The Human Consciousness Now...Our World in the Midst of Becoming...to What? Observe, contemplate Now.
WASHINGTON DC, Jul 17 2026 (IPS) - The largest disruption to the global oil market in decades should have sent prices soaring. But after spiking at the start of the war in the Middle East, crude prices soon settled in a range of $90 to $100 per barrel, much lower than many had feared. Why didn’t prices climb higher? The answer is that a combination of factors helped cushion the initial blow. But much of that room has now been used up.
There are plenty of reasons why oil should have become cripplingly expensive. The war effectively closed the Strait of Hormuz, cutting off some 20 million barrels a day of crude oil and refined products, a fifth of global consumption. Gulf producers redirected what they could. Saudi Arabia sent oil through its pipeline to the Red Sea port of Yanbu. The United Arab Emirates pushed its Fujairah port, outside the strait, close to capacity. Even so, these workarounds offset only a fraction of lost Hormuz volumes.
Beyond crude, refined product output in the gulf region dropped significantly, hitting diesel and jet fuel hardest—products in which the region accounts for about 10 percent of global supply.
By the end of May, more than 1.1 billion barrels of crude—equivalent to about 10 days of typical global consumption—had not reached the market. At the same stage of the disruption, the shortfall exceeded those of the 1973 oil shock, the Iran-Iraq war, and the Gulf War.
Three shock absorbers
How did the global system absorb a disruption of this scale? In the days before the war, supply was running about 2 million barrels a day above demand, providing a head start. In the March-May period, three factors helped close the gap:
• Demand compression did the heavy lifting, especially in Asia, as higher prices reduced consumption and economies turned to alternatives such as coal and renewables. Transportation demand proved stickier though, in part because of fuel price caps, subsidies, and tax rebates that contained the impact—but at a fiscal cost.• Production outside the Gulf rose more than expected, by nearly 2 million barrels a day above 2025 levels. The United States led the way, with Venezuela, Guyana, and Russia also raising production.
• Inventories did the rest. The estimated market deficit of about 4.0 million barrels a day in March–May was met almost entirely by drawing down global stocks, including commercial inventories in China and strategic reserves.
Recovery won’t be instant
Before the most recent escalation of tensions, the US-Iran framework agreement to reopen the strait sent prices sharply lower, in large part because stranded oil on tankers in the Gulf could rapidly return to the market. Still, much remains uncertain—including when freedom of navigation through the world’s most critical oil chokepoint will be effectively restored, and how quickly shipping, insurance, and operator confidence will follow.
Industry estimates suggest it will take two to three months before a significant share of oil flows can resume following a full reopening of the waterway. A longer-term concern is that prolonged production halts could cause permanent output losses, especially where financing to restart wells is scarce.
Whenever supply begins to recover, the oil deficit will close only gradually, drawing inventories closer to operational minimums—the level below which the physical system itself begins to bind.
Lessons for policymakers
Energy shocks still bite. What cushioned the initial blow this time is that energy markets had room to maneuver and absorb it. As tensions flare again in the Strait of Hormuz, that room is now smaller and shrinking further as spare capacity has been deployed, demand has compressed, and inventories have been drawn down. Unless inventories are replenished, the world will start from a weaker position when the next shock comes.
For policymakers, three lessons stand out:
• Inventories matter. Rebuilding them is essential to prepare for future shocks.• A single chokepoint leaves the global economy heavily exposed. Diversifying energy sources—including renewables—is as important as diversifying routes.
• Support to consumers should be targeted to the most vulnerable and temporary to protect government budgets and the price signals that encourage energy saving and efficiency.
Energy markets’ flexibility and prompt policy actions bought the global economy time. An enduring US-Iran agreement would create an opening to restore supply. But significant efforts are still critically needed to increase the resilience and diversification of energy supply and prevent oil shocks from destabilizing the global economy.
IPS UN Bureau
Jul 17 2026 (IPS) -
CIVICUS discusses the prospects for elections in Serbia with Rasa Nedeljkov, Programme Director at the Center for Research, Transparency and Accountability, a civil society organisation that monitors electoral processes and the rule of law in Serbia.
Rasa Nedeljkov
How has President Vučić responded to demands for elections?
Vučić committed to holding early elections in 2026 under pressure from over a year of mass protests. His announcement came with no date for dissolving parliament or his resignation, amid speculation that he could return as prime minister.
Vučić has deliberately dragged his feet because he wants to ensure that when they happen, his party cannot lose. Meanwhile, the government has systematically worsened conditions for elections. Independent media are being suffocated. University professors who supported student protests are being fired. Justice officials who show independence are being replaced by more obedient ones. Hate campaigns against civil society, journalists, opposition parties and students are intensifying. The plan has been transparent: call elections only once the environment is so controlled that they cannot bring real change.
