

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.

Iran needs to take all feasible precautions to spare civilians at risk of serious harm from artillery bombardment and other military operations in an area that includes dozens of Kurdish villages inside northern Iraq, Human Rights Watch said today.
The Iranian attacks, directed against the Iranian Kurdish armed group Party for Free Life of Kurdistan (PJAK), intensified in late May and have led to the displacement of more than 500 families, wounded an unknown number of villagers, and killed a teenage girl. Iraqi villagers also told Human Rights Watch, which visited the area in late June, that Iranian border guards have targeted their livestock and sometimes fired at the villagers themselves.
"Iran should take all feasible precautions to spare civilians from artillery and other attacks," said Joe Stork, deputy Middle East director at Human Rights Watch. "Firing artillery shells into populated areas, especially where there are no military targets, and targeting livestock are serious violations of the laws of war."
Since June 3, 2010, about 500 families have fled their border villages to crowded tent camps elsewhere in Erbil and Sulaimaniya provinces, joining about 250 families who had fled Iranian shelling in previous months. Aid organizations and local municipalities have struggled to meet the displaced families' basic needs. The recent attacks also led an unknown number of other Kurdish civilians to flee elsewhere throughout the countryside and to surrounding towns.
The affected areas lie in the Qandil Mountains, along the eastern borders of Erbil and Sulaimaniya provinces, in the region administered by the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG). To the west, along the Iraqi-Turkish border, Turkish forces continue to attack Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK) forces, although these attacks have not yet had the same impact on populated Iraqi Kurdish areas, aid agencies report. PJAK, a group formed in 2004, is affiliated with the PKK.
Human Rights Watch visited the Choman, Soran, Raniya and Pishdar districts between June 18 and June 27 and interviewed more than 50 displaced villagers, local government officials, and Iraqi soldiers. In all of the border areas Human Rights Watch visited, there were extensive patches of ground with small craters and twisted shrapnel inside villages and close to homes, as well as a pattern of damage to dwellings and crops that was consistent with artillery bombardment. Human Rights Watch also viewed video shot on villagers' mobile phones showing the moments after shelling, with smoke rising from craters alongside damaged tents and dying livestock. Villagers, government officials, and Iraqi security forces who Human Rights Watch interviewed were adamant that PJAK forces had never been in these areas and that there were no other military targets in the vicinity at any point before or during the shelling.
"We know these mountains," a KRG military officer who commands a military outpost in a mountainous area of Choman District told Human Rights Watch. "We don't have PJAK fighters in these villages. We only have government forces here. ... Iran is attacking places that do not have guerrillas."
Karwan Shareef, mayor of the Haji Omaran sub-district, told Human Rights Watch that the people living in the nearby areas being shelled are farmers and shepherds.
"I have seen no guerrilla forces in these areas," Shareef said. "PJAK are very far from the places that Iran has shelled. An artillery shell even hit only 250 meters from my office."
A local freelance journalist from the same area, who often reports on both the armed groups, said, "I interview PJAK all the time. I have to go further up in the mountains to do this. Plus, they are guerrillas - they know how to hide from the Iranians. The farmers do not."
Human Rights Watch did not see any evidence of PJAK activity in and around the communities it visited.
Family members, residents, and local officials told Human Rights Watch that a shell killed 14-year-old Basoz Jabar as she was playing outside in Wenza, a village in Choman district, on June 2. Residents of the village showed Human Rights Watch metal shell fragments collected from the site of the attack.
The girl's best friend, Shanaz Qadr, 13, described the shelling. The bombardment was deafeningly loud and frightening, she and other neighbors said, sending residents running for cover. The two girls separated and Qadr hid behind a large rock: "I cried because I was afraid as the shelling came closer. But when I heard the crying of my neighbors, I forgot everything. 'Oh my Basoz,' I heard them say. I couldn't stand it anymore. When the shelling died down, we saw the bloody body of Basoz." Since the attack, only a few families have remained in the village, in an effort to save their crops.
Aid organizations working in the affected areas had no numbers for injured civilians, but more than a dozen villagers told Human Rights Watch of residents who were wounded by the shelling and taken to stay with family members in surrounding areas.
The timing of the recent attacks has been particularly devastating for farmers since the attacks coincided with the short planting season. Villagers in several districts said this is the third year in a row in which Iranian shelling forced farmers to leave during crucial times for planting and tending crops.
While Iranian officials have said little about military activity across the border, especially artillery bombardments, they have stated that Iran's military actions are aimed at stopping attacks across the Iranian border carried out by PJAK. Iran's ambassador to Iraq, Hassan Kazemi Qomi, told the Iranian Mehr News Agency on June 9 that Iran was strictly controlling the security of its borders, and he rejected claims that Iranian troops crossed Iraq's border illegally.
Villagers and local officials told Human Rights Watch that in their view Iran intended to force the villagers off the land, effectively creating an area along the Iraqi side of the border without inhabitants. Locals said there was a pattern of shells striking increasingly close to their gardens and homes until they felt they had to leave for fear of being wounded or killed.
"They are doing this so we will leave," said a man in the village of Kani Spi. "We are just families, growing food to make money, but the Iranians do not want us here."
Farmers close to the border reported that since June, soldiers on the Iranian side intentionally killed the villagers' livestock with machine gun fire. In some cases, they said, Iranian troops fired on them as well if they climbed high enough on the hilltops to be seen. The farmers said they did not carry any weapons and were dressed in civilian clothing.
In one farmland area in the Haji Omaran sub-district, about two kilometers from the border, Dishad Baqer, a farmer in his 30s, said that all the residents fled after repeated shelling. He explained that it had been quiet for a few days, so almost 40 of the 60 residents had quietly come back to work to salvage their fields of sunflowers, tomatoes, and cucumbers. Iranian border guards "shot ten horses near here, two days ago," Baqer said. "We stay close, because if you walk up this hill, right now or anytime, they will shoot at you."
On June 22, the day he spoke with Human Rights Watch, Baqer said that they had been lucky for the previous few days because there had been no shelling at all.
"We are ready to run if it starts again," he said.
Villagers repeatedly warned Human Rights Watch to keep away from the tops of hills that were in view of the Iranian border troops on the other side. Another farmer in the same village said, "They will shoot at anything that moves, whether it's a person or an animal ... I think they are sending a message for us to leave our home."
Deliberately attacking civilians and civilian property, such as shooting at farmers who are not actively taking part in the hostilities and targeting livestock, are serious violations of international humanitarian law.
Human Rights Watch also called on Iraqi authorities to ensure that essential aid promised by the government reaches those displaced from their homes. The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) and other aid agencies told Human Rights Watch that more than 750 families (about 4,740 people) have been displaced by Iranian shelling, including about 250 from before the current campaign that began in late May.
The largest of the camps is Doli Shahidan, nine kilometers north of Sangasar. More than 2,000 people fled there from 21 villages, according to the UN refugee agency office in Sulaimaniya. While the local district government has started to provide potable water to the camp, displaced villagers rely on the refugee agency, the International Committee of the Red Cross, the Iraqi Red Crescent, and the International Organization for Migration for tents, plastic sheets, food items, first aid kits, cooking stoves, blankets, water filters, and other items.
According to aid agencies and local farmers, since early 2008, civilians by the thousands have been intermittently displaced in the region by the Iranian shelling - returning and leaving as the shelling stops and starts and making it difficult to assess numbers of displaced.
Iraqi government officials said that the central government's Ministry of Displacement and Immigration has in the past month compensated some of those displaced with a lump sum payment of 1 million Iraqi dinars (about US$850) per family. The KRG, which is distributing the payments, has not announced clear eligibility guidelines. While a few people told Human Rights Watch that they had received the compensation, most said they had not.
At the Jarawa refugee camp, in Raniya district, a village elder, Bapir Haji, said none of the families in the camp ever received compensation because of what he characterized as nepotism within the KRG.
"We haven't received anything because we aren't in the right families," he said.
According to locals, neither of the armed groups being hunted by Iran and Turkey receive assistance from the civilians in the shelled areas, although the locals say that segments of the local Kurdish population may sympathize with the rebel fighters.
The umbrella organization that includes both PJAK and the PKK, known as the Kurdistan Democratic Confederation (KCK), acknowledged to Human Rights Watch that fighters are based in parts of the Qandil mountains of northern Iraq and move across the border to conduct attacks inside Iran and Turkey. Regarding the areas being shelled by Iran inside Iraq, a spokesman, Ahmed Deniz, told Human Rights Watch, "PJAK forces are just not there.... our forces do not operate in these civilian areas."
South of the Haji Omaran border crossing, Human Rights Watch observed what an officer of the KRG's security forces, the peshmerga, identified as an Iranian military outpost. The officer said that the outpost had been constructed two weeks earlier by Iranian forces, and was three kilometers inside Iraq. Local officials later confirmed that the outpost was in Iraqi territory. About the shelling, the officer shook his head and remarked, "We can only just watch it."
