Connect with us

Middle East

Iranian women: This is not just about hijab

Published

on

From the beginning of the revolution we were told that those in power shouldn’t be criticized, but if we had been allowed to criticize, we wouldn’t have so much embezzlement, theft and betrayal.

These were the words of Azam Taleghani, who was among the most prominent individuals of the 1979 Iranian Revolution and being among the four women representatives of the first parliament after the Revolution, in one of her speeches right before her death in 2019. Azam Taleghani, who was imprisoned under the Shah regime and whose father was a quite influential cleric, has been saying about the parliamentary debates regarding the compulsory hijab “If the same obligation was not given on men, then this cannot be obligated on women either”. Quite interestingly, Taleghani never took off her dark veil called “chador” during her entire political career, or even after that. And her countless applications for presidential candidacy with her dark veil, has ended in the same way as it did with all other women: It was rejected by the Constitutional Council.

What do these women want?

43 years after the revolution made by Taleghani and many other women and men, against the imperialism and its inner collaborator the Shah regime, the Iranian women are once again on the streets at the forefront. This wave of pretests that began after Mahsa Amini was arrested in Tehran and died soon after in custody, is the largest wave of protests ever since the 1979 Revolution. Iranian people are taking on the streets in almost all provinces of the country. So, what are the demands from the streets, what do these women want, to what extent does the Iranian society support these protests and where does imperialism stand in the face of these protests? When the provocative reports from the west and the social media misinformation is combined with harsh internet restrictions, it gets very hard to reach any information from the region. Restrictions and misinformation have reduced the demands of the street protesters down to the issue of compulsory hijab practices.

It is seen that some women do not wear hijab on the streets of Tehran after the protests. (December 5, 2022).     PHOTO: Fatemeh Bahrami/AA

‘The main problem is The Constitution’

However, the Iranian women tell that the compulsory hijab practices, that were stereotyped with the Iranian women, have already relaxed in most regions before the protests. According to them hijab is not a problem on its own. A small textile business owner Vida S. (39) stated that the restrictions were mostly ignored before the protests, while driving or in public places such as cafes: “Especially after the protests, most women go out in the streets with their hair unveiled.”

A housewife Sara N. (38) also states that the compulsory hijab does not affect the social life deeply, on its own. However, she thinks that women should be free to wear the outfit they desire, just as men do. A schoolteacher from Tabriz Nasrin N. (42) stated the following on the compulsory hijab, which she defined as a formality and as an artificial practice: “The main problem that affects the social life, are the practices that are caused by the Sharia Law. For example, men can “divorce” their wives as they wish, after paying a one-time allowance called mahr. The same does not apply for women. A woman could not “divorce” her husband because she did not love him. She has to prove there is a heavy misconduct of the man, which allows the woman to get a divorce, such as domestic violence or drug abuse. And even if she gets the divorce, she could not get the child’s custody after the age of 7, if the man is still not keeping the same manners mentioned above. A woman cannot get a passport without her husband’s or her father’s permission. She cannot get an equal share of the inheritance as her male siblings. They cannot be judges, or even witnesses at homicide cases. And even at other trials, a female witness is given half credibility of a male witness.”

Sara (left), Seher (upper right) and Nesrin (lower right)

‘The conditions were already there, hijab just ignited the fire’

Vida tells that the main problem that took all these people to the streets, were economic. Nasrin says “Iranian currency is constantly losing value. Our purchasing power has dropped significantly, people are struggling to survive. The hijab just ignited the protests, in such state of turmoil. It is not just the women, but everyone is taking on the streets. This is a revolutionary movement”. And when I asked one of my Iranian friends, who has not taken off her veil even in Turkiye and whom I know very closely, whether these protests were actually because of hijab or not, she responded “Did you join the Gezi Park protests in 2013 because of just trees?”.

Sahar, whose entire youth was spent in Tehran and was spent with “the fear of going to hell because of her hair”, says hijab is also one of the main issues. Sahar speaks of the difficulties she had 30 years ago when she studies arts in university: “A group of theology students would come to us and call us ‘degenerates’. I was subjected to a lot of discrimination as a woman playing a music instrument. I was not allowed to play in front of men, I needed a license for concerts. Or some of our song lyrics were censored because it had sexual meanings, even if these songs belonged to a famous Islamic cleric…”

‘Women are pushed into two different lifestyles’

Sahar says that women are subjected to severe discrimination because they were only perceived sexually and are pushed into having two different lifestyles one out in the streets, and one at home. Sahar says that women are being treated as “second class citizens”: “Laws are heavily on men’s favor in marriages, in business and in inheritance. However in all developed and developing countries, law are supposed to protect women and children. It is exactly the opposite in Iran. We wish for a new constitution in which we are represented as equals with men; we demand freedom of speech, freedom to criticize and to have universal suffrage in elections that are made free and fair.”

