Civilians count costs of war as they return to southern Lebanon

People displaced by weeks of airstrikes have begun returning to Beirut and southern Lebanon as a 10-day ceasefire between Israel and Hezbollah took hold on Friday. Residents described scenes of destruction and fears of further conflict as they arrived home.


Issued on: 18/04/2026 - RFI

People drive past the rubble of destroyed buildings in Dahiyeh, a southern suburb of Beirut, Lebanon, on 17 April 2026, following a ceasefire between Israel and Hezbollah. © AP - Bilal Hussein

“Thank God, we’re happy, of course! It’s a victory, even though we know our three-story house has collapsed. It’s still something to be proud of,” one man told RFI as he made his way to the village of Kharayeb in southern Lebanon, which has been heavily bombarded by Israeli missiles.

“We’re returning with our heads held high,” his wife added. “And we’re not afraid of anyone, even if Israel bombs us, because we have our heroes on the front lines everywhere, and we’re proud of them.”

More than 2,000 people have been killed in Israeli airstrikes in Lebanon since early March, according to UN figures. Over 1.2 million people have been displaced, the equivalent of one in five of the population.

Israeli ground forces have invaded the country's south, a Hezbollah stronghold. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has said the troops will not withdraw during the truce, and has warned civilians not to return.

People sit at a site of an Israeli strike in Tyre carried out just before the 10-day ceasefire between Lebanon and Israel went into effect, on 18 April 2026. © Louisa Gouliamaki / Reuters


Many ignored the warning and came home on Friday, even if just to assess the damage.

“It’s sad to see my house in this state. The doors and windows have blown out,” said Nour, a woman returning to the town of Nabatieh. “But it’s good to be back. I wish it weren’t just temporary.”

In the town centre, Hassan was busy repairing his bakery. “We’ve seen much worse. Now we’re going to clean up. I have to fix the door myself. And tomorrow, we’ll open, God willing.”

'We all need solidarity': volunteers mobilise to help Lebanon's displaced

'People need to go home'

In the southern suburbs of Beirut, another area that Hezbollah's strong influence has made a target for Israeli strikes, returning residents found similar scenes.

“I lost my home and all my furniture. But what matters most is our dignity,” local man Hassan Dib told RFI. “When Hezbollah says we can go back, we’ll go back. That’s why so few people have returned yet.”

Hezbollah has instructed residents not to return to affected areas until a formal and final ceasefire is declared.

Ali Mrad had just arrived from the city of Tripoli in northern Lebanon, where he had been staying with relatives. “I came to check on my house, to see if it’s still standing or not. The situation is good now... I can’t describe how I feel. It’s like emerging from a very serious crisis.”

Others remained wary. “We’re in the process of returning home, but I expect the Israelis to break the truce and bomb us,” said Zahra Chehadé, displaced from her house in southern Beirut.

“I don’t feel safe. But people need to go home. Buildings can be rebuilt. The most important thing is that Israel doesn’t occupy Lebanon.”

This article has been adapted from original reporting in French by RFI's correspondents in southern Lebanon, Aabla Jounaidi and Jad el-Khoury, and Beirut correspondent Sophie Guignon.

France's Macron says fragile Lebanon ceasefire 'may already be undermined'

A 10-day ceasefire between Israel and Hezbollah – which took effect at midnight on Thursday after weeks of escalating cross-border fighting – risks collapsing, French President Emmanuel Macron warned, after reports of violations in southern Lebanon.


Issued on: 17/04/2026 - RFI

Displaced residents return to Dahiyeh, in Beirut's southern suburbs, on 17 April 2026, following a ceasefire between Israel and Hezbollah. © AP/Bilal Hussein

The ceasefire agreed between Israel and militant group Hezbollah took effect at midnight local time, after almost seven weeks of war.

Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said he agreed “to advance” peace efforts with Lebanon, but said Israeli troops would not withdraw.

The ceasefire appeared to be holding across most of Lebanon early Friday, but within hours, the Lebanese army accused Israel of “a number of violations" in the south of the country.

Macron on Friday said he fully supported the ceasefire, brokered by the United States and announced by President Donald Trump, but was concerned that it "may already be undermined by ongoing military operations".

"I call for the safety of civilians on both sides of the border between Lebanon and Israel," he said on X, formerly Twitter. "Hezbollah must lay down its arms. Israel must respect Lebanese sovereignty and end the war."

Deadly airstrikes

Israel has been fighting Hezbollah since the militant group launched rocket attacks in support of Iran last month, following the killing by Israel of Iran's supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

Hezbollah has not officially said if it will recognise the ceasefire, but one of its lawmakers told France's AFP news agency on Thursday that the group would respect it if Israel stopped its attacks on its militants.

More than 2,000 people have been killed in Israeli airstrikes in Lebanon since early March – including health workers and journalists, according to Lebanese authorities. Over 1.2 million people have been displaced, or one in five of the population, most of them from Shia Muslim communities.

Israel halted strikes in capital city Beirut on 8 April after a deadly bombardment that hit several crowded commercial and residential areas and killed more than 350 people in one day.

'Today, more than ever, we are with you': Lebanese diaspora mobilises in France

France-Lebanon bond

"We must do everything possible to ensure the ceasefire is respected," Defence Minister Catherine Vautrin told French television channel TF1, calling the situation in Lebanon "absolutely dire".

