The Human Consciousness Now...Our World in the Midst of Becoming...to What? Observe, contemplate Now.
ROME, Feb 25 2026 (IPS) - Farmland has long been one of the most important sources of security across generations. Writing about China nearly a century ago, Pearl S. Buck noted in The Good Earth, “If you will hold your land, you can live.” That holds true today. When farmers own land, they invest in it. When they don’t, they extract what they can today without thinking of tomorrow.
This household-level decision becomes a structural problem at scale: land degradation — today, 1.7 billion people live in areas of declining agricultural productivity — reflects systemic underinvestment in land, often rooted in insecure land tenure. The good news is that this means reforming and enforcing land tenure can be a powerful tool to combat land degradation and food insecurity.
Globally, only about a quarter of land is formally recognized. In sub-Saharan Africa, where customary systems dominate landholding, communities have been exposed to encroachment, weak dispute resolution, and exclusion from services and finance. More than 1.1 billion people believe they could lose rights to their land the next five years. This perceived insecurity has intensified amid rising financial pressure and displacement.
Land degradation reflects systemic underinvestment in land, often rooted in insecure land tenure. The good news is that this means reforming and enforcing land tenure can be a powerful tool to combat land degradation and food insecurity
Evidence from Ghana and Malawi shows that farmers with informal or seasonal rental agreements are significantly less likely to invest in soil restoration, water management, or productivity-enhancing practices. This is because they could lose access to the land before those investments generate returns over multiple years. Without land as collateral, farmers also struggle to access credit, insurance, and financial services needed to finance such improvements.
Customary systems have persistently disadvantaged women, who make up half of smallholder producers, in inheritance and transfer rights. Globally, women hold only 15% of agricultural land, and even when they do, they are susceptible to losing it in case of divorce or death of a spouse.
Limited legal access to land, combined with weak access to credit, insurance, and inputs, has reinforced cycles of low productivity, land degradation, and vulnerability for women farmers.
Where land tenure is weak or contested, rising land demand can fuel conflict. In Colombia, post-conflict agricultural expansion into forest areas has generated tensions where land claims remain unresolved. Similar disputes have emerged in parts of sub-Saharan Africa, where weak legal recognition of customary rights and insecure land claims make households vulnerable to land disputes, especially when large-scale land acquisitions occur.
These recurring tensions have reinforced the case for strengthening land governance as a foundation for stability and development. In fact, some 70 countries have initiated land policy reforms since 2012, when the UN endorsed internationally agreed principles protecting legitimate tenure rights, including customary ones. But many legislative reforms have been slow to translate into practice on the ground. Dispute resolution systems remain weak, and the rights of women, Indigenous Peoples, and customary landholders are still inconsistently recognized.
Change couldn’t come sooner. Reversing even 10% of degraded cropland could feed 154 million more people annually. Without government intervention, the world could face a farmland deficit twice the size of India by 2050.
Of course, secure land tenure alone won’t automatically restore land. Half of global farmland is controlled by the largest 1% of producers many of whom operate intensive production models that can accelerate land degradation when not paired with strong environmental safeguards. So land tenure reform must be accompanied by effective regulation, targeted incentives, access to finance and extension services, and strong institutional capacity.
Rising land demand, climate stress, and large-scale land acquisitions will continue to test the durability of these reforms. Whether these pressures translate into instability or resilience depends on policy choices. If governments want farmers to restore the land, they must first ensure that farmers can hold it.
Excerpt:
Máximo Torero is chief economist of the United Nations’ Food and Agriculture Organization in Rome
SYDNEY, Australia, Feb 25 2026 (IPS) - Two Pacific Island nations have been applauded for their successes in the global health campaign to eliminate the infectious eye disease, Trachoma.
Better disease data, effective treatment campaigns and improved access to water and hygiene contributed to the major progress now being celebrated as 27 nations worldwide are declared Trachoma-free by the World Health Organization (WHO). But, above all, experts say that the key to the permanent riddance of diseases is a genuine buy-in to the eradication programmes by entire communities.
“Trachoma elimination efforts are most effective when communities understand the disease, trust the interventions and are actively involved in prevention activities,” Dr Anasaini Cama, Pacific Trachoma Technical Lead at The Fred Hollows Foundation, a global non-government organisation working to eradicate preventable blindness, told IPS.
Finally eliminating Trachoma in countries such as Papua New Guinea is a major achievement when more than 80 percent of people live in rural and remote communities, where the risk of infection is especially high.
“This milestone reflects the power of public health at its best…It is a reminder that equity, visibility and prevention must be at the heart of our health system,” Elias Kapavore, Minister for Health in PNG, the most populous Pacific Island nation of more than 10 million people, told the media last year.
The infectious eye disease is one of 21 Neglected Tropical Diseases that, under Sustainable Development Goal 3.3, are being targeted for global eradication by 2030. And reports reveal that strides are being made. Between 2002 and 2025, a period of little more than two decades, the global population at risk of Trachoma fell from 1.5 billion to 97.1 million people, WHO reported in January.
Children in rural communities in southwest Pacific Island countries, including Papua New Guinea, were highly vulnerable to eye infections, such as Trachoma. Now the country has been applauded for its campaign to eliminate the disease. Credit: Catherine Wilson/IPS
“Trachoma, once a leading cause of blindness in Fiji, was widespread in the 1950s, with prevalence exceeding 20 percent among children in some areas. Today, following sustained national action, the prevalence of active Trachoma has fallen to below 1 percent,” Fiji’s Health Minister, Dr Ratu Antonio Lalabalavu, told local media.
Trachoma is the leading cause of blindness around the world and is found primarily in tropical climate zones and rural communities affected by poverty and lack of basic services. It is caused by a micro-organism, Chlamydia trachomatis, known to be carried by flies, with children and those living in overcrowded conditions the most vulnerable. In advanced cases of the disease, there is chronic scarring of the underside of the eyelid, which can then turn inward, resulting in the eyelashes inflicting permanent damage to the eye’s cornea.
Trachoma was first identified in PNG and Fiji when health surveys were conducted in the 1950s. Studies also revealed that it was endemic in the Solomon Islands and Vanuatu. More recently, in 2015, extensive studies were carried out in the provinces of Central, Madang, Morobe, East New Britain, Southern Highlands and Western in PNG as part of the Global Trachoma Mapping Project. The prevalence of trachomatous inflammation-follicular (TF) in children aged 1-9 years was found to be between 6 percent and 12.2 percent, exceeding the WHO threshold of 5 percent.
The disease can be debilitating and make it increasingly difficult for a child to attend and participate in school classes and, thus, hinder their development and increase their exposure to poverty and malnutrition.
Changing the conditions and habits through which the disease thrives is, therefore, crucial. And this is a vital part of WHO’s recommended approach, called the SAFE strategy. That is, surgery for patients with an advanced stage of the disease, including blindness, prescribing antibiotics to diminish infection, encouraging facial cleanliness, and environmental improvements.
Today, the development charity Mercy Works is working to boost better health in very remote villages in Kiunga in Western Province, close to the far western border of PNG, by ensuring supplies of clean water. Here, “safe water remains a daily challenge,” Andrew Lowry, Head of Mercy Works’ Programs, told IPS. “Frequent flooding contaminates water sources and damages infrastructure. Many communities have no road access, so materials and tradespeople travel by plane or boat, and often on foot. Schools and health centres often operate without a reliable water supply, making basic hygiene practices difficult to sustain.”
Mercy Works installs rainwater collection and storage systems in schools, health centres, and villages in both the Western Province and the Simbu Province in the Highlands region.
Nearly 4,000 kilometres southeast of PNG in Fiji, Cama has witnessed the impacts of eye diseases and interventions that have been effective. In the north of the country, she visited villages that were kept clean and neat and it was difficult to see if there was overcrowding in the households. “Generally, extended families living together is considered normal. What we did notice, and similarly in nearby villages, was the water issues, where water was not always available and water trucks would cart water to the village,” Cama told IPS.
In the community, “children were active and did not appear unwell in any way,” she recounted. “It was only when health care workers flipped the child’s eyelids that the inner surface of the eyelid would have follicles that were typical for Trachoma.” Once a child was diagnosed, Tetracycline eye ointment was prescribed to be applied twice a day for six weeks, together with recommended regular face washing.
This year, WHO announced that, for the first time since world records began, the number of people requiring healthcare intervention for Trachoma has fallen below 100 million. Yet the future cannot be one of complacency. Rising climate extremes across the Pacific Islands could reverse this achievement.
“Climate change can impact Trachoma programmes and cause re-emergence of Trachoma, meaning long-term vigilance is required,” Cama emphasised. “Flooding and warmer temperatures can damage sanitation systems that lead to a reduction in environmental hygiene, causing an increase in the presence of flies in the community, which can increase the spread of Trachoma. Through drought and low rainfall, accessibility to water is decreased, making regular face washing and hygiene more challenging.”
Boosting the number of trained health professionals is also critical in countries where national health services battle against limited resources, medical supplies and manpower. “One of the biggest challenges in the Pacific is the shortage of trained eye care specialists,” Cama said.
This is the case in both Fiji and PNG, where “only 8 of 22 provinces actually have an eye doctor”. To overcome this deficit, the Fred Hollows Foundation established the Pacific Eye Institute, the region’s first ophthalmic training institute, in Suva, Fiji. “Our goal is to have at least one eye doctor and a team of eye nurses in every province [in PNG],” she said.
The dividends of extinguishing diseases, such as Trachoma, are profound for people and communities. And aspirations of national development can be realised when health services contend with a diminished burden of illness, more children can finish their education and more people of working age can contribute to their communities and the economy.
Note: This article is brought to you by IPS Noram in collaboration with INPS Japan and Soka Gakkai International in consultative status with ECOSOC.
IPS UN Bureau Report
IPS UN Bureau, IPS UN Bureau Report,
UNITED NATIONS, Feb 25 2026 (IPS) - As generative artificial intelligence (AI) rapidly expands across nearly every sector of society, those that work in cultural and creative industries are expected to bear some of the greatest losses. With AI-generated content projected to dominate global markets in the coming years, combined with a lack of strong regulatory frameworks to protect intellectual property and AI’s ability to produce content quickly at a low cost, the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) warns that generative AI may become a major driver of inequality, threatening the livelihoods of millions of cultural workers around the world.
“It is no longer sufficient to simply celebrate the potential of digital tools,” said Lodovico Folin-Calabi, Director of the UNESCO Liaison Office in Brussels and UNESCO Representation to the European Union.“We must critically examine how these technologies are deployed, who is designing them, and whose voices are represented or excluded in their development.”
On February 18, UNESCO released the latest edition of its flagship report, Re|Shaping Policies for Creativity, examining how digital transformation and emerging technologies are reshaping the global cultural landscape. Drawing on data from more than 120 countries, the report highlights the growing impact of artificial intelligence, changing global trade dynamics, and increasing pressures on artistic freedom. UNESCO calls on governments, international institutions, and technology platforms to strengthen policy frameworks to prevent widening inequalities and protect the rights and livelihoods of creators, presenting a roadmap of more than 8,100 policy measures.
The report emphasizes that while emerging digital technologies offer new opportunities for innovation and provide artists with tools to expand their reach and streamline creative production, they have also deepened existing inequalities and made economic success increasingly uncertain. It projects that generative AI could lead to global revenue losses of up to 24 percent for music creators and 21 percent for audiovisual creators by 2028. These losses are compounded by artists’ growing reliance on digital income streams, which now account for nearly 35 percent of their earnings—marking a 17 percent increase from 2018.
As digital technologies become more integral to artists’ livelihoods, the rise of AI-generated content, increased risks of intellectual property infringement, and ongoing market volatility may make it even more difficult for cultural workers to remain sustainable. In recent years, streaming platforms and content curation systems have shifted to prioritize specific forms of content from popular creators, leaving smaller, lesser-known creators with far fewer opportunities for exposure or success.
“I think emerging artists struggle more than established artists with the rise of AI,” said Kiersten Beh, a traditional illustrator based in New Jersey. “Senior artists—especially freelance ones—already know how to promote themselves and get their work out there, and many of them have built strong relationships with clients over time. I fear that as an emerging artist, I don’t have these connections yet and instead find myself competing with AI directly.”
The report also underscores persistent gaps in how countries protect artists and their work. Only 61 percent of the countries surveyed were found to have adequate frameworks in place to safeguard artistic freedom and prevent intellectual property infringement from AI.
While approximately 85 percent of countries included cultural and creative sectors in their national development plans, just 56 percent outlined specific cultural objectives, highlighting a clear disconnect between broad commitments and concrete action. Furthermore, only 37 percent of the countries surveyed reported having measures to support cultural workers operating in environments entrenched in political instability, prolonged conflict, or displacement.
“We, international organizations, states, artists, and humanity in general, must stand together in ensuring that AI does not limit the rights of everyone who wants to be involved in artistic creativity,” said Alexandra Xanthaki, United Nations (UN) Special Rapporteur in the field of cultural rights. “This includes not only artists, but anyone who wants to take part in artistic life.”
These challenges are particularly pronounced in the Global South, where artists face heightened risks tied to technological barriers and widening digital divides. The report notes that essential digital skills are held by approximately 67 percent of people in developed countries, compared with just 28 percent in developing nations. Additionally, only 48 percent of surveyed countries have developed systems to track the consumption of digital cultural content.
Colombian independent expert Viviana Rangel emphasized these imbalances when speaking to UNESCO in October 2025. “Our region doesn’t produce this kind of technology–it consumes it. This places us in a more vulnerable position against the unintended effects of these technologies in the cultural field,” she said, adding that AI systems often sideline the perspectives and inputs of artists in the Global South.
Meanwhile, support for vulnerable artists remains significantly inconsistent and underfunded, leaving many exposed to emerging risks such as digital surveillance and algorithmic bias. Direct public funding for cultural sectors remains strikingly low – below 0.6 percent of the global GDP – and is projected to decline further in the coming years.
Additionally, progress toward ensuring universal support for cultural workers remains uneven, with a pronounced gender gap affecting female artists. Although the share of women leading cultural institutions worldwide has increased from 31 percent in 2017 to 46 percent in 2024, significant disparities persist: women hold 64 percent of leadership roles in developed countries, compared to just 30 percent in developing nations. Moreover, entrenched policy frameworks continue to position women primarily as cultural consumers rather than recognizing and supporting them as creators and leaders.
Achieving a sustainable future for artists and cultural workers in the age of AI will require more than technological adaptation–it demands equitable policy reform and coordinated global action. Through its latest report, UNESCO calls for renewed investment, a more balanced market, and stronger collaborative measures between governments, institutions, and industry leaders to safeguard artistic freedom and ensure that creative work remains a viable livelihood. The agency further stresses that creativity must continue to serve as a vital source of economic opportunity, cultural diversity, and social cohesion in a rapidly digitizing world.
IPS UN Bureau Report
GENEVA, Feb 25 2026 (IPS) - After surviving the harshest winter in a decade, millions of displaced Ukrainians are confronting a growing crisis marked by hardship and ongoing attacks as peace prospects remain distant.
Inside Ukraine, repeated attacks on housing, energy systems and essential services throughout the winter left millions without heating or electricity for prolonged periods. While temperatures are slowly rising, the damage remains. An estimated 10.8 million people inside the country need humanitarian assistance in 2026, and 3.7 million are internally displaced.
At the same time, 5.9 million Ukrainians remain refugees abroad. Across Europe, host countries have provided protection and opportunities at an unprecedented scale, giving refugees access to education, healthcare and employment. This has helped millions regain stability and contribute to host communities.
As the war continues, however, more is needed to support refugees from a displacement crisis with no clear end. Alongside Temporary Protection, States should explore options for alternative arrangements for longer stay. These can bring stability for the most vulnerable in particular, for whom return may not be immediately possible even after the war.
Evidence shows that meaningful inclusion delivers results and refugees significantly boost host country economies. In Poland, analysis by UNHCR and Deloitte showed that Ukrainian refugees’ net impact amounted to 2.7 per cent of the Polish GDP, in 2024. With increased language training and wider recognition of credentials, access to decent work and self-reliance can improve for refugees across the region.
Inside Ukraine, communities continue to repair homes, restore services and rebuild livelihoods, with the support of UNHCR and NGO partners. But after four years of war, resilience has limits. Sustained humanitarian assistance remains essential, alongside scaled-up recovery and reconstruction support to prevent further displacement and enable safe conditions for return.
When conditions allow, gradual and voluntary returns will be critical for Ukraine’s recovery. UNHCR is working with the Government and partners to restore people’s documents, support rehabilitation of social infrastructure and repair war-damaged homes. UNHCR also works with partners to analyse refugees’ intentions, forecast return movements and support Ukraine’s recovery planning.
Since the start of the full-scale war, UNHCR and partners have supported 10 million people with emergency aid, protection services and psychosocial support. In 2026, UNHCR plans to assist a further 2 million people inside the country, subject to sufficient funding. Across the region, UNHCR and partners are supporting 1.7 million refugees and the States hosting them, with a focus on inclusion and self-reliance.
As winter fades, the humanitarian crisis does not. We must support the people of Ukraine with humanitarian relief and recovery inside the country, and with safety and self-reliance abroad.
Philippe Leclerc is UNHCR’s Regional Director for Europe and Regional Refugee Coordinator for the Ukraine Situation
IPS UN Bureau
ABU DHABI, United Arab Emirates, Feb 24 2026 (IPS) - As wars drag on and the international order grows increasingly unstable, Abu Dhabi has been offering a different kind of narrative. It sought to recognize early efforts at reconciliation, bring religious leaders into the same space, and place former adversaries under the same spotlight. At the heart of the February 4, 2026 Zayed Award for Human Fraternity ceremony was an attempt to make visible, in a public setting, the choice of moving in the direction of easing conflict.
Pope Francis and Ahmed el-Tayeb sign the Document on Human Fraternity。Credit: Vatican News
Seven years on, the international landscape has become even more fragmented. Even so, the organizers have framed the ceremony not merely as an awards event, but as a symbolic platform intended to encourage a minimum measure of restraint when politics turns turbulent.
Shoring Up a Fragile Peace
The moment that drew the most attention this year was the recognition of Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan and Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev for their peace agreement. After decades of confrontation, the award functioned as a form of international endorsement for a still-fragile peace process in the South Caucasus.
Zayed Prize 2026 to Armenia and Azerbaijan Credit: Vatican News
The award, however, extended beyond state leadership. The 2026 laureates also included Afghan girls’ education advocate Zarqa Yaftali and the Palestinian nonprofit Taawon, honoring efforts to continue humanitarian and development work under conditions of conflict and political instability. It also underscores the award’s intention to bridge “top-down politics,” such as peace agreements, with “bottom-up peacebuilding” that supports communities on the ground. The underlying message is clear: even with treaties and agreements in place, peace cannot take root if the schools, healthcare, and local support systems needed to sustain society remain fragile.
A Dialogue Circuit Linking Rome and Astana
The closing ceremony held against the backdrop of the ancient Roman ruins, the Colosseum. Credit: Community of Sant’Egidio
Further east, Kazakhstan has institutionalized interfaith engagement through the Congress of Leaders of World and Traditional Religions in Astana. Both the Holy See and the Grand Imam of Al-Azhar have consistently participated, helping to sustain the congress as a venue for structured interreligious dialogue.