Claiming that religion and politics should be separated, Vida describes her demands as follows: “I do not want to be seen or treated as a terrorist. We want better life conditions as we deserve as the Iranian people”. Sara also has no other expectations other than “a normal life which men and women have same rights”. The obstetrician Delara N. (53) also says she wants live a “normal life”. For her, the way to do this is to “give women all the rights they deserve in social, political and private life that which would be all aspects of a human life”.

‘The fear of the imperialists…’

We asked them about the support messages for the protests in Iran, from the USA and EU. All women we have spoken to have a clear stance against the US and EU. Vida says “The intellect and the culture of the Iranian people are the reason for the imperialist powers’ fears. That is why there is no chance that they would support our development as a nation. We would stay restricted until this problem is resolved and that is exactly what the imperialists want, they do not wish an Iran which has gotten over its internal problems. Therefore, the US and Europe also wants the current government to stay in power, for their own benefits. That is because the internal problems will stay as long as the government stays in power”.

Sara highlights that the globalization has severely damaged a country’s will to take its own decisions not only in Iran but in all countries, and that the Western colonialism is no more legitimized through war but through “problems” such as race or sectarianism, while adding that: “The West does not see any benefits from the consequences of these protests. If they ever knew they would benefit from this, they would put out a much more decisive intervention”.

And according to Nasrin, who said the US and Europe is not content with these protests since they do not desire a peaceful Middle East, the messages of support from the West are just a façade and not quite sincere: “They do not want to subject Iranians. We have already seen the examples of their subjugations from Iraq and Afghanistan”.

Vida says “The intellect and the culture of the Iranian people are the reason for the imperialist powers’ fears.”

The power behind these protests

All the demands that rise out of Iran is neither unexpected when we think about the women influence in universities, academia and the social life despite all the obstacles, nor is it unexpected to find the “great powers” looking for an opportunity whenever there is turmoil in our region … Despite all this, the demands of equality from women and economic demands from the public are balancing out with being an instrument to imperialism.

Just like Taleghani was not a “servant to the US” or a “Western lapdog” or a “traitor”, nether are Sahar, Sara or Vida who were forced to take on streets for the sake of having a normal life. The things that happened, show that those who are benefitting from the Sharia Law, need to finally listen to the women that have suffered from it.

The economic crisis that is deepening by each day and enslaving the population to severe poverty under heavy sanctions from the West, stands as one of the bigger factors behind the protests in Iran. The Iranians know very well about the conditions for these bursts, during which great changes took place. The Iranian clergy was not able to stand against the Shah before its own interests were actually threatened with a land reform and before the merchants connected to the clergy were threatened by the global industries. And this was during when the most radical “reforms” were taking place, including the ban on hijab. The clergy only remembered its authority of inspecting the laws according to the Sharia Law in the land reforms of 1963, since when they first got this right in the first constitution of Iran in 1906 constitution.

Nature will take its course

So, it is “in accordance with the usual situation” when a class a group or an individual to raise their voices when their economic assurances are taken away and when they are suffering through hardships and difficulties. Looking for a “foreign intervention” in such situations, is basically as wrong as rowing against the tide. No country, and especially not the United States, would not export any “revolutions” or “reforms” to Iran, as easy as they did to Arab countries. That is because Iran is one of the two regional powers that has strong state traditions and great cultural accumulations, whose society relies on the concept of anti-imperialism. The Iranian government either finds a new course for this river tide, or “drains the entire river” for now, which will flow even stronger in the next couple years. But sooner or later, that river has to flow towards its riverbed.

Middle East

UNDP estimates $1.38 billion in building damage across southern Lebanon

Published

on

The United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) and Lebanon’s National Council for Scientific Research have released a rapid assessment report on building damage in southern Lebanon.

According to Lebanon’s Al-Akhbar newspaper, the study relied on satellite imagery and geospatial artificial intelligence (GeoAI) technologies to assess externally visible damage to buildings along the southern border between October 23, 2025, and April 29, 2026.

The report found that a total of 11,095 buildings had been completely destroyed in the areas surveyed. Based on an assumed average apartment size of 150 square metres, these destroyed structures are estimated to correspond theoretically to 17,891 housing units.

The volume of debris generated in the region is estimated at 3,107,756 cubic metres.

In addition to the buildings that were completely destroyed, the assessment identified partial damage to 2,242 buildings and minor damage to 9,311 others.