Responding to comments by the Israeli ambassador to the United States, who claimed that Paris had no business interfering in negotiations between Israel and Lebanon, the minister stated that "no one can call into question the relations between France and Lebanon".

She said: "We have a permanent presence alongside the Lebanese [...]. France and Lebanon share a common history and a bond that nothing can break."

(with newswires)

French soldier killed in Lebanon in attack on UN peacekeepers

A French soldier was killed and three others were wounded in an attack on UN peacekeepers on Saturday, President Emmanuel Macron announced, saying that the evidence suggested Hezbollah was responsible. The militant group has denied involvement.


Issued on: 18/04/2026 -  RFI

UN peacekeepers stand guard in in Qasmiyeh, Lebanon, as displaced people return home after the ceasefire between Israel and Hezbollah, on 18 April 2026. © Louisa Gouliamaki / Reuters


Macron named the soldier as Florian Montorio, a staff sergeant in the 17th Parachute Engineer Regiment of Montauban serving with Unifil, the United Nations' peacekeeping mission in Lebanon.

He was killed on Saturday morning in southern Lebanon, the president said in a post on X. The three soldiers wounded in the same attack were evacuated, he added.

"Everything suggests that Hezbollah is responsible for this attack," Macron said. "France demands that the Lebanese authorities immediately arrest the perpetrators and assume their responsibilities alongside Unifil."

But Hezbollah denied any connection to the attack. In a statement, the group urged "caution in making judgments and assigning responsibilities" pending the results of an investigation by the Lebanese army.

The attack came on the second full day of a 10-day ceasefire, agreed between Israel and Hezbollah on Thursday in order to negotiate an end to six weeks of war.

Macron's office said he held calls with Lebanon's President Joseph Aoun and Lebanese Prime Minister Nawaf Salam to urge them to guarantee the security of Unifil soldiers.

Both Aoun and Salam condemned the attack. The prime minister said he had ordered an "immediate investigation".

Ambush

Montorio is the second French soldier to die since the start of the war in the Middle East, after an Iranian-designed drone killed Arnaud Frion last month in Iraq's Kurdistan region.

Montorio was "ambushed by an armed group at very close range", according to French Defence Minister Catherine Vautrin.

She said he had been on a mission to clear a route to a Unifil post Deir-Kifa region that had been cut off for several days by fighting. He was struck by direct fire, Vautrin said, paying tribute to his 18 years of military service.

In a statement, Unifil said the peacekeepers "came under small-arms fire from non-state-actors" as they were clearing ordnance from a road in the village of Ghanduriyah.

Its initial assessment indicates the incoming fire was "allegedly Hezbollah", it said, adding that it had launched its own investigation into what "may amount to war crimes".

Peacekeepers from the United Nations Interim Force In Lebanon (Unifil) patrol near the southern Lebanese border village of Sarada on 24 February 2026. AFP - RABIH DAHER

The fighting in Lebanon has seen Unifil repeatedly targeted, by both Israeli and Hezbollah forces.

Unifil patrols in southern Lebanon, near the Israeli border where Israel and Hezbollah have been fighting since last month. The militant group drew Lebanon into the Middle East war with rocket fire at Israel in support of its backer, Iran.

Three Indonesian peacekeepers were killed last month, with a preliminary UN investigation finding one was killed by Israeli tank fire, while the two others were killed by an improvised explosive device likely planted by Hezbollah.

Other Unifil peacekeepers have also been wounded since the war broke out.

In April, Israeli soldiers destroyed surveillance cameras in Unifil's headquarters, the peacekeeping body said, and last week an Israeli tank twice rammed peacekeeping vehicles, causing damage but no injuries.

UN peacekeepers have served as a buffer between Lebanon and Israel since 1978, but their mandate expires at the end of this year.

(with AFP)

“Not Guns for Hire”: Trump’s Failure to Trigger a Kurdish Uprising

Trump tried to enlist the newly allied Kurds to his war. The U.S. discovered they were highly skeptical of being dragged into conflict by a foreign power.

By Alexis Daloumis

April 11, 2026

Source: Drop Site News

Soldiers at Komala (CPI) camp near Suleymaniyah. Photo: Alexis Daloumis.

SULEYMANIYAH, KURDISTAN REGION OF IRAQ—On April 5, during an interview with Fox News journalist Trey Yingst, President Donald Trump apparently confessed to trying to foment an armed uprising by dissidents inside Iran earlier this year, suggesting that the effort had only failed due to the betrayal of unnamed Kurdish groups. The U.S. government had, Trump said, “sent guns to the protesters, a lot of them. We sent them through the Kurds, and I think the Kurds took the guns.”

The claim of an ill-fated Kurdish role in attempting to topple the Iranian government triggered immediate denials by all major Iranian Kurdish parties. In comments to Drop Site, the Free Life Party of Kurdistan (PJAK), one of the largest and most organized Kurdish parties, denied Trump’s claim that they or other Kurdish groups—six of whom had formally announced the formation of a new alliance days before the start of the war—had received U.S. weapons to fight or transfer to other opposition factions in the country.

“No, we have never received weapons or assistance from the United States or any other country. As far as we know, all Kurdish parties have rejected Trump’s statements and are not aware of such claims,” said Zegrus Enderyarî, a member of the PJAK External Relations Committee. “It is possible that Trump intended to do such a thing or wanted to test the reaction of Iran and other regional countries. However, the time he referred to was when thousands of protesters in Iran were killed by the regime, and at that time, this alliance had not yet been formed.” (Drop Site could verify neither Trump’s claim he sent weapons nor the Kurds’ denial.)

