Dans une démarche un peu surprenante, le Syndicat national des praticiens de la santé publique (SNPSP) a déposé une plainte contre le feuilleton algérien « El-Mouhadjir« , […]
L’article Le Syndicat des médecins dépose plainte à l’ANIRAV contre la série El-Mouhadjir est apparu en premier sur .
Credit: Georgios Kostomitsopoulos/NurPhoto via Getty Images
By Inés M. Pousadela
MONTEVIDEO, Uruguay, Feb 24 2026 (IPS)
The Islamic Republic of Iran has put down another uprising, with a ferocity that makes previous crackdowns seem restrained. The theocratic regime has survived, but it has done so by substituting violence for the economic security it cannot provide and the political legitimacy it no longer has. Its show of force is also an admission of weakness.
The protests that began on 28 December were triggered by a specific event — the collapse of the rial to a record low — but rooted in years of accumulated grievances. The second half of 2025 alone saw at least 471 labour protests across 69 Iranian cities. Inflation stood at 49.4 per cent. The 12-day war with Israel in June sent the Tehran Stock Exchange down around 40 per cent and cost many people their jobs. The United Nations Security Council reimposed sanctions in September. The government cut fuel subsidies in November and slashed exchange-rate subsidies in December. Over 40 per cent of Iranian households now live below the poverty line and around half the population consume fewer than the recommended 2,100 calories per day.
It was this collapse that brought typically conservative bazaar merchants onto the streets. Within two weeks, the protests had spread to all of Iran’s 31 provinces, drawing in the urban middle class, working-class communities and people from rural provinces who had historically been among the regime’s most reliable supporters. What began as an economic stoppage rapidly became political defiance. For the millions who joined the striking merchants, the plummeting currency and rising cost of food were not market failures; they were proof of the regime’s corruption and ineptitude. Generation Z played a central role, demanding not reform but profound change. Lethal repression provided further confirmation the system was beyond reform.
The state’s response evolved. Initially it offered token economic concessions alongside its usual crowd control violence such as batons and teargas. When it became clear that a widespread movement with political demands had taken hold, it shifted to total attrition. On 8 January, authorities imposed a near-total internet shutdown and authorised security forces to use military-grade weapons against crowds. The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) – a parallel military structure, major political force and economic empire with a direct stake in the regime’s survival – spearheaded the crackdown, with its affiliated Basij paramilitary networks playing a central role in street-level violence.
The casualty figures were deliberately obscured by the internet blackout, but all evidence points in the same direction. Hengaw Organisation for Human Rights reported that at least 3,000 civilians — including 44 children — were killed in the first 17 days. Iran Human Rights, citing Ministry of Health sources, documented a minimum of 3,379 deaths across 15 provinces. The US-based Human Rights Activists News Agency reported around 7,000 verified fatalities by mid-February, with 12,000 further cases under review. Time magazine cited hospital records suggesting the toll may have reached 30,000. Even the lowest of these figures vastly eclipses the 537 deaths recorded during the 2022-2023 Woman, Life, Freedom protests. Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei’s concession that ‘several thousand’ had been killed confirmed the order of magnitude.
By 16 January the streets had been cleared, but a quieter repressive campaign continued, with nighttime raids, enforced disappearances and mass detentions in unofficial holding sites outside the legal system, targeting not only protesters but also doctors who treated the wounded, lawyers who provided legal assistance, bystanders who helped and people who posted supportive statements online. Authorities have detained over 50,000 people. Revolutionary Courts have fast-tracked mass indictments through summary trials, often conducted online and lasting mere minutes, with defendants denied independent legal counsel and confessions extracted under torture. Eighteen-year-old Saleh Mohammadi, whose retracted confession was obtained after interrogators broke bones in his hand, has been sentenced to be publicly hanged at the site of his alleged crime. Dozens more face imminent execution.
The regime has, for now, held: its security forces have not fractured, there have been no significant elite defections, and the IRGC has maintained its capacity for suppression. But it rules over a country with a wrecked economy, a battered nuclear programme, weakened regional proxies and a population that has run out of reasons to comply. Each protest cycle has required a higher threshold of state violence to suppress, a sign the regime has no other tool left.