At the housing-unit level, the report estimates that alongside the approximately 17,891 units that were completely destroyed, around 5,219 homes sustained partial damage and 18,282 suffered minor damage.

The report stressed that these housing figures are not based on direct field surveys but on mathematical modelling using average floor-space assumptions and therefore constitute theoretical estimates.

Preliminary cost of building damage estimated at $1.38 billion

The report calculated reconstruction costs using a standard benchmark value of $450 per square metre. On that basis, the total preliminary cost of building damage was estimated at $1.384 billion.

Geographically, Nabatieh Governorate accounted for the largest share of the damage, estimated at $1.053 billion, while losses in South Governorate were assessed at $331 million.

At the district level, preliminary costs were estimated at $688 million in Bint Jbeil, $333 million in Marjayoun, $315 million in Tyre, $32 million in Nabatieh district and $16 million in Sidon.

The report emphasised that these figures cover only external physical damage to buildings and do not represent the final cost of reconstruction or the total economic losses caused by the war.

In Bint Jbeil district, the highest levels of destruction were recorded in Aitaroun, where 1,658 buildings were destroyed, followed by Bint Jbeil city with 1,076, Ayta al-Shaab with 539, Beit Lif with 371, Yaroun with 242 and Ainata with 227.

In Marjayoun district, 969 destroyed buildings were recorded in Mais al-Jabal, 824 in Taybeh, 285 in Houla, 199 in Markaba, 184 in Blida and 174 in Deir Siryan.

In Nabatieh district, 71 buildings were destroyed in Yahmar al-Shaqif, 69 in Zoutar al-Sharqiya and 37 in Kfar Sir. In Tyre district, 370 buildings were completely destroyed in Burj al-Shamali, 216 in Naqoura, 162 in Abbassiyeh, 80 in Tyre city and 65 in al-Mansouri. In Sidon district, destruction was concentrated mainly in Zirariyeh, where 65 buildings were destroyed, and Arzi, where 62 buildings were levelled.

The report also outlined significant limitations that prevent the findings from being treated as a definitive final assessment.

The study did not cover entire administrative districts but was limited to areas where clear satellite imagery was available.

As a result, the area south of the Litani River constituted the main focus, while only limited data from areas north of the river were included. Some municipalities were fully surveyed, while only selected sections of others could be examined.

For example, all cadastral zones in Bint Jbeil district were surveyed. In Tyre district, 74 of 75 cadastral areas were fully covered, while one was only partially included.

In Marjayoun, 17 of 33 areas were fully surveyed and 21 partially covered. In Nabatieh, only four of 52 areas were fully analysed, while 15 were partially examined. In Sidon, none of the 77 areas underwent a complete survey, with only five areas partially included in the assessment.

The report listed several additional limitations:

Critical infrastructure damage, including roads, bridges, electricity networks, water systems and telecommunications facilities, was not assessed.

Damage to underground shelters, basements and non-visible interior sections of buildings could not be detected.

No clear distinction could be made between residential, commercial and industrial structures.

Buildings with minor damage were excluded from debris-volume and cost calculations.

Structural density, shadows and narrow streets introduced potential margins of error in satellite analysis.

No field visits or on-site inspections were conducted to verify the findings. The assessment was carried out entirely through desk-based analysis of satellite imagery.

Given the scale of destruction and confidence in the methodology employed, no on-site verification procedures were undertaken in cooperation with the Lebanese Armed Forces or the United Nations Department of Safety and Security (UNDSS).

UNDP said the findings should be regarded as preliminary planning data and that the scope of the assessment would be expanded as additional satellite imagery and field information become available.

Officials noted that once excluded categories and infrastructure losses are taken into account, the true cost of the destruction in southern Lebanon is likely to be significantly higher than the estimates contained in the report.

Continue Reading

Middle East

Iran makes Lebanon ceasefire prerequisite for final agreement with US

Published

on

Assessments that efforts to restrain Israel in Lebanon are being shaped less in Beirut or Tel Aviv than in closed-door talks between Iranian and American negotiators resurfaced ahead of negotiations in the Swiss town of Bürgenstock.

Unlike the current approach adopted by the Lebanese government, Iran continues to pursue a strategy of leveraging its influence on the ground to secure diplomatic gains.

The Lebanese government, meanwhile, remains committed to a separate negotiating track that critics say facilitates concessions to Israel at the negotiating table in Washington that could not be achieved on the battlefield.

US Vice President JD Vance, who arrived in Switzerland to participate in the latest round of talks, confirmed that efforts to make the ceasefire in Lebanon permanent would be among the negotiations’ top priorities.

According to CNN, citing a diplomatic source familiar with the matter, the US and Iranian delegations agreed to convene an emergency session on the situation in Lebanon as the first item of discussion, placing the issue at the top of the agenda.

US says it faces difficulties over Israeli withdrawal

According to diplomatic sources cited by Al-Akhbar newspaper, US officials informed the Iranian side that Washington had made intensive efforts to persuade the Israeli government to complete a full withdrawal from Lebanon but had encountered significant difficulties in the process.

US officials requested Iranian support in facilitating Hezbollah’s withdrawal from southern Lebanon as part of efforts to enable an Israeli pullout.

The Iranian delegation responded that Hezbollah was an internal Lebanese matter. While indicating that Tehran did not oppose an agreement by the Lebanese authorities on a timetable providing for a rapid Israeli withdrawal, the delegation outlined what it viewed as its own area of responsibility.

Iranian representatives said both Tehran and Washington had committed to implementing measures aimed at ending the war across the region, including in Lebanon, and argued that the United States should exert pressure on Israel not only to uphold a ceasefire but also to withdraw quickly.

Iran reiterates Lebanon condition for final agreement

An Iranian official also told CNN that ending the conflict in Lebanon was the most important item on the Iranian delegation’s agenda.

During the talks, Vice President Vance said Washington would continue working toward peace between Lebanon and Israel and expressed hope that the temporary ceasefire could be transformed into a permanent agreement capable of delivering long-term stability.

Speaking before the session, Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmail Baghaei said Tehran would not begin negotiations on a final agreement with Washington unless the war in Lebanon was halted, as stipulated in the US-Iran memorandum of understanding.

In a post on X, Baghaei wrote: “It is not possible to move to the negotiation stage for a final agreement unless these provisions are implemented, foremost among them the first clause, which calls for ending the war on all fronts, including Lebanon.”

Military and diplomatic developments ahead of the Bürgenstock talks threatened to undermine the understanding reached between the parties. Following Israeli attacks in Lebanon and what Iran described as an escalation of military tensions in violation of the US-Iran agreement, Tehran announced that it had closed the Strait of Hormuz to traffic.

In a statement, Iran’s Khatam al-Anbiya Headquarters said the closure of the strait was only the first step in a series of measures planned by Tehran. Iran’s Foreign Ministry subsequently announced the suspension of the Geneva negotiations with the United States.

Following those developments, reports indicated that Washington intervened and increased pressure on Israel, leading Israeli military commanders to issue definitive orders for a complete halt to military operations in southern Lebanon for the second time within 24 hours.

Israeli media reports said the decision was not taken solely on Tel Aviv’s own initiative and that military operations were curtailed as a result of intense US pressure following Iran’s move in the Strait of Hormuz.

Continue Reading

Middle East

US lifts naval blockade of Iran after ceasefire memorandum signed

Published

on

The United States has lifted its naval blockade of Iran on the orders of President Donald Trump, ending restrictions on vessels entering and leaving Iranian ports.

Announcing the development, the US Central Command (CENTCOM) said the US military was no longer blocking maritime traffic to Iranian ports and had halted all operations related to enforcing the naval blockade.

The statement added that US warships would remain in the region to monitor compliance with the terms of the agreement.

The decision to lift the blockade follows the memorandum of understanding signed by the United States and Iran on June 18, aimed at ending the war and reopening the Strait of Hormuz to maritime traffic.

After signing the document in France, where he was attending the G7 summit, Trump sent the agreement to Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian for approval.

In a statement, Iran’s Foreign Ministry said a formal signing ceremony between the two delegations, previously scheduled to take place in Geneva on June 19, would no longer be held.

Negotiations to continue in Switzerland

According to Axios, citing sources familiar with the matter, the signing process for the memorandum of understanding was accelerated in order to reopen the Strait of Hormuz to shipping as quickly as possible.

A planned meeting between US and Iranian representatives in Switzerland has not been cancelled. The talks are expected to focus on launching negotiations over Iran’s nuclear programme, with US Vice President James David Vance and Iranian Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf set to take part.

According to CNN, the 14-point memorandum calls for an immediate ceasefire on all fronts, the lifting of the naval blockade, the resumption of maritime traffic through the Strait of Hormuz, the removal of oil sanctions on Iran and the withdrawal of US troops from areas surrounding Iran.

The agreement also includes the allocation of $300 billion for Iran’s economic reconstruction, the release of $24 billion in frozen Iranian assets and a 60-day negotiation process aimed at reaching a final agreement on the nuclear programme.

In return, the authorities in Tehran pledged not to develop nuclear weapons.

Continue Reading

MOST READ

Turkey