The Alliance of Iranian Kurdistan Political Parties—involving six out of the seven active Kurdish parties in Iranian Kurdistan—was announced on February 22, six days before the start of the war. The timing of the pact has led many to suggest that it was intended as preparation for an alignment with Israel and the U.S. in the coming conflict. Enderyarî, without directly refuting that narrative, pointed out that the relevant discussions between the parties had started in the aftermath of the 2022 anti-government “Woman, Life, Freedom” movement in Iran—significantly predating the current war. “Although political conditions also played a role, the formation of this alliance was a historical necessity, and it can even be said that it was delayed,” said Enderyarî.

Regardless, Iranian Kurds quickly found themselves thrust into the forefront of the U.S. and Israeli war against Iran. In the first week of fighting, the U.S. and Israel bombed numerous government positions in Kurdish regions of Iran, while making public calls to Kurdish groups to launch an uprising against the government. That uprising, intended to drain the resources and attention of the Iranian military, while potentially causing the ethnic dissolution of the country, did not come to pass.

Other Iranian Kurdish groups who spoke to Drop Site expressed suspicion over attempts to maneuver them into a conflict at the behest of foreign powers.

Ebrahim Alizadeh, General Secretary of Komala (CPI), also known as the Kurdistan Organization of the Iranian Communist Party, the only party of the seven that didn’t join the alliance, stated that one of the reasons his group had not joined the February 22 announcement was out of belief that the alliance had been hastily formed in the shadow of U.S. and Israeli war plans.

“We asked to have a trial period of collaboration…but we realized that there was external pressure to do it faster. Afterwards we understood that this pressure was related to the war that started,” he said. ”When the war started, the Americans and Israelis asked them to enter Iran to liberate a region and put pressure on the central state. The plan didn’t work and they withdrew from it, partly because Turkey convinced them.”

The Iranian portion of Kurdistan, where Israel and the U.S. have tried to encourage revolt, has several distinctive features setting it apart from the other three parts. Unlike Kurdish regions in Turkey, Iraq, and Syria—all once part of the Ottoman Empire—Iranian Kurdistan has been under continuous Iranian rule for at least four centuries, with the Safavid Empire dismantling Kurdish principalities far earlier. Most Iranian Kurds are also Sunni in an emphatically Shia state, making them a double minority.

The failure to trigger a Kurdish uprising was one of many factors that contributed to transforming the war into a quagmire for the U.S. By early April, Trump’s frustrations over the war had begun publicly boiling over, leading to public accusations of betrayal by Kurdish groups.

On April 6, Trump fulminated that U.S. arms “were supposed to go to the people so they could fight back against these thugs. You know what happened? The people that they sent them to kept them because they said, ‘What a beautiful gun. I think I’ll keep it.’ So, I’m very upset with a certain group of people and they’re going to pay a big price for that.”

Trump’s references to “the Kurds,” as well as, “a certain group of people,” has led to confusion about whether his allegations are leveled against a specific Iranian Kurdish party, factions based in Iraqi Kurdistan, or the Kurdish people in general.

“He has still not clarified which Kurds he was referring to: the Kurds of Iraq or the Kurds of Iran?” Alizadeh told Drop Site. “All Iranian Kurdish parties have denied it. We reject cooperation with the American project in Iran. Other parties, by contrast, have sought weapons from the United States and are saying that they did not receive them. Were those weapons given to the Kurdish parties in Iraqi Kurdistan? They have remained silent on this matter. In the end, someone here is clearly lying.”

“Leave the Kurds alone”

Trump’s claims, which have been treated with disbelief by several regional journalists and experts, come amid intensified attacks on Iranian Kurdish parties and other targets within Iraqi Kurdish territory by Iran and its proxies. The attacks reflect a recurring tendency by the U.S. and Israel to “out” the Kurds and expose them to violent Iranian retaliation. This portrayal of Iranian Kurds as a perpetual fifth column working at the behest of foreign states has been devastating for Iranian Kurdish parties, who operate across the border in Iraq where many have been hosted by the autonomous Iraqi Kurdish government.

On March 4, false reports began circulating from journalists and others that thousands of Kurdish fighters had already crossed the border into Iran to begin a ground operation against the Iranian government.

The next day, Shanaz Ibrahim Ahmed, the wife of Iraqi President, Abdul Latif Rashid, as well as a long-standing Kurdish politician and a senior figure of the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan (PUK), denounced the idea of an intervention egged on by Tel Aviv and Washington. In a public statement decrying the effort to involve Kurds in the war, Ahmed said, “Leave the Kurds alone, we are not guns for hire.”

Ahmed’s statement, celebrated by many Kurds in the region, was released on the anniversary of Raperin, another famous Kurdish uprising against Saddam Hussein in 1991. That rebellion, which had also been tacitly encouraged by the U.S., was brutally suppressed by the Iraqi military, adding another chapter to a long history of perceived betrayals by Western powers.

When asked about the influence of Ahmed’s intervention, PJAK’s representative Enderyarî told Drop Site that despite a history of betrayals, Kurdish groups were still ultimately divided on the broader issue of foreign support. “The statements made by Shanaz Ibrahim Ahmad received wide attention among Kurds and others. However, not all political groups share the same view. Some believe that without foreign support—especially from the United States—it is not possible to change the regime in Iran, and therefore they support external intervention to some extent,” he said. “However, we, as a force based on grassroots organization and public awareness, believe that change must come from within society.”

