form of power that cannot be dismissed so easily: moral authority. Guterres has spent much of his tenure conserving it so carefully that, when history demanded its expenditure, there was often nothing to show for it.

He has confused caution with wisdom and diplomatic acceptability with statesmanship. But statesmanship is not the art of saying only what power can comfortably tolerate. Its purpose, at decisive moments, is precisely the opposite.

And so Islamabad is a fitting final tableau: Guterres praising resilience while surrounded by evidence of why resilience is necessary; representing institutions whose own findings he seems unwilling to embody; smiling through repression in Pakistan after years of speaking around genocide in Gaza.

History will not care how many statements he issued, how solemnly he frowned, or how often he invoked international law.

It will ask what he said when speaking plainly became dangerous. Too often, António Guterres chose not to. He saw almost everything. He described almost everything. And when history demanded courage rather than description, he chose cowardice.

Iranian delegation attending WHO RC73

TEHRAN – An Iranian delegation led by Ali Jafarian, a senior advisor to the health minister, is participating in the 73rd session of the WHO Regional Committee for Eastern Mediterranean (RC73), being held from October 13 to 15 in Cairo, Egypt.

The event has brought together health ministers and high-level delegates from the 22 countries and territories to set regional health priorities and guide WHO work with member states.

The Iranian official is scheduled to deliver a speech focusing on different health issues such as the impacts of sanctions and wars on the health system, the supply chain of medical items and equipment, the health ministry’s website reported.

Strengthening preparedness and response to public health emergencies, expanding technical and regional cooperation, and benefiting from the capacity of WHO to support the priorities of national health systems are among the issues to be discussed by the Iranian delegation. Jafarian is also planned to hold meetings with health officials from the Eastern Mediterranean office and the region.   

The opening ceremony celebrated outstanding contributions to health in the Region. The State of Kuwait Prize for the Control of Cancer, Cardiovascular Diseases and Diabetes in the Eastern Mediterranean Region was presented to three laureates from Iran, Egypt, and the United Arab Emirates.

Amir-Ali Hamidieh, an Iranian professor at Tehran University of Medical Sciences, grabbed the prize for his pioneering work in paediatric haematology, oncology and stem cell transplantation.

A distinguished physician, academic and pioneer in paediatric haematology, oncology and stem cell transplantation, Hamidieh earned his M.D. from Islamic Azad University, Tehran, and pursued postgraduate training in paediatrics and paediatric haematology/ oncology at Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences. He later completed advanced fellowships in haematopoietic stem cell transplantation at The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center and Baylor College of Medicine in Texas, United States of America.

Hamidieh currently serves as Professor of Pediatric Hematology/ Oncology and Stem Cell Transplantation at Tehran University of Medical Sciences, where he also directs the Pediatric Cell and Gene Therapy Research Center.

He is the founder of the Iranian paediatric stem cell transplantation programme and the national stem cell donor network, which established the country’s first human leukocyte antigen (HLA) registry.

He chairs the National Council for Development of Stem Cell Sciences and Technologies under the Vice-Presidency for Science and Technology and is a member of the executive boards of the Asia-Pacific Blood and Marrow Transplantation Group and the Iranian Food and Drug Administration.

His leadership has enabled the development of seven paediatric transplant centres across the Islamic Republic of Iran and the successful completion of more than 2100 paediatric stem cell transplants.
Hamidieh has authored more than 100 peer-reviewed articles on research spanning regenerative medicine, gene therapy, immunodeficiencies and paediatric cancers.

He has also led clinical innovations in CAR-T cell therapy and photopheresis across many countries. Through his academic leadership, clinical excellence and commitment to equitable care, Hamidieh has significantly advanced the field of paediatric stem cell transplantation in Iran and the broader Eastern Mediterranean Region.

RC73 at a critical time for health

The opening of RC73 comes at a critical time for health in the Region. Protracted and escalating emergencies continue to disrupt health systems, putting millions of lives at risk, at a time when countries are contending with disease outbreaks, persistent inequities, a growing burden of noncommunicable diseases and mounting financial pressures.

In his opening remarks, Adham Rashad Ismail, Officer-in-Charge of the WHO Regional Office for the Eastern Mediterranean, highlighted the immense humanitarian and financial pressures facing the Region.

The official reaffirmed WHO’s commitment to sustaining essential health services and supporting countries through ongoing crises: “WHO must continue to support populations affected by conflict and crisis, protect essential health services and advocate for uninterrupted humanitarian access and funding. The people relying on health services in Afghanistan, the Gaza Strip, Sudan, Yemen and elsewhere cannot bear the consequences of shrinking resources.”

With the opening ceremony concluded, member states will discuss the Annual Report of the Regional Director 2025/2026, which provides a regional stock take of health progress, persistent challenges and WHO’s work with countries over the past year, helping to identify areas where progress needs to be sustained or accelerated.

The Committee will discuss two technical papers, “Advancing health financing for stronger financial protection in the Eastern Mediterranean Region: pathways to equity and resilience” which focuses on ways to build equity and resilience in health care funding and enhance financial protection for populations across the Region, and “A multi-disease elimination architecture for communicable diseases in the Eastern Mediterranean Region” which outlines joint strategies to tackle and eliminate multiple communicable diseases simultaneously.

Discussions will also cover health emergencies and polio eradication, and a panel on artificial intelligence for health will explore the opportunities presented by rapidly evolving technologies.

Member States will hold a regional consultation on the draft Program Budget 2028–2029 and review governance matters and resolutions and decisions of regional interest adopted by the World Health Assembly and WHO Executive Board.

The discussions and decisions taken at RC73 will guide collective action across the Eastern Mediterranean Region, from protecting health amid emergencies and completing the last mile of polio eradication to strengthening health financing, accelerating disease elimination and preparing health systems for the future.

Tags

• Iran
• World Health Organization (WHO)
• the 73rd session of the WHO Regional Committee for Eastern Mediterranean (RC73)

Tehran, Doha explore partnership opportunities in ICT sector

TEHRAN – Information and Communication Technology (ICT) Minister Sattar Hashemi and Qatar’s ambassador in Iran Saad bin Abdullah Al-Mohammad Al-Sharif have underlined the need to expand cooperation between the two countries in the ICT sector.

The officials met in Tehran on Wednesday, discussing ways to develop joint efforts in the field of ICT, particularly digital technologies, Mehr news agency reported.

The talk also focused on Iran and Qatar collaborations in international organizations and specialized forums, including the interaction of the two nations within the International Telecommunication Union (ITU) and the ITU Plenipotentiary Conference.

Regarding the role of ITU in shaping global policies and standards within the ICT sector, coordination and interaction among member states can provide a favorable basis for pursuing shared perspectives and interests, as well as strengthening international cooperation.

The next ITU Plenipotentiary Conference (PP-26) is set to take place from November 9 to 27 November in Doha, Qatar. Held every four years, the conference brings together member states to make decisions on strategic and financial direction, future activities, elect leadership, and adopt resolutions that shape global telecommunications and Internet policy for the next four years.

Expanding ICT ties with neighboring nations on the agenda

On the sidelines of the first session of the UN Global Dialogue on AI Governance, convened by the UN General Assembly in Geneva on July 6 and 7, the head of the Information Technology Organization of Iran, Mohammad-Mohsen Sadr, has held separate meetings with Iraqi, Pakistani, and Omani officials to discuss ways to enhance collaboration between Iran and these countries in the ICT sector.

Holding a meeting with Iraqi Minister of Communications Mustafa Jabbar Sanad, the two sides highlighted the role of information technology and artificial intelligence in helping to address energy imbalances, developing smart infrastructure, enhancing productivity in the energy sector, and fostering cooperation in e-government and data transit. They also discussed expanding cooperation in digital transformation, exchanging technical expertise, and implementing joint projects.

The Iranian official met Shaza Fatima Khawaja, the Pakistani Minister for IT and Telecommunications, as well. During the meeting, both parties explored avenues to enhance cooperation between Iran and Pakistan in the fields of information technology, e-government, artificial intelligence, digital economy, cybersecurity, and the development of the innovation ecosystem.

In his X account, Sadr described the meeting with the Omani official as a constructive one, which particularly focused on e-government, artificial intelligence, digital economy, communication infrastructure, and expanding technological interactions between the two countries.

The two countries have high capacities to deepen digital cooperation and develop joint initiatives in the future of the digital economy, he added.

AI governance is the set of rules, standards, and oversight practices that determine how artificial intelligence systems are built, deployed, and held accountable, and in July 2026, it moved onto the world stage.

The official said a workshop on Artificial Intelligence and the Government Digital Ecosystem held on July 7 at the International Telecommunication Union (ITU) headquarters in Geneva was very well received by the participants; it included his speech and the talks of other representatives from UNDESA’s E-Government Assessment Branch and the ITU Development Sector, as well as university professors.

The UN Global Dialogue on AI Governance was the world’s first intergovernmental platform where every government and stakeholder group sat at the same table to align on AI oversight.

It is a direct product of the Global Digital Compact, the digital cooperation framework adopted in September 2024.
The Dialogue brought together all 193 UN member states alongside the private sector, civil society, academia, and the technical community. It received the first annual report of the UN Independent International Scientific Panel on Artificial Intelligence, giving member states a shared evidence base.

Crucially, the forum adopts no binding resolutions or regulations. It is a place to exchange best practices and build common approaches, and it ran alongside the World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS) Forum 2026 and the International Telecommunication Union (ITU) AI for Good Global Summit in the same week. A second session is scheduled for New York in May 2027.

Tags

• Iran
• Qatar
• information and communication technology (ICT)

Iran eyes African markets through technology cooperation with Senegal

TEHRAN – Iranian officials have explored ways to strengthen scientific and technological cooperation with Senegal, positioning the West African country as a gateway for Iranian knowledge-based companies seeking to expand into African markets.

Hossein Roozbeh, head of the Organization for the Development of International Cooperation in Science and Technology, met with Hamid Moradkhani, Iran’s ambassador to Senegal, on Saturday to discuss avenues for expanding bilateral cooperation, IRNA reported.

The talks focused on boosting exports of knowledge-based products, transferring technical expertise for the production of agricultural drones, and finalizing a comprehensive memorandum of understanding (MoU) on technological cooperation between the two countries.

The officials also discussed ways to benefit from artificial intelligence (AI) capacities and technological infrastructures to develop bilateral economic relations.

Describing Senegal as a gateway for Iranian technology to the African continent, Roozbeh put forward several proposals to expand bilateral cooperation.

He noted that more than 11,000 knowledge-based companies operate in Iran, producing goods that meet international standards and compete with their global counterparts in both quality and price.

He also announced Iran’s readiness for joint manufacturing of products in agricultural, medical, petrochemical, and energy sectors.

His other suggestion focused on establishing and developing science and technology parks and Iranian innovation centers in Senegal.

Holding technological exhibitions, providing specialized content for media in Senegal, granting scholarships to Senegalese students, and hosting Senegalese technical delegations in the Iranian House of Innovation and Technology (iHiT) were among other points suggested by the official.

For his part, Moradkhani highlighted technology transfer and specialized training as the key pillars of the two countries’ collaborations, and called for the Vice Presidency for Science and Technology to play an active role in Iran-Africa joint commissions.

He also underscored the importance of establishing a network of experts and strengthening exchanges in the oil and energy sectors.

The official added that a draft memorandum of understanding (MoU) had been finalized and was expected to be signed during a visit to Tehran by senior Senegalese officials in January 2027.

Tehran hosts meeting of African envoys to boost science, health cooperation

On December 7, 2025, Iranian officials and the ambassadors of 19 African countries to Tehran discussed ways to enhance cooperation in the fields of science, education, research, and health.

Addressing the meeting, held in Tehran, Nader Tavakoli, the Chancellor of Iran University of Medical Sciences, said despite coercive sanctions, the country has managed to make great strides in the health sector, from education and treatment to technology and production of medicines, relying on committed and creative human resources, IRNA reported.

“Now, we are ready to share these achievements with Africans through establishing a strategic health alliance between Iran and African countries,” Tavakoli highlighted.

Elaborating on the core areas of the strategic alliance, he said that researchers will focus on addressing real-time illnesses, such as tropical and endemic diseases, drug shortages, and health service delivery in rural areas.

Admitting African students and developing joint educational courses, with dual accreditation, as well as dispatching professors for training of trainers, will be another part of the alliance.

Other main components of the strategic alliance will include sharing technical knowledge in fields such as manufacturing vaccines, biosimilar drugs, and medical equipment by establishing a collaborative production line in African countries, Tavakoli added.