Seen in this light, Rome, Astana, and Abu Dhabi are not merely separate events; they emerge as nodal points in a broader space of dialogue that links religion and diplomacy. Put differently, they function like a regular service designed to keep the lines of communication open—ensuring that the ability to meet and talk does not fall silent.
Religious Actors Across Borders
On Feb. 4, a Soka Gakkai delegation led by Vice President Hirotsugu Terasaki attended the 2026 Zayed Award for Human Fraternity ceremony in Abu Dhabi, UAE. At the invitation of @ZayedAward, the delegation joined global religious leaders. On Feb. 3, the delegation met with Judge Mohamed Abdelsalam, Secretary-General of the Zayed Award for Human Fraternity and they delivered a letter from Soka Gakkai President Minoru Harada to the Grand Imam of Al-Azhar His Eminence Ahmed Al-Tayeb. Credit: SGI
Ahead of the Abu Dhabi ceremony, Terasaki met with Judge Mohamed Abdelsalam, Secretary-General of the award, and delivered a letter from Minoru Harada, President of Soka Gakkai, addressed to Grand Imam Ahmed Al-Tayeb. The two exchanged views on the need to further strengthen “heart-to-heart dialogue” that transcends religious differences.
The stages created by the United Arab Emirates and Kazakhstan—both of which place emphasis on “spiritual diplomacy”—are more than mere events. What gives these settings moral authority and lends them ethical weight as arenas for peacebuilding is a sustained architecture of dialogue, underpinned by relationships that religious and civil-society leaders have cultivated over many years. Put differently, it is a system for meeting regularly and ensuring that lines of communication do not fall silent. Even when interstate relations grow tense, religious and civil-society networks can keep channels of dialogue open, serving as a buffer against rupture.
The fact that Kazakh President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev engaged with this year’s award ceremony through a video address, and that Director-General Terasaki has moved across dialogue venues such as Abu Dhabi, Rome, and Astana, quietly suggests the presence of such networks where religion and diplomacy intersect. Likewise, the Holy See has also been one of the actors continuously involved in all three of these settings.
Kazakh President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev extended his congratulations to Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev and Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan on being given the Sheikh Zayed Award for Human Fraternity in a video address. Credit: Akorda
Shared Words, Different Realities
The vocabulary repeatedly invoked in these forums is strikingly consistent: fraternity, coexistence, dialogue, and human dignity. At a time when multilateralism is faltering and traditional channels of mediation are weakening, this language also serves a political purpose—allowing states to signal, at home and abroad, a preference for dialogue over force and to project the image that they are not stoking confrontation, but providing a venue in which tensions can be managed.
Yet the distance between ceremony and reality does not disappear. Celebrating a peace agreement does not necessarily guarantee its implementation. Honoring efforts in girls’ education does not automatically reopen classrooms. Proclaiming coexistence does not stop violence overnight. Awards can encourage compromise and bless dialogue, but they are not mechanisms that can compel outcomes.
Even so, governments and religious and civil-society networks continue to engage in these venues—through attendance, public statements, and sustained involvement—because they remain among the few public settings where opposing parties can appear side by side. There are not many spaces where actors in tense relationships can stand in the same room, where restraint is openly affirmed, and where interfaith ties can function as informal diplomatic channels.
A Place to “Rehearse” Peace
A woman crafts a mosaic depicting a peace dove in the Za’atari refugee camp in Jordan. Credit: UN Women/Christopher Herwig
They also point toward the emergence of a new diplomatic domain where religion, civil society and state interests converge.
In today’s international environment, it is precisely these small points of contact that can carry real significance. Before peace is institutionalized as policy, there are only limited spaces where its shape can be publicly “rehearsed.”
The Abu Dhabi ceremony is one of those rare stages. It did not resolve a conflict, nor did it erase suspicion. Even so, choosing dialogue—and continuing to make that choice visible in the open—constitutes an act in itself: a clear signal, in an age of polarization, of a commitment to restraint over enmity.
This article is brought to you by INPS Japan in collaboration with Soka Gakkai International, in consultative status with the UN’s Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC).
INPS Japan
IPS UN Bureau
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
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