Enderyarî added, “We do not see ourselves as part of this war. For us, this is a conflict between two hegemonic forces: one at the global level, the United States, seeking to maintain its dominance, and the other at the regional level, such as Iran and Israel, seeking regional hegemony. We do not choose either of these paths. Instead, we choose a third path based on self-governance and peaceful coexistence among the peoples of the region.”

This idea of the “Third Path” is not new, nor a product of the latest developments. PJAK belongs to the same political ecosystem as the Kurdistan Workers Party, or PKK. The historical Kurdish leader and founder of PKK, Abdullah Ocalan, has long expressed concern about the possibility of the Kurdish movement falling into Israel’s sphere of influence and being weaponized by it. Other top leaders of PKK such as Duran Kalkan have recently been explicit about it as well, stating in a recent interview that Israel and the U.S. were merely seeking a new, undemocratic hegemony in the region, and “preparing a new Shah” to replace the Islamic Republic.

Despite this stance from most of the leadership, there seems to be a real current among the base as well as some senior figures that see potential benefits in aligning with Israel.

“It is true Reber Apo and Duran Kalkan said those things, but there are indeed a lot of people within the movement that see Israel favorably,” Kawa, a 32-year-old construction worker in Suleymaniyah who’s ideologically aligned with PKK/PJAK told Drop Site. “If you ask me, is Israel good? No it isn’t. But it looks like Israel wants to give some respect to the Kurds—that’s why people think like that.”

The discourse around potential Kurdish involvement in the war is happening in the aftermath of recent developments in northeastern Syria, where a Kurdish-led project in autonomous governance known as the the Democratic Autonomous Administration of North and East Syria (DAANES) was dissolved by force in a military offensive by the new Syrian government based in Damascus. Despite working for years with U.S. forces as a counterterrorism partner, the Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) found itself abandoned at this critical moment—an episode viewed by many Kurds around the region as the latest chapter in a long history of betrayals.

The forcible integration of the DAANES into central government control came about after numerous Arab tribes that had previously fought alongside the SDF switched sides and pledged allegiance to Damascus. That decision has helped trigger a renewed sense of unity among Kurds across different factions, alongside sentiments of ethnic nationalism and resentment towards Arabs.

“I can’t, I’m done. I’m done with the Arabs,” said Marwan, a seasoned Kurdish fighter of the SDF, who spoke to Drop Site in the Syrian city of Haseke this February. The veteran of the historical Kobane battle against the Islamic State emphasized the sense of betrayal many Kurds felt from their former Arab partners. “It was not the government forces that attacked us in Shedadi and killed so many friends. It was our formerly allied Arab tribes that stabbed us in the back. How can we trust them any more?”

In the Kurdish-majority Syrian cities of Haseke and Qamislo, the Kurdish national flag is now everywhere—something which until recently was forbidden by the SDF because of policies stressing ethnic inclusion. Banners featuring Ocalan, together with Iraqi Kurdish leaders Massoud Barzani and Jalal Talabani, or of SDF chief Mazlum Abdi and Massoud Barzani, have become visible in some areas.

A sense of newfound ethnic unity and resentment has become particularly prevalent in Iraqi Kurdistan , where recent developments in Syria have been seen as a vindication of the nationalist conservative politics that dominate the regional government.

“Before, in my social group there were Arabs and Kurds and we were all just friends, but after all this we became Arabs and Kurds” said Sevak, a 24-year-old metal worker who spoke to Drop Site in Erbil. “Now the Kurds are united, before they were divided along party lines, ‘You are with Ocalan, or you are with Barzani.’ Now they are one.”

The increasing debates about the future of the Kurdish liberation movement comes as Iraqi Kurdistan has faced hundreds of missile and drone attacks from Iran and pro-Iranian militia groups in Iraq. In one of the latest incidents, a drone strike killed a Kurdish civilian couple in a rural agricultural village with no military presence—Musa Anwar Rasool and his wife Mujda Asaad Hassan, leaving behind two orphaned daughters.

The attacks, many of which are believed to have been carried out by groups associated with the Popular Mobilization Forces, an official part of the Iraqi security establishment, have further raised tensions between Iraqi Kurdistan and Baghdad. For the time being, the tentative ceasefire in Iran may give time for the Kurdish movement to reassess its future. The events of the past months will not soon be forgotten.

 

Kurdish Women’s Struggle For Gender Equality – And Much Else Besides

For a century, Kurdish women have been at the forefront of the struggle against patriarchal and state oppression. They continue to push boundaries and defend their gains against mounting pressure.

By Nazand Begikhani

April 12, 2026

Source: Le Monde Diplomatique

Yanar Mohammed speaking at a conference in Berlin in 2013.

On 2 March this year, Yanar Mohammed, a prominent feminist figure in Iraq, was shot dead outside her home by two gunmen – the latest in a string of activists killed, likely by units of the Popular Mobilisation Forces, Shia militias (1). A tireless advocate for gender equality, she had spent years campaigning against honour crimes, early and forced marriages, and all forms of violence against women. Based on women’s rights media outlet, such as Newjin, Yanar’s assassination is part of an alarming escalation in gender-based violence currently affecting Iraq and several other countries across the Middle East.