This strategy reveals the fundamental collapse of democratic standards in Serbia. Democracy requires genuine competition, and competition is genuine only when the government can lose. Vučić is building the opposite, putting in place a system where elections are empty rituals that rubber-stamp predetermined outcomes. Every month of delay has bought time to consolidate control and eliminate remaining spaces for independent voices.
What are the challenges with elections in Serbia?
Elections are being voided of substance through the systematic disregard, misuse and selective enforcement of laws and rules, all with the goal of turning elections into empty rituals.
We are witnessing harsher voter intimidation, more elaborate political clientelism, more brazen abuse of public resources and increasingly overt violence on election day. Our observers have been physically attacked, with police looking on.
Elections are still held, but the quality of the process is severely damaged. Electoral corruption takes countless forms, including interference in elections by organised crime and capture of institutions. And it’s protected by impunity. The state apparatus refuses to prosecute it.
Serbia is becoming an electoral autocracy. Unlike democracies, where governments lose elections, in electoral autocracies only opposition parties can lose.
How is the government attacking civil society?
Fourteen months ago, police raided our office and remained on-site for 28 hours, copying almost 10,000 pages of financial documents. This was turned into a spectacle for state-controlled media, which branded us a ‘criminal gang of foreign mercenaries money-laundering millions of dollars’. Three other civil society organisations in Belgrade were raided on the same day. We still haven’t heard from the prosecutor’s office, and we are certain our papers were perfectly clean.
Yet the assault continues through narrative and threat. Senior ruling party officials and pro-government media regularly label us as behind-the-scenes organisers of a ‘colour revolution against Serbia’. We live in constant uncertainty, never knowing if another raid or something worse is coming. The strategy is clear: to exhaust civil society financially and psychologically and make donors and partners fear any association with us. It’s institutional intimidation dressed in the language of law enforcement.
Can protests bring lasting institutional change?
The protests are the best thing that has happened to Serbia in a long time. Sparked by the collapse of a railway station canopy in Novi Sad in November 2024, which killed 16 people, they began as a student-led demand for accountability and grew into a nationwide movement. Our society had sunk into political apathy, a feeling that there was no alternative, not even a slight possibility of change. The endurance of Serbian people in demanding the restoration of the rule of law, in the face of growing repression and toxic propaganda, has been remarkable. Society has been evolving politically, showing more solidarity and resilience. People have begun to imagine that change is possible.
At the same time, the protests have made painfully visible how deep state capture runs, and how far Serbia is from having accountable institutions. How do you translate months of mobilisation into lasting change? Nobody has a complete answer. When we get there, the transition will be complex and exhausting. We should closely watch neighbouring Hungary. Viktor Orbán’s and Vučić’s styles of authoritarian, grand-corruption-driven rule are very much alike. However, Hungary is an EU member, which may make a big difference.
We believe it’s important that this period, rather than the moment elections are officially called, be used for preparation, including by recruiting and training people to serve as election observers and members of polling boards, and building the logistics needed to cover polling stations nationwide. The goal has to be readiness, so whenever elections are called, the infrastructure of oversight is already in place.
What’s the role of the EU in Serbia’s democratic future?
Serbia needs more international support and pressure, and the EU is the most crucial lever. Neighbouring countries are making progress towards EU membership. Serbia is stuck. Without the EU perspective, all potential outcomes for Serbia look murky.
Our current government is far closer to China and Russia than to Europe, as its propaganda and rhetoric make abundantly clear. It wants only the financial benefits of EU membership, not the accountability that comes with it. It wants EU money without EU standards. That’s not a sustainable position, but without stronger international pressure, it may be the path Serbia remains on.
CIVICUS interviews a wide range of civil society activists, experts and leaders to gather diverse perspectives on civil society action and current issues for publication on its CIVICUS Lens platform. The views expressed in interviews are the interviewees’ and do not necessarily reflect those of CIVICUS. Publication does not imply endorsement of interviewees or the organisations they represent.
GET IN TOUCH
Website
Bluesky
Facebook
Instagram
Threads
TikTok
Twitter
YouTube
SEE ALSO
Serbia: ‘Social media are more trustworthy than much of official media, a disturbing sign of state capture’ CIVICUS Lens | Interview with Marija Babić 29.Jun.2026
Serbia: ‘We haven’t inherited democracy, so we’ve had to reinvent it ourselves’ CIVICUS Lens | Interview with Mihajlo Matković 06.Dec.2025
Serbia’s suspicious election CIVICUS Lens 26.Jan.2024
DAR ES SALAAM, Tanzania, Jul 17 2026 (IPS) - The sweltering heat inside a London conference hall did not deter Indigenous leader Jackeline Mendoza Díaz from condemning the sheer destruction of the Peruvian Amazon. Her voice occasionally trembled with emotion but delivered a strong message — painting a picture far removed from the glittering gold bars traded in the world’s financial capitals.