What prevents weakness from becoming collapse is the absence of any alternative. The international response briefly suggested external pressure might tell – but did not. Donald Trump told Iranian protesters that ‘help is on its way’. The European Union listed the IRGC as a terrorist organisation. The UK imposed fresh sanctions. The Iranian diaspora held at least 168 protests across 30 countries. But the international noise simply enabled the regime to spread the narrative that the uprising was foreign-directed.
The exiled opposition is fragmented along ethnic, ideological and generational lines, seemingly more consumed by internal rivalries than the task of converting widespread discontent into sustained political pressure. Inside Iran, the most credible opposition voices — Nobel laureate Narges Mohammadi, reformist politician Mostafa Tajzadeh and veteran leader Mir Hossein Mousavi — are imprisoned or cut off from public life.
A weakened regime facing a leaderless opposition can endure, but what it cannot do is reverse its decay. Violence may clear the streets, but it cannot rebuild the economy, restore trust or give Iran’s young people a reason to stay. The regime has bought time, at an ever-rising price, but the crisis it’s suppressed isn’t going away.
Inés M. Pousadela is CIVICUS Head of Research and Analysis, co-director and writer for CIVICUS Lens and co-author of the State of Civil Society Report. She is also a Professor of Comparative Politics at Universidad ORT Uruguay.
For interviews or more information, please contact research@civicus.org
Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
UN Secretary-General António Guterres speaks at the opening of the 61st session of the Human Rights Council at the Palais des Nations, in Geneva. Meanwhile, Volker Turk, UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, addresses (below) at the opening of the High-level segment of the Human Rights Council. Credit: UN Photo/Violaine Martin
By Volker Turk
GENEVA, Feb 24 2026 (IPS)
A fierce competition for power, control and resources is playing out on the world stage at a rate and intensity unseen for the past 80 years.
People are feeling unmoored, anxious and insecure. The gears of global power are shifting; the consequences are not clear. Some are signalling the end of the world order as we know it.
But today, I want to talk about another world order. One that is organised from the ground up, and that is unshakeable. A foundational system of how people relate to each other, based on our inherent worth, our hopes, and our common values.
I am referring to people’s pursuit of dignity, equality, and justice. This quest is innate to what makes us human: to be free, to be heard, and to have our basic needs met.
And it is a strong counterbalance to the top-down, autocratic trends we see today. The use of force to resolve disputes between and within countries is becoming normalized.
Inflammatory threats against sovereign nations are thrown about, with no regard to the fire they could ignite. The laws of war are being brutally violated.
Mass civilian suffering – from Sudan, to Gaza, to Ukraine, to Myanmar – is unfolding before our eyes. In Sudan, there needs to be accountability for all violations by all parties – notably, the war crimes and possible crimes against humanity committed by the Rapid Support Forces in El Fasher. Such atrocities must not be repeated in Kordofan or elsewhere. All those with influence need to act urgently to put an end to this senseless war.
The situation in Gaza remains catastrophic. Palestinians are still dying from Israeli fire, cold, hunger, and treatable diseases. The aid allowed in is not enough to meet the massive needs. There are concerns over ethnic cleansing in both Gaza and the West Bank, where Israel is accelerating efforts to consolidate unlawful annexation. Any sustainable solution must be based on two states living side by side in equal dignity and rights, in line with UN resolutions and international law.
Tomorrow marks four years since Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine. Four interminable and agonizing years. Civilian casualties have soared, and Russia’s systematic attacks on Ukraine’s energy and water infrastructure could amount to international crimes. The fighting needs to end, and I urge a focus on human rights and justice in any ceasefire or peace agreement.
In Myanmar, five years after the military coup, the awful conflict is claiming even more civilian lives, and the humanitarian situation continues to deteriorate. The recent elections staged by the military have only deepened people’s despair.
Across most violent conflicts today, journalists, health and aid workers are targeted, in blatant violation of international law. These actions must not be allowed to harden into the new normal.
States need to be persistent objectors to violations of the law – by pursuing accountability, and by clearly denouncing these egregious crimes with consistency, and without exception.
Meanwhile, violence and tensions are resurging in some countries, including South Sudan and Ethiopia. And authorities in Iran have violently repressed mass protests with lethal force, killing thousands.