The expansion of scientific interactions between Iranian and African scientists was the last point mentioned by the official. The strategic alliance will lay the basis for boosting scientific collaborations between over 60 universities and hundreds of top research centers across the country, he further noted.

On December 8, the ministries of health and foreign affairs, in a virtual meeting with Iranian ambassadors and attachés in Africa, discussed the potential for promoting cooperation with African countries in the health sector.

During the meeting, Alireza Biglari, the deputy health minister for international affairs, highlighted the country’s capabilities in areas related to health. Referring to the existing capacity as a valuable opportunity for the expansion of health diplomacy and the favorable condition for cooperation with African countries, the official announced the readiness of the health ministry to implement decisions and operational plans, IRNA reported.

For his part, Akbar Khosravi Nejad, Assistant to Iran’s Foreign Minister and Director General for Africa, underlined the importance of Africa in Iran’s foreign policy, and said that the country’s health system is one of the main sectors for enhancing collaborations with these countries.

Tavakoli, for his part, presented an account of the current activities and programs of the university in Africa, as well as future plans to meet African ambassadors in Tehran.

Tags

• Iran
• senegal
• technology

One year since the ceasefire, the UN commemorates its failures

by Ramona Wadi

A general view of the destruction as Palestinian civilians and emergency responders search through the debris of damaged residential buildings following an Israeli military airstrike in the Sabra neighborhood, south of Gaza City, Palestine on October 9, 2026. [Saeed M. M. T. Jaras – Anadolu Agency]

Nothing spells hypocrisy more accurately than the UN commemorating its failures. In a press release titled One year after ceasefire announcement, killings continue across Gaza, the UN Deputy Special Coordinator, Resident Coordinator and Humanitarian Coordinator’s Office expresses its purported concern “about continued crimes under international law, including war crimes.”

That is to be expected when, instead of halting genocide, a ceasefire is announced so belatedly that it holds no value except in international rhetoric. Since the so-called ceasefire, which did nothing but give the international community respite from having to face global outrage at Israel’s ongoing genocide in Gaza, over 1,400 Palestinians have been killed, 1,076 of which have been identified by UN personnel. The press release also notes that Israel killed over 20,000 Palestinian children in Gaza since 7 October 2023. 

“This pattern raises serious concerns that Israel is directing attacks against civilians not directly participating in hostilities – a war crime,” the press release partly states. Is this pattern really raising concern now? Have UN diplomats and personnel not seen children torn to shreds, decapitated by bombs or burnt to death before commemorating the first rhetorical ceasefire? Or is the UN attempting to make Israeli war crimes since the ceasefire look worse than they did during the genocide?

 All war crimes are war crimes. Only the UN enjoys distinguishing according to time frames, because timeframes suit bureaucratic purposes.

Since the ceasefire widely celebrated by the international community while Palestinians still suffer under Israel’s bombs, the slower form of genocide chosen by Israel is no longer making constant headlines. Rather, news has transformed into updates. Palestinians have been forcibly displaced multiple times. Instead of forcing Israel to withdraw its military occupation from Gaza, there is passive observation as Israel’s gradual encroachment reaches its target area of 70 per cent of Gaza, as Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu had declared. The UN will undoubtedly then continue with its passive observation as Israel occupied 80 per cent of Gaza, given that Israeli officials have already stated there will be no withdrawal. 

The bizarre end Palestinians fear is not spoken about as much by the UN – where will Palestinians live? Will the UN then capitulate to Israel’s purported free movement plan? What will the UN do when it realises that by not stopping Israel’s genocide, Palestinians have nowhere to go?

But that was the plan all along, since 1947. Which constitutes another hypocritical commemoration –in November, the UN celebrates solidarity with Palestinians on the day it allowed the Zionist colonial movement its presence in Palestine on stolen land. 

Decades after the first anti-colonial struggles for liberation started, the UN is still protecting its colonial roots while referring to international law, human rights, Sustainable Development Goals, non-biding resolutions and the fallacy of hope. One year since the ceasefire, the UN should not be contemplating how Israel continued with its war crimes. The UN should be contemplating its existence and its complicity with colonialism.

Those on the right side of history do not need anniversaries to see colonialism for what it is.