Behind the rising price of gold, she said, lie poisoned rivers, razed forests and Indigenous communities jostling to defend their ancestral lands from the rising wave of illegal mining.
In her Asháninka community, she said, rivers that once sustained life no longer provide edible fish. Women trek for hours searching for clean water, while community leaders who speak out against encroachment increasingly do so at personal risk.
“Our rivers are being contaminated with mercury. When the rivers are contaminated, the fish become contaminated as well, and we indigenous people depend on these rivers for our survival,” Díaz told participants during a webinar that brought together Indigenous leaders, environmental advocates, investigators, bankers and policymakers to discuss the growing crisis of illicit gold.
Her testimony offered a glimpse into a global phenomenon that experts say is accelerating, as gold prices fuel environmental destruction, organized crime and corruption across continents
Behind the soaring value of gold lies a darker reality, visible in remote forests, fragile river systems and marginalised communities globally.
A recent report by the Global Initiative Against Transnational Organised Crime (GI-TOC) warns that illicit gold has become one of the world’s most consequential criminal markets, functioning as an “accelerant economy” that fuels conflict, corruption, environmental crime and organised criminal networks worldwide.
The report says rising gold prices have enabled criminals to control entire supply chains.
For nearby communities, the consequences are dire.
“We are defenders of the forests and defenders of life. Yet because of this, Indigenous defenders are often attacked, and many of us are even killed for protecting our people, our territories and our way of life,” said Diaz.
Forests Falling, Rivers Dying
In Ghana, where illegal mining has become a national crisis, environmental campaigner Daryl Bosu described a country caught up in a moral dilemma to balance the worth of the precious metal with environmental woes.
“Ghana is Africa’s largest gold producer, and gold remains one of the most important pillars of our economy,” Bosu said. “However, alongside these economic benefits, we have witnessed an alarming increase in illegal and poorly regulated mining activities.”
The environmental consequences, he warned, have been severe.
“Many of our forest reserves have suffered extensive degradation. Rivers and water bodies that serve millions of people have become heavily polluted.”
Across gold-producing regions, forests are rapidly being cleared to dig mining pits, roads and processing kilns. Once mining begins, toxic substances often contaminate rivers and groundwater aquifers.
According to the GI-TOC report, illicit gold mining frequently paves the way for illegal logging, wildlife trafficking and land grabbing. Dirty money is increasingly being invested in cattle ranching that destroys critical forest ecosystems.
Mercury’s Silent Toll
While deforestation often captures public attention, experts say mercury pollution remains one of the most devastating but least visible consequences of artisanal and small-scale gold mining.
Speaking exclusively to IPS during the recent Global Environment Facility (GEF) Assembly in Samarkand, Uzbekistan, Monika Stankiewicz, Executive Secretary of the Minamata Convention on Mercury, warned that mercury contamination continues to threaten millions of people living in mining communities.
“Mercury contamination does not stop at the mining site,” Stankiewicz told IPS.
“It enters rivers and ecosystems, affecting fish, soil and water sources locally.”
For families dependent on fishing and farming, the consequences can be profound.
“Reduced food safety and food security, loss of income from contaminated natural resources, and long-term degradation of ecosystems they depend on,” she explained.
Mercury exposure can trigger neurological damage, memory loss, tremors, respiratory illnesses and reproductive health complications. Children are particularly vulnerable.
The impacts extend far beyond mining sites themselves.
Mercury released into the environment can travel vast distances through atmospheric circulation. Indigenous communities in the Arctic, for example, are experiencing mercury contamination despite having no mercury-intensive mining activities in their territories.
Following the Money
Yet environmental damage represents only one side of the illicit gold equation.
Several participants stressed that illicit gold is fundamentally a financial crime issue.
Julia Yansura, programme director, Environmental Crime & Illicit Finance, FACT Coalition, said billions of dollars earned through environmentally damaging mining activities continue to enter legitimate financial systems without scrutiny.
“What we are discussing today is not merely an environmental issue,” she said. “It is also a financial crime issue.”
Traditional responses have focused heavily on police raids and military operations targeting miners.
But according to Yansura, such interventions often fail because they focus on low-level actors while leaving intact the financial networks that sustain illegal mining.
“A more effective approach would focus on following the money,” she said.
The GI-TOC report supports that assessment, warning that criminals increasingly control entire gold supply chains.
The report also identifies growing use of cryptocurrencies and gold-backed stablecoins as emerging mechanisms for laundering illicit proceeds outside traditional anti-money laundering frameworks.
London’s Hidden Role
Much of the webinar focused on the responsibilities of major financial centres.
A coalition of 35 civil society organisations has urged governments gathering at the UK Illicit Finance Summit to recognise that gold has evolved beyond a commodity into what they describe as a strategic vehicle for organised crime, sanctions evasion and corruption.
The coalition notes that London remains the world’s largest over-the-counter gold trading hub, handling approximately 70 percent of global OTC gold trading volumes.
Because illicit gold frequently passes through multiple countries and refineries before reaching financial markets, campaigners argue that financial centres can no longer treat illegal mining as a problem confined to producer countries.
“The solution cannot come only from mining countries,” Yansura said. “It must also come from the financial centres where profits are ultimately laundered and legitimated.”
The coalition is calling for mandatory due diligence requirements, stronger beneficial ownership transparency, enhanced scrutiny of gold traders and robust anti-money laundering obligations across the entire gold supply chain.
A Crisis Outpacing Regulation
Sophia Pickles of the GI-TOC warned that existing international frameworks have failed to contain the evolving nature of illicit gold markets.
“There has undoubtedly been progress,” she acknowledged. “However, our recent research shows that criminal activity linked to gold mining is expanding.”
According to the GI-TOC report, voluntary responsible sourcing standards are insufficient against increasingly sophisticated criminal networks. Information gaps, weak customs oversight and opaque financial transactions continue to provide opportunities for illicit gold to enter legitimate markets.
Researchers argue that current approaches remain too narrowly focused on artisanal mining and conflict zones while overlooking broader vulnerabilities embedded throughout global supply chains.
Among the report’s key recommendations are legally binding due diligence requirements, stronger oversight of international bullion centres, mandatory transparency measures and enhanced scrutiny of financial institutions.
Searching for Solutions
Despite the scale of the challenge, Stankiewicz believes progress is possible.
Under the Minamata Convention, countries with significant artisanal and small-scale gold mining sectors are required to develop national action plans aimed at reducing mercury use and protecting communities.
The results, she says, are encouraging.
Countries are increasingly adopting mercury-free technologies, strengthening regulations and formalising parts of the mining sector.
Beyond the Gold Rush
As the webinar drew to an end, panellists emphasised that illicit gold is not just a mining issue but an environmental, health, governance, human rights and financial crime crisis.
For Mendoza Díaz and communities living on the edge of gold extraction, the message was crystal clear.
“We are not just defending our land and our territories; we are defending life itself and our ecosystem.”
IPS UN Bureau Report
UNITED NATIONS, Jul 17 2026 (IPS) - A continuation of hostilities within the Strait of Hormuz is once again threatening one of the world’s most critical supply chain arteries, posing another wave of disruption which could choke the global energy, shipping and commodity markets. With roughly a quarter of global seaborne oil trade transiting through the Strait, alongside significant flows of liquefied natural gas and fertilizers, further constraints on commercial traffic could send new cost pressures cascading through supply chains that have yet to absorb the full effects of the earlier conflict.
Unlike the initial disruption, this latest escalation is hitting an already elevated and damaged cost base. U.S. President Donald Trump had proposed a 20 percent charge on cargo transiting the Strait, a plan he abandoned on July 14th after pressure from Gulf allies. At a current crude oil price of roughly USD 85 per barrel, a 20 percent levy on all cargo would amount to an additional USD 17 per barrel, around 17 times Iran’s previously proposed USD 1 per barrel toll.
Yet, the larger challenge remains whether an assurance of safety through the Strait can really be guaranteed. While Washington has promised to safeguard commercial vessels attempting to transit, multiple vessels have been struck by Iranian forces, including the UAE-flagged supertankers Mombasa and Al Bahiyah on July 12th. Both vessels have a capacity of roughly 2 million barrels of oil, placing the potential value of a full cargo at roughly USD 171 million before insurance, maintenance and transit costs are considered.
If continued attacks deter vessels from transiting the Strait, constrained oil flows could combine with increased insurance premiums and higher transport costs, pushing additional expenses through global supply chains and eventually onto consumers.
These effects are already visible when examining vessel movements. On July 15th, a total of five transits were recorded, three inbound and two outbound, with one of those ships being Iranian-flagged outbound. Daily throughput in deadweight tonnage (DWT) stood at 130,311 DWT, or just 1.27 percent of the 10.3 million DWT pre-conflict daily average. Meanwhile, approximately 450 vessels remain waiting to transit the Strait, including 120 tankers, 180 bulk carriers and 150 other vessels.
War risk premiums, the additional fees charged to insure vessels operating within conflict zones, have skyrocketed from a 0.15 percent pre-conflict rate to 5 percent, a more than 33-fold increase. Very large crude carriers (VLCCs) can be valued from USD 130 million to more than USD 170 million, meaning a five percent premium could add an additional cost of USD 6.5 million to USD 8.75 million per voyage. For a VLCC carrying 2 million barrels, that would amount to roughly USD 7.5 million, compared with approximately USD 2.225 million under Iran’s proposed USD 1-per-barrel toll combined with pre-conflict war-risk premiums.
However, the compounding effects extend beyond oil. Data from the World Trade Organization’s (WTO) Strait of Hormuz Trade Tracker shows that while crude oil shipments had begun to recover marginally, liquefied natural gas (LNG) and fertilizer-related shipments remain at a virtual standstill, with zero outbound shipments currently recorded. Renewed escalations risk further restricting already depressed commodity flows, with approximately one-third of the world’s seaborne fertilizer trade and one-fifth of global LNG transiting through the Strait.
Using a volume index in which 100 represents average volume levels, the WTO recorded a volume index of 25.69 for LNG on July 5th, following nearly four months in which shipments were recorded on only four other days. Fertilizer-related shipments showed greater resilience, recording a volume index of 97.62 on June 23rd. However, no further fertilizer-related shipments have been recorded, leaving the trade flow at a standstill for more than three weeks.
These restrictions could be particularly damaging for energy- and food-importing economies, notably developing countries that spend significant shares of national income on essential imports of energy and food. Simultaneous increases in fuel, transportation, and agricultural inputs risk creating a broader inflationary shock. Higher fertilizer costs can increase agricultural production costs, while elevated energy and shipping expenses raise the cost of transporting goods from exporters to importers, leaving consumers exposed to several layers of the same disruption.
The disruption has also carried a significant human cost. The International Maritime Organization (IMO) has warned against continued commercial transit through the Strait, with IMO Secretary-General Arsenio Dominguez urging shipowners, operators, and flag States, along with all relevant authorities to “avoid exposing seafarers to unnecessary danger by transiting the Strait.” At the same time, the United States has announced that it will resume a naval blockade targeting vessels transiting to and from Iranian ports. Iran, meanwhile, has framed its control over the Strait as a national security issue and has threatened that it will remain closed “until the end of America’s evils.”
At its 137th session, the IMO Council reaffirmed that the right of transit through straits used for international navigation “should not be threatened, impeded, denied, hampered, impaired or suspended,” reiterating that any measures taken by coastal states to regulate traffic in vital shipping lanes should be done in accordance with IMO regulations under the International Convention on the Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS). The Council also stated that traffic through the Strait must “remain free of any tolls and charges, in accordance with international law, including the IMO Convention.”
UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Volker Türk warned that “Reports on the closure of the Strait of Hormuz are very alarming for their impact on human rights far beyond the region,” describing the Strait as “a vital lifeline on which millions are reliant.”
The dangers are also being borne directly by seafarers trapped in the Persian Gulf. Of approximately 20,000 seafarers stranded by the crisis, around 11,000 have been evacuated through an IMO-supported initiative. However, evacuation operations have reportedly been paused since June 25, leaving thousands still stranded.
The economic consequences of the initial disruption were already substantial before this latest escalation. According to the World Bank, global energy prices rose by 24 percent following the conflict’s onset, with fertilizer prices projected to rise by more than 30 percent in 2026. Renewed hostilities in the Strait now threaten to compound these pressures, demonstrating how insecurity within a narrow stretch of water can transmit costs across global supply chains, from ships at sea to businesses, households and economies around the world.
IPS UN Bureau Report
GENEVA, Jul 17 2026 (IPS) - Three years into the war in Sudan, survivors and human rights defenders are struggling to respond to overwhelming needs amid widespread violence, displacement, and limited global attention. As horrific violations and abuses intensify and those documenting them become targets, calls for accountability and sustained international engagement grow more urgent.
“The violations are severe: torture, rape, and other forms of sexual violence affecting women, men, and children,” said Dr. Nahid Jibrallah, founder and director of the SEEMA Centre for the Protection of Women and Children, a Sudanese civil society organization that has spent years supporting those affected by violence.
SEEMA Centre, now based in Kampala, Uganda, due to the war, provides medical, psychosocial, and legal and social assistance to Sudanese victims of torture in Uganda, as well as to their family members, with the support of the UN Voluntary Fund for Victims of Torture. Through the project supported by the Fund, it expands its services to Sudan to provide critical services and support to victims of torture, leveraging its experience and expertise to document and report on violations, advocate for accountability, and provide targeted services to those affected.
The Fund is issuing a special call for emergency applications for Sudan in response to the surge in needs of survivors.
While Sudan has endured periods of conflict over decades, the current war which began in April 2023, has reshaped the country in devastating ways.
UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Volker Türk, recalled in a statement during his recent visit to Sudan, that he was shocked by accounts of extreme brutality, including atrocity crimes.
“I heard harrowing stories from survivors who witnessed the killing of their loved ones, and from women who had been subjected to gang rape and other forms of torture,” he said.
The conflict has also driven Jibrallah and her team to flee the country, so they are now working from Uganda.
“Torture is used as a weapon to control communities, including sexual abuse and also trafficking,” she said.
She said her colleagues at SEEMA Centre and other frontline groups, haven’t been spared the brunt of war. The war has created not only a humanitarian emergency, but a protection crisis for those trying to respond. She said that doctors, lawyers, health personnel, and human rights activists have been threatened, detained, tortured, and even killed for carrying out their work. The very people documenting violations and supporting survivors have become targets themselves.
The scale of suffering is unlike anything they have faced.
“Unfortunately, we cannot respond to this high level of need,” Jibrallah said. “The need is overwhelming, complicated, and spread across areas where even access is a challenge.”
“What we need is not to compromise human rights for any political agenda,” Jibrallah said. “We do not want resources to go to fuel the war or to mask human rights violations.”
UN Human Rights in Sudan
Sudan is now facing the world’s largest displacement crisis. Since the conflict began in April 2023, an estimated 14 million people have been forced from their homes, both within Sudan and across its borders.
“What makes Sudan’s crisis even more alarming is its invisibility. The world is not watching closely enough, but we are here, despite insecurity and access restrictions,” said Li Fung, UN Human Rights’ Representative in Sudan, on the staggering human cost of the Sudan conflict.
UN Human Rights has continued to monitor, document and analyze serious violations of human rights and international humanitarian law, despite access and security constraints. This work not only informs protection, humanitarian, and political responses today, but preserves vital evidence for future accountability and access to justice for victims and their families.
Civilians continue to endure the most horrific violations and abuses, forced displacement, trauma, and a dire humanitarian situation. Through its engagement on the ground, the Office is documenting violations, listening to survivors and communities, working with civil society and community networks, and bringing their voices to the attention of the world to press for action to end the war.
To this end, Jibrallah emphasised that documenting violations is essential and stressed the need for accountability: “It is very important to ensure accountability and to study this data, and to ensure that this will not happen again. It should be used for sustainable peace.”
IPS UN Bureau
HERAT, Afghanistan, Jul 16 2026 (IPS) - One morning in June, Halima (name changed), went to the market in Herat, her hometown in western Afghanistan, with her mother. She was wearing a long coat and a surgical mask covering her face. She could not have imagined that just a few minutes later she would be sitting in prison.
Vehicles from the Ministry of the Promotion of Virtue and Prevention of Vice, or morality police, arrived at the market right after Halima and her mother. According to Halima, female employees of the ministry began arresting women without asking any questions. Cars waiting nearby took the detainees away.
“Everything happened quickly. Some tried to escape, while others were terrified. We did not understand on what basis the Taliban selected those to be arrested.”
Halima says that some of the women arrested were wearing burqas that covered both their faces and bodies. Like Halima, some were wearing long coats and face masks. Still, the morality police seized her.
“My mother cried and begged them not to take me. She was threatened with a one-month prison term, along with corporal punishment and a fine, if she tried to prevent my arrest. No one dared to come and help, even though my mother yelled.”
Women were being arrested, kicked and beaten, humiliated and mocked. Taliban troops stood by their SUVs, watching as their female colleagues grabbed the women. They grabbed those whose clothing did not conform to the Taliban’s concept of dress code
The phones of the arrested girls and women were confiscated. There were about 30 of them, and all were taken to a so-called shelter run by the Department of Labor and Social Affairs. It houses both single women and newly arrested women. None of them were allowed to contact their families. The next morning they were transferred to a prison.
The women’s wing of the prison was dirty and poorly equipped. Fear and uncertainty filled the minds of every prisoner.
“I sat in a corner and looked at my fellow prisoners: young girls, middle-aged women, and mothers who were worried about their children. There were about 60 of us. Everyone was either wearing a burqa or wearing what I thought was appropriate clothing. Yet, each of us was imprisoned because we supposedly did not follow the dress code,” says Halima.