This intensification of violence against women cannot be separated from the context of war, instability and political fragmentation ravaging the region. Kurdistan, divided among four nation-states in the Middle East, remains particularly vulnerable despite a century-long intersectional struggle against multiple forms of patriarchal and state oppression. While Kurdish women are widely recognised for their decisive role in the fight against ISIS – particularly within the fighting forces in Syria and Iraq – they have also remained deeply committed to advancing women’s rights, equality and freedom in their societies.

Legal and institutional reforms in Iraqi Kurdistan

In Iraqi Kurdistan, since the uprising of 1991 women have played a central role in awareness campaigns against inequality and discriminatory practices rooted in certain social traditions and in the Baathist legal system, including the Iraqi Personal Status Law of 1959 and the Iraqi Penal Code number 111 of 1969. Thanks to their persistent mobilisation and determination, and the support of progressive figures within the regional government, Kurdistan achieved several important advances: the recognition of honour crimes as murders without mitigating circumstances, the restriction of polygamy in several jurisdictions, expanded rights to divorce and fairer provisions regarding child custody.

With the rise of cyber violence, the regional parliament – encouraged by a dynamic civil society and supported by reform-minded leaders – in 2008 passed Law No. 6 on Preventing the Misuse of New Information Technologies. The aim was to curb digital harassment, protect victims and ensure accountability for perpetrators. A year later, in 2009, the legal minimum quota for female parliamentarians was increased from 25% to 30% of the legislature.

Women in Kurdistan have also successfully mobilised political elites in support of women’s rights and broader social policies. This effort led to the institutionalisation of women’s issues through the creation of the Combatting Violence Against Women Directorate (2007), the High Council of Women’s Affairs (2011) and the Women’s Rights Monitoring Board (2012), headed at the time by Prime Minister Nechirvan Barzani. These initiatives resulted in the establishment of shelters for women at risk and training programmes for judges, law enforcement officers, social workers and government officials. In parallel, the Kurdistan Region encouraged the creation of gender studies centres to analyse these societal challenges, conduct research and produce evidence-based knowledge grounded in feminist and ethical approaches. In 2011 the regional parliament enacted Law No 8 combatting domestic violence, one of the most progressive legal frameworks of its kind in the region.

These reforms have largely remained confined to the Kurdistan Region. In the rest of Iraq where Yanar was particularly active, not only did similar legal progress fail to materialise, but in August 2024 the Iraqi Supreme Court ruled that some reforms passed by the Kurdistan parliament went against sharia law (2). Women saw the decision as a major setback. When the Iraqi parliament subsequently passed the Jaafari Personal Status Code in August 2025, Kurdish women mobilised strongly against it, arguing that the legislation discriminates against women and privileges men in matters of marriage, divorce, inheritance and child guardianship. Yanar campaigned forcefully against the Al-Jaafari Law, arguing that it undermined the rights of women and girls while legitimising discriminatory, religious and tribal interpretations of marriage and women’s legal status.

In the context of the ongoing conflict and war, Hana Shwan – a journalist and prominent feminist figure in Iraqi Kurdistan, who visited women in shelters and prisons last week and whom I interviewed for this article – described how the conflict has acutely intensified uncertainty and fear among the most vulnerable women, particularly those in shelters and prisons, while simultaneously eroding her organisation’s ability to sustain its work in Sulaimaniya, near the border of Iran. Echoing Simone de Beauvoir, she emphasised that the conflict has not produced new inequalities so much as it has exposed and amplified entrenched gender discrimination, deepened structural injustices, and accelerated patterns of interpersonal violence. Natia Navrouzov, a Yazidi lawyer and head of the NGO Yazda based in Duhok with offices in Sinjar, underscored the compounded impact of conflict and violence in the Middle East in exacerbating mental health crises among affected communities. She noted that the ongoing bombardment across the Kurdistan Region has forced her organisation to suspend all field activities, further limiting access to already scarce psychosocial support services.

Despite the many obstacles impeding the these reforms’ implementation – particularly the rise of Islamist influence since the emergence of ISIS in 2014 – women in the Kurdistan region continue to push boundaries and defend their rights. Hana and Natia are two of the visible and courageous examples of this determination.

Women’s achievements in Syria

In Syrian Kurdistan, Rojava, women have also played a decisive role in defeating ISIS, notably during the battles of Raqqa and Kobane. Beyond the battlefield, they have been central to the governance of the Autonomous Administration of North and East Syria (AANES) for nearly a decade. Women helped embed gender equality in political and social institutions and supported legal reforms that abolished polygamy, early marriage and certain inequalities in inheritance previously justified through religious interpretations. Under their influence, the co-presidency system – requiring that a man and a woman share political leadership – has become an established principle, not only in Syrian Kurdistan but also within some Kurdish political structures in Turkey.

These achievements are now under serious threat. The Syrian regime launched an offensive this January that resulted in massacres and the occupation of large parts of the Kurdish autonomous region. Nevertheless, women continue to mobilise to protect their political gains. Their vigilance is reinforced by concerns that their institutions may be absorbed into the Syrian governmental system under the agreement reached on 29 January between Ahmed al-Sharaa, Syrian president and a former jihadist, and the Syrian Democratic Forces led by General Mazloum Abdi.