I will provide more detail on these and other country situations in my global update later this week. Developments around the world point to a deeply worrying trend: domination and supremacy are making a comeback.
If we listen to the rhetoric of some leaders, what lurks behind it is a belief that they are above the law, and above the UN Charter. They claim exceptional status, exceptional danger or exceptional moral judgement to pursue their own agenda at any cost. And why wouldn’t they try, when they are unlikely to face consequences?
They build and sustain systems that perpetuate inequalities within and between countries. Some weaponise their economic leverage. They spread disinformation to distract, silence and marginalize.
A tight clique of tech tycoons controls an outsize proportion of global information flows, distorting public debate, markets, and even governance systems. Corporate and state interests ravage our environment, robbing the riches of the earth for their own gain.
But at the same time, people are not watching all this from the sidelines. They are activating their power, from the ground up. Women and young people especially are leading these movements.
They are claiming their right to basic living conditions, to fair pay, to bodily autonomy, to self-determination, to be heard, to vote freely, and many other rights. From Nepal to Madagascar, from Serbia to Peru and beyond, people are demanding equality and denouncing corruption.
Neighbours and communities are standing up for each other – sometimes even risking their lives. People are protesting war and injustice in places far from home, expressing solidarity and pressuring their governments to act.
They see human rights as a practical force for good – and they are right. Human rights are anathema to supremacy: they are a direct challenge to those who seek and cling to power. That is what makes human rights radical, and that is what gives them force.
They are universal, timeless, and indestructible.
Human rights didn’t magically appear with the Universal Declaration on 10 December 1948.
People have been seeking freedom and equality long before these principles were codified in national or international agreements.
In the late 1700s, enslaved people in modern-day Haiti rose up against colonial rule, in the name of racial equality. The American and French revolutions challenged unaccountable authority. The Abolitionist movement was a rejection of the Transatlantic slave trade – the most brutal system of subjugation.
In the early 1900s, women joined together to demand the right to vote. The fight for gender equality continues. After the bloodshed of two World Wars and the Holocaust, the UN Charter reasserted faith in fundamental human rights, and in the dignity and worth of the human person.
The 20th century then ushered in a period of decolonization, which reaffirmed the right to self-determination. People mobilized to end racial segregation, for labour rights, and to protect the rights of LGBT people.
Mothers marched together to seek justice for their disappeared children, from Argentina to Sri Lanka to Syria. And young people raised their voices for climate justice.
Human rights are the thread that runs through all these movements. And we do not take their achievements for granted. Tyranny will seize any chance and exploit any opening. We must keep standing up for human rights, in solidarity with each other.
When we come together, we wield more power than any autocrat or tech billionaire. The struggle for human rights can never be derailed by the whims of a handful of leaders with reactionary, supremacist agendas.
While some States are weakening the multilateral system, we need bolder and more joined-up responses.
First, this means calling out violations of international law, regardless of the perpetrators. Too often, denouncing violations by one party is labelled as siding with the enemy. In reality, it is upholding universality, and the pursuit of justice for all.
The alternative – selective, fragmented responses – weakens international law and hurts us all.
The entire human rights ecosystem is designed to promote universality and ensure consistency. This includes the tools mandated by this Council. I condemn all attacks against them.
Second, we need stronger commitment to accountability. This includes strengthening the International Criminal Court and encouraging national prosecutions under the principle of universal jurisdiction. We need to increase the cost of breaking international law.
Third, let’s forge coalitions to champion what unites us, and uphold equality, dignity, and justice for all. We must protect the diversity of the human family and demonstrate what we gain by standing together.
In the coming weeks, we will set in motion a Global Alliance for Human Rights to capture the energy and commitment that is palpable everywhere.
This will be a cross-regional, multi-stakeholder coalition of States, businesses, cities, philanthropists, scientists, artists, philosophers, young people and civil society.
It will confront top-down domination with grassroots solidarity and support. It will represent the quiet majority, who want a different world. Human rights are not political currency, and they are not up for grabs.
Our future depends on our joint commitment to defend every person’s rights, every time, everywhere.
https://news.un.org/en/story/2026/02/1167015
IPS UN Bureau
Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau