

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.

The Afghan government should deliver on promises to cooperate with the International Criminal Court's ongoing analysis of the grave crimes committed in Afghanistan, Human Rights Watch and the Transitional Justice Coordination Group (TJCG) said today in a letter to President Ashraf Ghani.
Since 2007, the Office of the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court (ICC) has been examining whether crimes committed in Afghanistan since May 2003 meet the threshold to open a formal investigation. The prosecutor reported in November 2015 that its long-sought efforts to visit the country to assess national criminal proceedings, key to its analysis, had been frustrated. In late January 2016, the second vice president made a statement welcoming an ICC visit to Afghanistan.
"Afghanistan has been a justice-free zone for too long, with victims of grave abuses paying the highest price," said Richard Dicker, international justice director. "As an ICC member, the Afghan government should make good on its obligations to cooperate with the ICC and show its commitment to the rule of law."
The prosecutor's analysis covers possible war crimes and crimes against humanity committed by members of the Taliban, Afghan government forces, and international forces, including United States forces. Afghanistan became a member of the ICC on May 1, 2003.
Human Rights Watch and the TJCG urged key Afghan government officials, including those in the Foreign Affairs and Justice Ministries, as well as the national security advisor and the attorney general, to meet with the ICC's Office of the Prosecutor. The two nongovernmental organizations also called on the government to ratify the Agreement on the Privileges and Immunities of the Court, an international treaty that provides the ICC with the necessary access and cooperation to carry out its work in the country independently.
In its January statement, the government announced the creation of a technical committee of key government officials and the Afghanistan Independent Human Rights Commission to broker cooperation with the ICC. The government should include civil society activists such as the TJCG as observer members of the committee, the groups said.
The government also said it would officially solicit "the views and opinions of international partners about the nature of their interaction with the ICC." Human Rights Watch and the TJCG expressed concern about the possible role of the US and other foreign forces to influence the scope of Afghanistan's cooperation with the ICC, given its legal obligation to do so as a member of the court.
"The government's top priority should not be placating international partners, but rather delivering justice to Afghanistan's countless victims," Dicker said.
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.
The announcement, said one advocate for the end of the conflict, "should mark not merely the end of this war, but the beginning of a new US approach rooted in diplomacy, accountability, and the simple truth that peace is the only way forward.”
After the Trump administration in the United States and the government of Iran both acknowledged late Sunday that a memorandum of understanding, or MOU, had been reached to end the war initiated by the US and Israel in February, advocates for peace heralded the interim deal but also noted difficult hurdles remain to secure a lasting peace in the region.
"This Great Deal will bring Peace and Security to the whole Region. Many presidents have tried to make Peace with Iran, and all have failed before me," declared a social media post from President Donald Trump, who failed to mention that he was the one who started the war, alongside Israeli forces, on February 28.
While the MOU, a text of which has yet to be formally released but scheduled to be signed Friday in Geneva, reportedly includes an end to hostilities for 60 days, the opening of the Strait of Hormuz as soon as this week, and a halt to the US-imposed naval blockade on Iran. Tougher issues—including Iran's nuclear program, the release of seized Iranian assets, possible war reparations, and Israel's ongoing assault on Lebanon—have yet to be fully ironed out.
Kazem Gharibabadi, Iran’s deputy foreign minister, said a broader deal that would cover sanctions relief for Iran would be worked out during the 60-day ceasefire.
“We have incorporated all our important positions into the draft MOU,” Gharibabadi said Sunday. “This memorandum does not mean trusting the enemy; it has been written with active distrust. We will monitor the implementation of US commitments.”
Speaking Monday on state television, Gharibabadi reiterated that "Iran’s approach combines diplomacy with readiness for defense," stressing that even with agreements in place, Iran "remains fully prepared to counter any future threats" from the US and Israel.
UN Secretary-General António Guterres was among those to welcome the diplomatic development, calling it a “critical step” toward resolving the regional conflict that has caused global economic pain far beyond the Middle East. In a statement from Guterres' office, the UN chief expressed hopes "that the parties will build on this new momentum and redouble their efforts towards a final resolution of the conflict" that includes a “durable and comprehensive peace."
Foreign policy experts said the deal must be embraced, even if all the details are not yet clear, in order to bring about a much needed peace and as a way to begin to heal the human and economic suffering it unleashed.
Jamal Abdi, president of the National Iranian American Council (NIAC), said the deal to "end the disastrous US-Israeli war on Iran" should be seen as "welcome news," but noted that the situation—not forgetting previous claims of a resolution that turned out to be false—remains fragile.
The deal, said Abdi, "was finalized despite the considerable effort of [Israel Prime Minister] Benjamin Netanyahu to sabotage it, striking into the southern suburbs of Beirut in a clear provocation intended to deter Iran from signing the deal. It didn’t work—this time—but his motivation to drag the US back into war with Iran will remain so long as he is in office. President Trump was right to sharply criticize Netanyahu again, and he will have to keep one eye on the Israeli Prime Minister if he wants his peace with Iran to stick."
While an end to Israel's bombing and incursion into southern Lebanon has been a key demand of Iran since the war began, Israel has continued to pound targets, including civilian infrastructure, as part of its ongoing effort to sabotage peace efforts in the region. Israel's Defense Minister Israel Katz told Haaretz on Monday that Israeli forces would not withdraw from positions in occupied Syria, Lebanon, or the Gaza Strip.
National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir said, "Trump's agreement doesn't bind us. Israel is not subordinate to the United States; we are an independent and sovereign state."
Joe Kent, former director of the National Counterterrorism Center who resigned from the Trump administration in March in protest over the Iran war, said a change of US policy towards Israel is vital if the peace deal is to hold.
"We can strengthen our chances of this deal holding," said Kent, "by cutting all military and intelligence assistance to Israel, [which] took every opportunity to tank this deal and will likely do so again unless we take action."
US lawmakers opposed to Trump's invasion and ongoing policies in the region also welcomed the news of the agreement.
"The ceasefire agreement with Iran with the opening of the Strait of Hormuz is welcome news," said Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) in a statement late Sunday. "Democrats should support it. I am glad it includes a provision for mutual respect of the US and Iran's sovereignty so we do not launch a dumb war of choice again."
"The war was a costly lesson for the US," added Khanna. "As expected, Trump failed to bring about regime change. The terms seem no better than what [President Barack] Obama secured under the [Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action] JCPOA nearly a decade ago. America lost 14 precious service members and wasted billions of dollars on this foolish endeavor. But today, we can be relieved that gas and food costs will start coming down for Americans. And that no more American or civilian lives will be lost."
According to Abdi at NIAC, the US policy choice with Iran was always "between peace and war," but the deal on the table now means there are no excuses not to choose peace going forward.
"We know the price of war, and so we must do the hard work to forge a stronger peace. We have seen where maximum pressure, sabotage, and military escalation lead: impoverishment, repression, regional instability, and finally a disastrous war with global consequences. The lesson could not be clearer," Abdi said.
"The United States and Iran must now implement this deal in good faith, resist efforts to sabotage it, and use this opening to build a broader path away from sanctions, war, and collective punishment," he continued. "Today’s announcement should mark not merely the end of this war, but the beginning of a new US approach rooted in diplomacy, accountability, and the simple truth that peace is the only way forward."
Iran's chief negotiator accused the Trump administration of giving the Israeli government a "green light" to continue attacking Lebanon and undermining diplomatic talks.
Update:
US President Donald Trump, Pakistan's prime minister, and the Iranian Foreign Ministry said Sunday that the US and Iran have reached an agreement on a framework to end the war that Trump launched in late February.
Iran's deputy foreign minister, Kazem Gharibabadi, said the terms of the deal will be made public after the memorandum of understanding is signed on Friday in Switzerland. Pakistani Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif wrote on social media that "both sides have declared the immediate and permanent termination of military operations on all fronts, including in Lebanon."
The memorandum of understanding is expected to extend the current ceasefire agreement by 60 days while detailed negotiations take place.
Gharibabadi said the start of the 60-day negotiations will be contingent on the US lifting its naval blockade of Iranian ports, "ending the state of war and military operations," and "releasing Iran's frozen funds."
Earlier:
The Israeli military bombed the southern suburbs of Beirut on Sunday just as Iranian and US officials voiced optimism that a diplomatic agreement is in reach, prompting accusations that the government of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is trying to derail the negotiations.
Israel's strikes reportedly targeted a five-story apartment building, killing at least three people, according to Lebanese authorities. Netanyahu said the bombing was a response to Hezbollah rocket fire into northern Israel.
The latest bombing of Beirut came hours after US President Donald Trump said he expected a memorandum of understanding (MOU) to be signed as early as Sunday, potentially setting the stage for negotiations to end the illegal war Trump started in late February. Iranian officials have pushed back on the US president's claim that the MOU will be signed Sunday, but Iran's foreign minister said Friday that an agreement had "never been closer."
The Associated Press reported Sunday that Israel's new strikes on Beirut "threatened to hamper negotiations over a deal, which in its current form is a deep disappointment to Israel’s government."
"The last time Israel struck the Beirut suburbs a week ago, it set off the most serious escalation of fighting between Iran and Israel since the tenuous ceasefire took hold April 7," AP added.
Kenneth Roth, former executive director of Human Rights Watch, wrote on social media that "as a US-Iranian deal seems like it might be closer, Israel predictably bombs the Beirut suburbs, evidently hoping to sabotage the deal."
"Why does Trump put up with this and continue to arm and fund such obstructionism?" Roth asked.
Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, Iran's chief negotiator and speaker of parliament, said Israel's strikes indicate that the US "either does not have the will or the ability to fulfill its obligations."
"You cannot gain concessions by giving [Israel] a green light," he added. "The good cop, bad cop routine has become old. If you do not have the will or the ability to fulfill your commitments, then there is no basis for talking about continuing down this path."
As the US & Iran reportedly near a deal that includes ending the war in Lebanon, Israel is attacking Beirut again.
Either Trump can't restrain Netanyahu, or the deal is already being violated before it's signed.
Either way, it undermines the deal's value for Iran. pic.twitter.com/v08c21i7wa
— Sina Toossi (@SinaToossi) June 14, 2026
While the MOU that's reportedly under consideration has not been released in full, its broad outlines have been reported in media outlets and divulged by Iranian and US officials in recent days. Reuters reported Sunday that "a final draft of the memorandum of understanding with the US covered a range of issues, from Tehran’s nuclear work to reopening the Strait of Hormuz and US waivers on oil sanctions, with a final deal to be discussed in the 60 days following agreement by the two sides."
Under the MOU, Iran would immediately reopen the Strait of Hormuz and the US would end its illegal blockade of Iranian ports, according to Reuters. The US would also agree to waive oil sanctions on Iran and release $25 billion in frozen Iranian assets, while Iran would agree to "maintain the current status of its nuclear program, refraining from further uranium enrichment and expansion of nuclear facilities."
Abbas Araghchi, Iran's foreign minister, said in a television interview on Friday that the MOU's proposed 60-day ceasefire extension would include Lebanon.
Axios reported that Netanyahu has "found himself in the dark" as US-Iran negotiations have progressed in recent days, "calling allies close to the Trump administration to try and gather information."
Following Sunday's strike on Beirut, Trump told Axios' Barak Ravid that Netanyahu "has no fucking judgment."
"I passed this message on to him—that I am very unhappy with the attack in Beirut," said Trump, whose administration has approved billions of dollars worth of weapons sales to the Israeli government.
Trita Parsi, executive vice president of the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, warned that "Israel will do more sabotage unless Trump imposes a cost on Israel."
"Netanyahu knows exactly what he is doing and is judging that an attack on Beirut—rather than southern Lebanon—is exactly what's needed to derail the pending US-Iran deal," Parsi argued.
"Now in its third consecutive year of famine, Sudan received nothing."
Elon Musk's vault to trillionaire status following the public debut of his rocket company SpaceX came on the heels of an analysis showing the devastating impact of his destruction of the US Agency for International Development on millions of people in countries facing or on the brink of famine.
The analysis, authored by Council on Foreign Relations expert and longtime aid worker Sam Vigersky, noted that Musk's targeting of USAID during his tenure as head of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) resulted in the transfer of the Food for Peace program to the US Department of Agriculture (USDA), an agency "without international humanitarian or disaster-response expertise."
Vigersky found that the USDA this year chose just seven countries to receive American grain under the Food for Peace program: the Democratic Republic of Congo, Ethiopia, Guatemala, Haiti, Kenya, El Salvador, and Rwanda. The latter two countries, Vigersky noted, "do not meet an emergency threshold" for assistance.
"Meanwhile, the country facing the largest hunger crisis in the world—Sudan—did not make the list. Now in its third consecutive year of famine, Sudan received nothing. In fact, more than 40% of Sudan’s community kitchens, a lifeline for the displaced, have closed in the past six months as funding dried up, according to Islamic Relief," Vigersky reported. "Afghanistan, Lebanon, and Yemen were also passed over. Millions of people in those countries live one step from famine, according to the Integrated Food Security Phase Classification (IPC), the UN-backed monitoring system that uses a standardized five-point scale (five being famine) to measure the severity of food insecurity."
Experts assessing the global impact of USAID's decimation at the hands of billionaire US President Donald Trump and the world's first trillionaire, who bragged publicly about "feeding USAID into the wood chipper," estimate that hundreds of thousands of people have already died as a result of the large-scale loss of humanitarian assistance—and millions more will die in the coming years if swift action is not taken to restore aid.
"The impacts of the cuts were immediate and tragic," Nicholas Enrich, a former USAID employee who became a whistleblower, wrote in The Boston Globe on Friday. "Health clinics and emergency ambulance services shuttered overnight. Clinical trials were deserted. Thousands of healthcare workers lost their jobs. Lifesaving food and medicine was left to expire in warehouses. According to conservative estimates, in the year since USAID was dismantled, 750,000 people have died as a result of the cuts. For the first time in a generation, more children died in one year — 2025—than in the previous year."
Oxfam has estimated that a 10% tax on Musk's $1 trillion fortune would generate enough revenue to end extreme poverty worldwide for a year.