Women’s concerns extend far beyond questions of equality and human rights; they are central to sustainable peacebuilding and long-term security. At a conference held on 2 March at the French Senate in Paris (organised by the Kurdish Institute of Paris), Kurdish journalist Ronahi Hassan from Rojava underscored this urgency, stating: ‘At a time when the region faces renewed instability and extremist threats, the preservation of decentralised governance and institutionalised gender representation is not only a matter of Kurdish rights, but a cornerstone of international security.’

Model of empowerment in Turkey

In Turkey, the Kurdish women’s movement has also made remarkable progress in advancing gender equality, particularly within political and military contexts. Emerging in response to widespread violence, systemic discrimination and the broader dynamics of the conflict with the Turkish state, Kurdish feminists have developed their own model of empowerment, introducing co-leadership systems within political parties and councils, and ensuring that women share decision-making equally with men. In military organisations associated with the feminist movement, women now occupy leadership positions and participate in strategic planning, challenging traditional gender hierarchies and social expectations.

Kurdish women have also confronted deeply rooted feudal and patriarchal norms within their society, promoting women’s autonomy and resisting domestic and community violence. Their initiative has included addressing gaps within the broader Turkish feminist movement, advocating for peace and intersectional approaches that recognise ethnic and political marginalisation. Its influence now extends beyond Kurdistan, inspiring similar initiatives across the wider Middle East (3).

Iran’s Woman, Life, Freedom movement

In Iran, Kurdish women became the driving force behind the Jin, Jiyan, Azadî (‘Woman, Life, Freedom’) movement following the killing of the Kurdish student Jina Mahsa Amini in 2022. For many Kurds, this slogan has become a universal call for dignity and freedom. The movement quickly transcended ethnic boundaries within Iran and challenged the authority of the ruling regime, and went on to become a global symbol of resistance and emancipation. Sahar Bagheri, researcher at the IRIS laboratory in Paris, reflects on this struggle in Rojhelat (Kurdistan of Iran) saying: ‘The struggle of Kurdish women is fundamentally feminist, rooted in the defence of our bodily autonomy and our land as inseparable sites of resistance.’ She adds: ‘As Kurdish women, we remain steadfast in our commitment to Jin, Jiyan, Azadî, asserting ourselves as active political subjects. Our resistance challenges both patriarchal domination and colonial power, insisting that women’s liberation is inseparable from collective self-determination.’

The above examples show that Kurds are not ‘separatist militias’ seeking to challenge borders inherited from 20th-century colonial arrangements, as some recent narratives have suggested. On the contrary, they are well organised actors representing a significant potential for democratic progress and building societies grounded in freedom, equality and universal human rights. These principles stand in stark contrast to the ideological extremism and radical Islamist currents that have destabilised much of the Middle East since the establishment of the Islamic Republic of Iran.

Nor should Kurds be reduced to a simplistic image of ‘brave warriors’. Instead the international community ought to recognise the values they strive to defend and implement whenever political space allows.

Yanar’s assassination is a stark reminder that democracy remains fragile and that the pursuit of emancipation can provoke new forms of repression and domination. In this context, recognising the strategic importance of women’s struggle for freedom, equality and human dignity is not just a symbolic gesture.Email

Nazand Begikhani

Nazand Begikhani is a poet and Vincent Wright Chair and Lecturer at Sciences Po, Paris.

 

The war on Iran and the role of the peace movement

APRIL 9, 2026

A CND Information Paper by Carol Turner analyses the recently announced ceasefire in the context of the Trump administration’s wider policy on Iran.

The acceptance by the United States and Iran of a Pakistan-brokered ceasefire for two weeks, to allow for negotiations, comes as welcome relief after President Trump’s most recent and most disgraceful threat of destroying an entire civilisation. Its implication of nuclear war against Iran sent a shiver round the world.

The breakdown of this temporary ceasefire is, however, a real possibility. Prime Minister Netanyahu has said the ceasefire does not cover Lebanon and Israeli Defence Forces continue to bomb large parts of the country. Escalation of the war remains a clear and present danger.

The peace movement remains on high alert, and we are right to be so. We continue to demand an end to the use of UK bases for US attacks on Iran.

US objectives are clear

Throughout the six week bombardment of Iran, the US military strategy is uncertain. There is no confusion about the aims of Trump’s Iran policy, however. His overall objectives are clear and consistent.

Within days of taking office in January 2025, Trump signed Presidential Memorandum PS/NS2. This is a formal instruction to all the agencies of the US state to initiate a “maximum pressure” campaign against Iran, with the aims of:

• preventing Iran ever developing nuclear weapons;

• ending its ballistic missiles programme; and

• breaking its support for regional proxies.

US-Iran relations shifted sharply during Trump’s first administration between 2017-2021. He withdrew the US from the Iran nuclear deal negotiated by the Obama White House, effectively bringing the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPoA) to an end. Diplomatic engagement and negotiations which resulted in one of the most successful arms reduction agreements of the 21st century were replaced by a hostile and confrontational approach.

Withdrawal from the JCPoA was accompanied with over 1,500 sanctions targeting Iran’s financial, oil, and shipping sectors, with secondary sanctions on foreign firms doing business with Iran. These have severely damaged Iran’s economy. They were behind the street protests at the start of this year, combined with the added strains of the US-Israel 12 day war in June 2025.

In his second term in office, Trump has doubled down on this approach, encouraged by Prime Minister Netanyahu who openly calls for regime change.