What is known as the principle of distinction, which requires parties to an armed conflict to distinguish at all times between combatants and civilians, is central to international humanitarian law, which regulates the conduct of hostilities. Customary international law requires that operations may be directed only against combatants and other military objectives; civilians and civilian objects may not be the target of attack. Deliberate, indiscriminate, or disproportionate attacks against civilians and civilian objects are prohibited.
Attacks are indiscriminate when they are not directed at a specific military objective or employ a method or means of warfare that cannot be directed at a military objective or whose effects cannot be limited. A disproportionate attack is one in which the expected incidental loss of civilian life and damage to civilian objects would be excessive in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated.
Until recently, Iranian shelling elicited little comment from either the Iraqi central government or the regional government. In a June 22 news conference, Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki accused Iran and Turkey of violating Iraq's territory and said that the Iraqi government had sent letters of protest to both ambassadors. Deputy Foreign Minister Labeed Abbawi delivered those letters.
"We have expressed to the Iranians that we are against the actions of any [armed] groups operating near the borders, but these problems will not be solved by unilateral military actions in our borders by another country," Abbawi told Human Rights Watch. "We are asking Iran and Turkey to stop the shelling and bombing immediately. There have been no direct responses from Iran, except that we were told that our concerns were exaggerated. This is the traditional response."
Human Rights Watch is one of the world's leading independent organizations dedicated to defending and protecting human rights. By focusing international attention where human rights are violated, we give voice to the oppressed and hold oppressors accountable for their crimes. Our rigorous, objective investigations and strategic, targeted advocacy build intense pressure for action and raise the cost of human rights abuse. For 30 years, Human Rights Watch has worked tenaciously to lay the legal and moral groundwork for deep-rooted change and has fought to bring greater justice and security to people around the world.
One Somali labor federation said the ruling "represents a major victory for workers, trade unions, and social justice across the world."
Labor leaders around the world cheered Thursday's landmark World Court ruling affirming that the right to strike is protected under international law.
The International Court of Justice (ICJ) in The Hague ruled 10-4 in an advisory opinion—meaning it's not legally binding—that “the right to strike of workers and their organizations is protected” under the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organize Convention of 1948, also known as International Labor Organization (ILO) Convention 87.
However, the tribunal also declared that its finding "does not entail any determination on the precise content, scope, or conditions for the exercise of that right."
The case originated with a 2023 request by the ILO Governing Body amid disagreement among the agency's three constituencies—governments, workers, and employers—over the right to strike.
"For decades, this issue has generated one of the deepest disputes within the ILO's tripartite structure... creating a deadlock over the interpretation of international labor standards," explained Kenyan labor law expert Ayaga Max Liambilah.
"Workers and trade unions argued that the right to organize becomes ineffective without the ability to strike, viewing strikes as essential tools for collective bargaining and protection of workers' interests," he said. "Employers' organizations, particularly the International Organization of Employers (IOE), maintained that Convention 87 does not expressly include a right to strike and that reading it into the convention creates obligations never explicitly negotiated by states."
International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) representative Paapa Danquah told the court during proceedings that “strike action has been our vital tool... to improve labor conditions and to defend our human dignities."
IOE secretary general Roberto Suárez Santos countered that Convention 87 does not explicitly address the right to strike. After the court's decision, he underscored that the tribunal did not rule on the "precise content, scope, or conditions for the exercise of that right.”
Unions and workers around the world welcomed the ICJ decision.
“We thank the World Court for this advisory opinion," said ITUC secretary general Luc Triangle, whose organization represents more than 200 million workers in over 160 countries. "The court has confirmed that international law supports the long-standing understanding shared not only by unions, but across large parts of the ILO system for decades."
“This is an important moment for legal certainty, for social justice, and for the credibility of the international labor standards system," he added.
Sonny Matula, president of Federation of Free Workers—a Filipino labor organization—"joyfully and warmly" welcomed the ruling.
"In the Philippines, this is not a foreign concept," he said. "Article XIII, Section 3 of the Constitution expressly recognizes the rights of workers to self-organization, collective bargaining, and peaceful concerted activities, including the right to strike in accordance with law."
"The strike is labor's last voice when dialogue has failed," Matula added. "Without the right to strike, we can say that freedom of association is like a silent campaign, unheard."
Christy Hoffman, general secretary of the Union Network International (UNI) Global Union, said in a statement that “as any trade unionist will tell you, there is no right to organize without the right to strike!"
"The two are inseparable foundations of any functional and fair industrial relations system," Hoffman asserted. "Congratulations to the many advocates who argued the point so brilliantly before the ICJ, and to the ITUC for its steadfast commitment to this case."
The Federation of Somali Trade Unions (FESTU) issued a statement applauding the ICJ ruling, which it said "represents a major victory for workers, trade unions, and social justice across the world."
"It reaffirms with legal certainty that the right to strike is inseparable from freedom of association and constitutes a fundamental pillar of democratic labor relations, collective bargaining, and the protection of workers’ dignity, rights, and interests," FESTU continued.
"The court’s opinion has reinforced the legitimacy of the ILO supervisory mechanisms and restored clarity on a matter that for years had been the subject of intense international debate and institutional disagreement," the federation added. "This is a defining moment in the history of the global trade union movement and a major achievement for multilateralism, social justice, and international law."
Liz Shuler, president of the AFL-CIO—the largest US labor federation—said that "this decision affirms decades of judicial precedent and what workers around the world know: There is no right to organize and bargain collectively without the right to strike."
"When workers are barred from taking collective action on the job, they cannot defend their rights and demand the workplace conditions and contracts they are owed," she continued. "The freedom to join a union becomes an empty formality."
"At a moment when workers’ organizations face sustained attacks around the world, this opinion reaffirms that the freedom to withhold one's labor is not a privilege granted by the powerful, but a fundamental human right grounded in international law," Shuler added. "The AFL-CIO commends the International Trade Union Confederation and its legal team for their efforts in this result."
"I think it's time for the US to put its footprint back on Greenland," said the president's envoy, Jeff Landry.
Hundreds of Greenlanders demonstrated outside the new US Consulate in Nuuk on Thursday as President Donald Trump's envoy signaled that he's still seeking to control the self-governing Danish territory that straddles the Arctic and Atlantic oceans.
Various Greenlandic politicians also declined invitations to attend the opening of the consulate, with Prime Minister Jens-Frederik Nielsen telling the local outlet Sermitsiaq that "we haven't made a decision in principle, but I won't participate."
Protesters were armed with Greenland's red and white flag and signs that read "USA ASU," which translates to "Stop USA," as well as messages in English, including "Make America go away!" and "We are not for sale!" Their chants included "Greenland belongs to Greenlanders," "Go home," and "No means no."
"It's very important, now more than ever, to show the American people what we already said, that no means no, and that the future and self-determination of Greenland belongs to the Greenlandic people," said Aqqalukkuluk Fontain, a 37-year-old IT account manager and protest organizer, according to The Guardian.
"The protest itself is not to provoke Donald Trump or Jeff Landry but to show the world that Greenland has its own democracy," Fontain added. Landry, the Republican governor of Louisiana and the president's envoy to the island, arrived in Nuuk on Sunday.
The newspaper noted Trump's envoy traveled there "uninvited with a delegation including a doctor, who caused fury by saying he was there to 'assess the medical needs of Greenland.' Landry briefly attended a business conference with the US ambassador to Denmark, Kenneth Lowery, and left Nuuk on Wednesday night."
During Landry's "ham-handed trip," The New York Times reported, "he offered chocolate chip cookies and red MAGA hats to people he met on the street. He didn't get many takers, and Greenlandic officials criticized the visit."
It was Landry's first visit to the island of 57,000 since Trump appointed him as envoy in December. On Monday, he met with Greenlandic Foreign Minister Múte Egede and Nielsen, who called the talks "constructive," even though there was "no sign... that anything has changed" regarding Trump's position.
While polling has shown Americans and Greenlanders alike oppose Trump's takeover threats, Landry told Agence France-Presse near the end of his trip that "I think it's time for the US to put its footprint back on Greenland."
"I think that you're seeing the president talk about increasing national security operations and repopulating certain bases in Greenland," he continued. "Greenland needs the US."
The envoy made similar remarks on Friday during a Fox News appearance, highlighting Greenland's oil resources amid soaring global prices—which stem from Trump's illegal war on Iran that led the Iranian government to restrict ship traffic through the Strait of Hormuz, a key trade route for fertilizer and fossil fuels.
In addition to waging war on Iran and continuing to threaten both Greenland and Cuba, Trump invaded Venezuela early this year, abducting President Nicolás Maduro and seizing control of the South American country's nationalized oil industry.
"The DNC should select a new leader who demonstrates competence, creativity, moral clarity, and a relentless commitment to actually changing the broken Democratic Party brand.”
The disastrous release of the Democratic National Committee's 2024 election "autopsy" report on Thursday has brought about a reckoning for the committee's chair, Ken Martin, who is facing calls to resign from legislators and other influential figures in the party.
The 192-page report, written by strategist Paul Rivera in the wake of former Vice President Kamala Harris' loss to President Donald Trump, was panned as amateurish and incomplete, even more than 18 months after the election. Rivera was reportedly fired on Friday.
Aside from being filled with glaring spelling and factual errors and containing several unfinished sections and self-contradicting annotations, it neglected key issues widely believed to have contributed to the Democratic nominee's defeat: Most acutely, her continued backing of Israel as it perpetrated a genocide in Gaza, her inability to address working- and middle-class voters' concerns about affordability, and the shambolic attempt by former President Joe Biden to run for a second term despite his old age and his earlier indications he would serve for only four years.
Many Democrats now see it as a damning indictment of Martin, who was elected as DNC chair last year in part on promises to conduct a thorough and transparent review of the party's defeat. Not helping was his sudden pivot in late 2025 to attempt to bury the report he once championed, only releasing it this week after it leaked to CNN despite mounting pressure from party members.
On Friday morning, Axios quoted an ideological mix of Democratic legislators describing the report's release as the final straw for Martin.
"He should resign," Rep. Seth Moulton (D-Mass.) told Axios, citing "his lack of leadership" and saying it is "utterly nuts it took us this long to release the autopsy."
In a radio interview Thursday, Rep. Mark Pocan (D-Wis.) said in response to a caller who argued Martin should be replaced: "I agree... Having what we have right now is not doing it."
Rep. Marc Veasey (D-Texas) told Semafor that "there doesn't seem to be a plan to turn things around and the clock is ticking... I believe it's time for him to move on."
Despite a push by Martin's allies to arm state party chairs with talking points expressing that they are "fully confident in his leadership," NOTUS reported that inside private DNC group chats and one-on-one conversations, dissension is brewing, and there is even talk of forcing a vote of no confidence to oust the chairman.
"People feel gaslit" by Martin's flip-flopping, one unnamed DNC member told the outlet. "You kept telling people it was coming, then when you didn’t release it, you didn’t even tell everyone the real reason why.”
“While I don’t believe that there are enough votes to pass a vote of no confidence yet, I think there’s more of a permission structure now to have a more open conversation about it,” said another member who NOTUS described as an ally of Martin's. “If they think this is going to make things go away, no, this is only going to ramp up now.”
That's the hope of many in the party's grassroots, who said the entire saga demonstrated Martin's unfitness for a role with major responsibilities as Democrats head into existentially important elections in 2026 and 2028.
Dan Pfeiffer—a former Obama administration staffer whose Pod Save America podcast cohosts held Martin's feet to the fire as he fought to keep the autopsy hidden—called the release "a disaster of his own making."
"He didn’t pick a qualified person to run the autopsy. The fact that he was apparently shocked by the work product shows there was no oversight of the process," Pfeiffer said on social media. "Once he saw that the report was poorly done, he just decided to start lying to everyone about why it wasn't being released."
"In '28, the DNC will set the primary calendar, decide how delegates are awarded, sponsor the debates, and put on the convention," he said. "If no one trusts the DNC, it will be harder to unite the party around the eventual nominee."
Amanda Litman, the president of Run For Something, a group that recruits progressive candidates for office, said in a video posted to social media Thursday that putting together a report composed of "pure gibberish," without access to any of the underlying interviews or materials that buoyed its conclusions, called into question the DNC's ability to be "a fair, competent... conductor of the Democratic presidential primary."
"Ken Martin is not up to the task of being DNC chair—the most important part of which is preparing to run the presidential primary process with trust and competency—and should resign," she added on Friday.
David Hogg, who served as the DNC vice chair in 2025 before being pushed out by Martin over his efforts to support primary challengers against some entrenched party elders, said the autopsy saga was a "demoralizing joke" for the party.
In a release from his political action committee, Leaders We Deserve, Hogg said, "Martin should resign, and the DNC should select a new leader who demonstrates competence, creativity, moral clarity, and a relentless commitment to actually changing the broken Democratic Party brand."