The next day she was released. At home, her mother hugged her and they both cried. Halima was told that her father had paid 16,000 Afghanis (about 220 euros) for his daughter’s release. In addition, the family had to sign a guarantee that none of the women in the family would go out again without proper clothing.
After returning home, nothing felt the same. Halima’s brothers were furious and claimed that she had tarnished the family’s honor by going to prison.
“As if I had committed a crime! But I still believe that I did nothing wrong,” she says.
“Fear has become a part of my life. I will never forget those two nights in prison. I kept wondering whether all my fellow prisoners had been released and whether others had been arrested after us. I wondered what would happen to the women and girls of this country,” says Halima.
“I can’t go out like I used to. I’m always afraid when I leave home. I keep thinking about what will happen if I’m arrested again.”
Halima is not alone in her experiences. The Taliban have recently begun enforcing the dress code for women in Herat more strictly.
In early June, mosques in the city announced stricter regulations, and reports of the arrests of women and girls across the city began spreading on social media. The arrests have raised concerns, sparked protests and heightened security across the province.
According to the UN, at least 30 women were arrested in Herat over the first weekend of June.
Suhaila (name changed) remembers the moment when anger and powerlessness led many in Herat to protest.
The day before the protests, Suhaila went shopping at the market. Earlier that day, the imam of the local mosque had announced a new Taliban order: women who violated the dress code would be arrested and imprisoned without the possibility of appeal.
Suhaila’s father believed that the threats from the authorities should be taken seriously and that her daughter should not go out without full-body clothing. Suhaila followed her father’s advice and dressed as instructed, but still experienced something at the market that she will never forget.
“As soon as I arrived at the market, I sensed an unusual atmosphere of confusion. Women were moving restlessly from one side of the market to the other, and many were trying to do their shopping and leave as quickly as possible.”
Then it started happening. Women were being arrested, kicked and beaten, humiliated and mocked. Taliban troops stood by their SUVs, watching as their female colleagues grabbed the women. They grabbed those whose clothing did not conform to the Taliban’s concept of dress code.
“I wanted to scream and protest, but I was at the market with my little sister. I held her tightly to me and just cried. I was afraid that if I opened my mouth, they would take us, too.”
Zainab did not escape.
That evening, Suhaila joined a WhatsApp group for young people in her neighborhood, where they discussed what had happened. The group had dozens of messages about the arrests. Some shared photos and stories of what had happened, while others shared personal experiences of family members.
Soon, the group began dicussing the possibility of organizing a protest. Some warned that protesting would lead to more arrests and perhaps even deaths. Others believed that remaining silent in the face of injustice would rob people of their self-respect.
Suhaila decided to join the protests. She wanted to give a voice to the girls and women whose arrests she had witnessed. In the morning, she left for the agreed-upon meeting point without telling her father about her plans and despite her mother’s objections. The protesters began chanting slogans demanding women’s rights to education, work, and freedom.
The protest grew quickly but did not last long. Suddenly, Taliban SUVs approached the crowd from several directions and surrounded it. The protesters were beaten, and the Taliban opened fire. Desperate screams could be heard everywhere, and people looked for shelter wherever they could. Some were injured, while others tried to help them.
Among those arrested were also Suhaila’s friends.
“Zainab did not escape. The last time I saw her was when she was forced into a Taliban car. No one has heard from her since,” Suhaila says.
“We do not feel safe even in our homes. The Taliban are going from street to street looking for protesters,” Suhaila says of the atmosphere after the protests.
Fear is everywhere. Women no longer want to go to the market, and many families leave their homes only when forced to.
It is no longer clear what is allowed and what is not. Uncertainty keeps people in their homes. The city has fallen silent and businesses are struggling.
Shakoor (name changed) believes that it is not just a question of women’s clothing.
“Girls and women have a special status in this city. Arresting a woman or publicly humiliating her is considered an attack on the dignity and honor of the family. That is why the reaction has been so strong, and this time men have also demonstrated.”
The local Taliban administration believes that tightening the dress code for women protects social values.
Governor Noor Ahmad Islamjar believes the protests are the result of misunderstandings and outside influence. In a television interview, he reminded the public that demonstrations are not allowed.
The Taliban regime says the women arrested will be released after receiving a warning, their families will be notified, and they will be required to sign a pledge to follow the dress code. However, not all families know what has happened to their loved ones.
One of them is Suhaila’s friend, Zainab. Her family has not heard from her since her arrest.
UNITED NATIONS, Jul 16 2026 (IPS) - As the international community continues to weigh the good, the bad and the deadly in artificial intelligence (AI), which is spreading far and wide with apparently no guardrails, the United Nations is taking a closer look at the impact, both positive and negative, of AI.
UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres said last week that “the technology is heightening the danger, with sophisticated and increasingly autonomous new weaponry, including drones, able to inflict massive harm on populations.”
The new weapons, particularly Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs), more commonly known as drones, seem to be a new wave of killing machines in recent conflicts, including the US vs. Iran, Israel vs. Palestine and Lebanon, and Russia vs. Israel, plus scores of civil wars in Africa and Asia.
Simon Adams, Professor of Human Rights at Murdoch University in Australia and former President and CEO of the Center for Victims of Torture—a leading international human rights and humanitarian NGO—told Inter Press Service no country in the world has openly admitted to deploying a weapon that is completely autonomous in the sense of killing humans without a person also being involved in the decision-making process.
“But there are already a number of powerful states—including several that sit around the table at the UN Security Council—who are increasingly dependent on drones, robots and AI systems to fight wars for them. Algorithms are choosing bombing targets and are already responsible for killing civilians in some major conflict zones.”
AI has the potential to improve the lives of billions of people on this planet. It would be a moral failing of epic proportions and a global tragedy if AI were harnessed to innovate new ways for humans to outsource the dirty work of waging war to robots, he said.
“Killer robots are a horror that belongs in science fiction. There is nothing more sinister than outsourcing killing and warfighting to emotionless, faceless machines that will select which humans get to live or die. Lethal autonomous weapons systems are ethically indefensible and should be illegal. We need a global ban before it is too late.”
Guterres has also reiterated his call to have them banned by international law, adding that some decisions must remain forever human, none more than taking a human life.
David Swanson, campaign coordinator for RootsAction, told IPS dozens of national governments have already stated their support for banning autonomous weapons, and dozens of others expressed their inclination to support such a ban.
So, a treaty could be established among those nations, on the model of the recent Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW) and then work could be done to add more nations to it. The initial signers and ratifiers would be the small and medium nations with the most willingness to defy the will of the U.S. government.
This banning of a particular type of weapon would ignore, as does the TPNW, the existence of the Treaty on the Nonproliferation of Nuclear Weapons, which requires disarmament of all weapons. It would also fail to address the morally repugnant act of ordering a young person, on pain of severe punishment, to press a button that sends a missile into people thousands of miles away—an act of dubious moral superiority to setting loose fully autonomous killer robots, he declared.
“But the biggest denier of reality in all of this is the U.S. government, which pioneered drone wars, was widely warned that it would not like the results when other nations followed suit, went on to suffer huge damage from foreign drones in places like the Persian Gulf during the current war on Iran, and altered its agenda not one iota. As guns sometimes appear to have more rights within the United States than children do, all forms of weaponry seem to be treated as deserving first consideration in U.S. foreign policy’,” he said
According to the New York Times of July 13, for decades Western governments have ordered supplies like tanks, fighter jets and submarines from contractors such as Lockheed Martin or Northrop Grumman—items that take years to deliver and are dizzyingly expensive: an F-35 jet can run to over $100 million.
“But the current trend is clear: defense technology is becoming cheaper and nimbler, with breakthroughs developed by privately funded companies rather than governments,” says an article authored by Vivienne Walt.
Of the Pentagon’s $1.5 trillion budget request by the current US administration for next year, about $55 billion is earmarked for the creation of a new unmanned, AI-powered arsenal.
Singling out a more positive non-military use of drones, the Times said last month that Sri Lanka, faced with one of the worst outbreaks of dengue fever in years, is using military drones to scan rooftops and find mosquito breeding grounds to eliminate them. The country’s air force has been routinely flying drones over high-rise buildings to identify breeding sites.
Nick Mottern, co-coordinator of the Weaponized Drone Ban Treaty Campaign, told IPS: “We are calling for a treaty to remove all weapons from drones, rather than to ban drones controlled autonomously by AI.
This is because all militaries will claim that there will always be a human in ultimate control of AI-augmented drones in spite of the fact that the drone will identify targets using AI, select weapons using AI, and present a human with all elements of the decision to kill using AI.
A treaty banning weapons on drones is the only way to stop the drone tsunami, he declared
Speaking at the First Global Dialogue on AI Governance in early July, Guterres said the world faced more than 120 conflicts in 2025.
Conflicts are becoming more protracted, more complex, and more interconnected, he pointed out. “We see widespread violations of international law and a growing sense of impunity. Technology is heightening the danger, with sophisticated — and increasingly autonomous — new weaponry, including drones, able to inflict massive harm on populations.”
“And online hate speech, misinformation and disinformation are spread and amplified in an instant. Too often, early warning signs are ignored. And responses are often a little too late.”
IPS UN Bureau Report