…the military means are not

Present confusion lies not in what Trump wants, but in the manner in which he seeks to achieve it. Six weeks in, we can see how unprepared he was for Iran’s response to US-Israeli bombardment. Evidence of the military campaign so far suggests Trump did not anticipate Iran’s military capacity to retaliate. Not does he appear to have foreseen the huge impact of Iran’s asymmetrical response – their ability to punch beyond their weight by pursuing economic rather than military targets.

Iran continues to target military and economic facilities in Israel and across the Middle East, while focusing on the Strait of Hormuz. Oil prices have rocketed, as economists warn that the continuing blockade of the Strait could lead to a global economic recession. The impact is already being felt in North America and Europe, including at the petrol pumps and the cost of heating oil in Britain – and another cost of living hike is on the cards.

Meanwhile Trump’s military adventure in Iran is contributing to the drop in his domestic ratings, at their lowest since his election victory in 2024. This is a serious problem for the Republicans as the mid-term elections approach, but perhaps most important of all, there are signs that a serious split between Republicans and Democrats is posed in the longer term – something which hasn’t threatened the continuity of US foreign policy in the Middle East for the last half century.

Nuclear hypocrisy

As readers know, CND remains unshakeable in our opposition to the possession of nuclear weapons – by any and every country. This includes the UK’s Trident nuclear weapons system and the expansion of Britain’s nuclear capability which has taken place under Conservative and Labour governments alike.

A Conservative government agreed that US nuclear weapons could return to Britain, in the form of nuclear gravity bombs which were installed at RAF Lakenheath last year. The Labour government has agreed to purchase 12 US nuclear fighter jets which will be stationed at RAF Marham. They are able to deliver the US nukes sited at Lakenheath as part of Nato’s nuclear mission in Europe.

There has been no transparency about these decisions, and negligible discussion in the mainstream media. They have taken place without a vote or even a debate in Parliament. No government has acknowledged that US nukes have returned to Britain, despite parliamentary questions from Labour, Green, and SNP MPs. Successive defence ministers have side-stepped their questions with obfuscating replies that it is not British government practise to comment on the affairs of other countries.

Britain’s possession of nuclear weapons and nuclear expansion makes the UK a target in any war, and endangers everyone in Britain. This is why we must campaign against British bases being used by the US in their war on Iran.

The US-Israeli war is steeped in nuclear hypocrisy. There is no suggestion, including by any US agency, that Iran has developed nuclear weapons. The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has repeatedly confirmed that Iran does not have nuclear weapons and is not on the verge of developing them. Two nuclear weapon states, the US and Israel, are waging war to prevent Iran ever being able to develop nuclear weapons in the future.

The USA has the biggest and most powerful military in the world, including the most modern and deadly nuclear arsenal, and boasts the best-equipped ballistic missile defences.

If Trump is so keen to end Iran’s nuclear programme:

• why did he withdraw the United States from the JCPoA; and

• why has he abandoned the nuclear talks he said were making progress – only days before the bombardment began?

Israel is the only nuclear weapons state in the Middle East. It has possessed nuclear weapons since the late 1960s. Some Knesset politicians even suggested they could be used in Gaza after October 2023.

Israel:

• has never acknowledged it has a nuclear arsenal;

• is not a signatory to the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, in contrast to Iran’s long time support; and

• does not permit IAEA inspections.

No War on Iran, No British Bases for US attacks

The only progress ever made in dissuading Iran from developing nuclear capability was achieved through negotiations. The essence of diplomacy is talking to people with whom you don’t agree.

CND was out on the streets within hours of the war on Iran beginning. A No War on Iran coalition has taken shape, led by CND and Stop the War, and supported by the Palestine coalition which has organised opposition to Israel’s genocide in Gaza, and other groups such as CASMII, the Campaign Against Sanctions and Military Intervention in Iran. We have worked with NukeWatch and Drone Wars UK to track and publicise the use of British bases by US fighter jets to launch their deadly attacks on Iran. There are regular protests at RAF Fairford, from where US planes frequently launch bombing raids on Iran.

Anti-war sentiment in Britain is growing and strengthening, despite a state crackdown on the right to protest. Days after the Iran war began, the General Council of the Trades Union Congress (TUC) issued a statement reaffirming its commitment to peace, diplomacy and respect for state sovereignty. The TUC opposed the use of force without clear UN authorisation and called for an immediate halt to hostilities and the urgent resumption of talks. It also called on the UK government to resist efforts to drag Britain further into the conflict.

An open letter signed by trade union general secretaries and senior officials and individual unions have issued strong statements. There has been opposition from parliamentarians too, expressed in an Early Day Motion from Brian Leishman, a Scottish Labour MP, and signed by Labour, Green, Independent, and Liberal Democrat colleagues.

The war on Iran has already spread across the Middle East, and has the potential to expand further, bringing the threat of nuclear conflict even closer. CND will continue to campaign for an end to the US-Israel war on Iran, and an end to the US use of British bases. We insist that the only path to peace and nuclear security lies in the pursuit of diplomacy and negotiations.

Read the CND statement on the Iran ceasefire.

Carol Turner is CND Vice-Chair.

Image: c/o Labour Hub.

 

As the US and Israel pound Iran, a call to end the war

APRIL 4, 2026

The US and Israel have destroyed or damaged more than 115,000 civilian structures, according to Iran’s Red Crescent Society.  Some 763 schools and 316 health facilities have been hit, along with water plants and roads. This week a pharmaceutical company and an orphanage were bombed. Power plants and economic infrastructure have also been targeted. World Heritage sites have been attacked.

Earlier this week, the New York Times and BBC verified in separate reports that a previously untested US-made ballistic missile was probably used in the February 28th strike on a sports hall in Lamerd, Iran, where at least 21 people were killed, including young girls training there.

Two days ago, President Donald Trump celebrated a ‘double tap’ strike on a road bridge near Tehran to Karaj, sharing video of the attack that killed eight people and wounded 95. The second strike occurred as rescue workers responded to the initial attack. The strikes killed civilians who had gathered beneath the bridge and along the riverbank to celebrate Nature Day in Iran.

Trump’s cheering of attacks on civilian targets has drawn widespread condemnation. Owen Jones said: “Donald Trump is openly flaunting his war crimes. Journalists who won’t call them that are complicit.” Zeteo editor-in-chief Mehdi Hasan said: “This is what terrorism looks like, state terrorism.”

Over 90,000 residential units have been damaged in airstrikes. More than 3 million Iranians have been displaced by the war. Nearly 2,000 people have been killed and ten times that number wounded since the start of the bombardments. US-made mines have also been air-dropped in civilian areas.

Below we publish a statement supported by trade union leaders in Iraq, leading Iranian and Kurdish political activists, John McDonnell MP and many others.

End the war immediately and unconditionally

Over one month has passed since the US-Israel attack on Iran. Thousands of dead, millions of displaced, and destruction of sections of the social infrastructure are the outcomes of the attacks and the ongoing war to date.

Continuous threats of escalation of the attacks and bombing of economic infrastructure and nuclear facilities, as well as the persistent danger of complete destruction of the most vital arteries of social and economic life, have significantly increased the risk of immediate death of tens of thousands and the gradual death of millions of human beings in Iran and the region.

This war, contrary to the claims of its perpetrators and supporters, is not in aid of the people in Iran. These attacks and pledges of further assaults are neither intended to pave the way for the freedom of the Iranian people nor to defend their struggle in getting rid of the Islamic Republic! This is a war against the people and against their more than forty years of effort to achieve freedom, welfare, and security.

The victory of either side in this war will not be a victory for the people of Iran, who had, prior to this war, begun working towards building a humane and free future. The people of Iran and their struggle for freedom are the first victims and losers of this war.

The destructive effects of this war on the lives of the people and the requirements of their freedom-seeking movement are today more undeniable than ever before.

To defend the lives and security of the people in Iran, to protect the achievements of their struggles, and to support the efforts of generations striving for freedom and a humane life, this war must end immediately and unconditionally.

We consider this demand to be the minimum demand that can be achieved through the collective power of people in Iran and around the globe; a demand that not only minimises the damage but also paves the way for the Iranian people to advance toward their aspirations for freedom.

We call on all labour unions, human rights organisations and institutions and the global civilized population to put pressure on the parties in this war to end the war immediately and unconditionally.

Supported by:

• Abdul Karim Abdul Sada (Abu Watan) – President of the General Federation of  Workers’ Unions in Iraq/President of the General Union of Oil and Gas Workers
• Arrash Kamagar – Political Activist
• Assad Golchini – Communist Activist
• Assad Rostami – Secretary of the Executive Committee of the Communist Party of Iran
• Ardeshir Mehrdad – Political Activist
• Aman Kafa – Spokesperson of Iran Freedom and Revolution Watch
• Anwar Hassain Bazgar – Poet, Author and Journalist
• Azar Modaresi – Secretary of Central Committee of Hekmatist Party (Official Line)
• Bahar Monzir – Secretary of the People’s Organisation for Progress
• Dashty Jamal-  Secretary of the International Federation of Iraqi Refugees
• Diana Nammi – Founder of Iranian and Kurdish Women’s Rights Organisation-UK
• Ebrahim Alizadeh – First Secretary of Komala – Kurdistan Organisation of Communist party of Iran
• Ebrahim Awkh – Political Activist
• Fereydoon Nazerie – Member of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Iran
• Fuad Qzahi – Author
• Hassan Hesam – Member of the leadership of the Rahe Kargar
• Hassan Jumaa Awad Al-Asadi – President of the General Federation of Oil, Gas and Petrochemical Unions in Iraq
• Hosain Dolatabadi- Political Activist
•  John McDonnell – Member of Parliament of the UK
• John Moloney – Assistant General Secretary of Public and Commercial Services Union, UK
• Khaled Hajmodamadi – Secretary of Leadership Committee of Hekmatist Party (Official Line)
• Mohamad Aloush – Secretary General of the Palestinian Workers’ Struggle Federation
• Nadia Mahmoud – Aman Women Alliance
• Nassrin Parwaz – Author
• Osman Haj Maref – Secretary of Central Committee of Worker’s Communist Party of Kurdistan
• Parvaneh Bokah – Member of local parliament- Hanover Germany
• Roger Silverman – Editor of the Journal On the Brink and a founding member of Workers International Network
• Reza Moqadam – Member of the Leadership of the Socialist Workers’ Alliance
• Rebwar Ahmad – Central Committee of Worker-Communist Party of Kurdistan
• Rebwar Aref – Central Committee of Worker-Communist Party of Kurdistan
• Samir Adel – Secretary of Central Committee of Worker-Communist Party of Iraq
• Soraya Shahabi – Founder of Iran Freedom and Revolution Watch

Image c/o Labour Hub.