Last week, American diplomats <a href="https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2026/07/28/us-walks-out-un-france-criticizes-human-rights/91076174007/">walked out</a> of a United Nations Security Council meeting after French diplomats publicly lectured the United States on human rights. Their only mistake was ever going back.
In certain corners of prestige globalist coteries and the well-heeled, well-connected New York-Paris-Geneva jet set, it’s a popular sentiment that the UN was a brilliant accomplishment and a bastion of civilization; it’s easy to take that supposition for granted. But I’m a little at a loss as to what exactly makes the UN so great. The concept is actually rather ridiculous.
Nations, by their very nature, are not united — at least not in any broad sense.
A nation is a group of people with a common allegiance based on a shared set of values and identity. Because of this, any given nation has an inherent set of goals that are fundamentally distinct from those of the rest of the world.
This is not to suggest that there is anything wrong with international cooperation. NATO, despite its flaws, is a much better model. A group of nations with a shared set of values and foreign policy objectives has voluntarily agreed to invest in one another’s safety. Their commitment to one another is conditional, narrowly tailored, and serves their individual interests.
This is a far cry from a sprawling bureaucracy that is regularly empowered to impugn our national sovereignty.
Leaving aside the practical inefficiencies of the UN, it is generally understood (save for a few starry-eyed college students) that the body has no real tangible power or enforcement mechanisms. It is symbolic. Still, symbolism is important, if hollow, and must be taken seriously.
So from where does the UN derive its symbolic power? Supposedly, it represents the interests of all the peoples of the world in a parliament.
This logic fails on two fronts. First, there is nothing democratic or representative about the UN. The majority of its member states are dictatorships. Approximately 45% of UN member states are <a href="https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/democracy-index-eiu">democracies</a>. That means the majority of representatives are not selected by the “people” at all, but by authoritarian governments.
Even if the UN were actually a democratic body, that would not make it any more legitimate. Plenty of people, especially outside of the Western world, believe some pretty horrible things. Plenty of people would do some pretty horrible things if given the chance. I, for one, couldn’t give a damn what those people think of American foreign policy. They don’t get a say.
We need not limit our criticisms to the theoretical. Let’s examine a few consequences of the grand UN experiment.
Kurt Waldheim, the UN secretary-general from 1972 to 1981, <a href="https://nsarchive2.gwu.edu/NSAEBB/NSAEBB331/04-09-87waldheim-rpt.pdf">served</a> as a Nazi intelligence officer who was barred from entering the United States for war crimes.
UN Special Rapporteur on human rights Francesca Albanese has <a href="https://x.com/USAmbHRC/status/1603091256082563075">written</a> that the U.S. is subjugated by the “Jewish lobby” <a href="https://www.facebook.com/franci.albanese/posts/pfbid0sFVgrR2ZDod8z5agRfZhXRqbNGUeTkaiT6pXc2MMJt1MjeDN6hkUjnnoY7Jnmprvl">and</a> that Jews feel a “need to be superior.” She also <a href="https://x.com/USAmbHRC/status/1757103240817078396?lang=en">argued</a> that the October 7 massacre was not motivated by antisemitism, but a “reaction” to “Israel’s oppression.”
In 2011, a UNESCO-funded Palestinian magazine <a href="https://unwatch.org/issue-331-unesco-funded-pro-hitler-palestinian-magazine">distributed</a> an essay praising Hitler and the Holocaust. Over 100 current and former United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees employees were <a href="https://oig.usaid.gov/node/8155?">implicated</a> in the October 7 attack.
Behold our moral superiors.
For decades, the UN has provided a legitimized platform for the defense of some of history’s worst atrocities. Syrian representatives deflected responsibility for their chemical-weapons attacks and received backing from Russia. Iranian leaders have consistently used the UN’s global stage to advance Holocaust denial.
Monsters in suits are still monsters. Giving them a global audience and an official outlet for their monstrosity is a moral failure of the highest order.
The Human Rights Council includes China, Iraq, Qatar, and Pakistan. Yes, these are the countries whose governments appoint representatives to lecture you on human rights.
Since 2006, the UN Human Rights Council has <a href="https://unwatch.org/2025-unga-resolutions-on-israel-vs-rest-of-the-world/">adopted</a> 112 resolutions against Israel, 45 against Syria, 16 against Iran, 11 against Russia, and four against Venezuela. In 2025, the UN General Assembly adopted 15 resolutions against Israel and only 11 against the rest of the world. Even if you accept the death tolls purported by Hamas, they pale in comparison to the victims of the Assad regime. So why the disparity in reactions? I’ve been assured it’s not antisemitism.
This is <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/how-the-lefts-rejection-of-reality-backfired-on-a-progressive-champion?author=Zach+Stark&amp;category=News&amp;elementPosition=15&amp;row=0&amp;rowType=Vertical+List&amp;title=How+The+Left%E2%80%99s+Rejection+Of+Reality+Backfired+On+A+Progressive+Champion">top-down epistemology</a> at its finest. The UN supposedly carries moral authority, claiming the height of credibility. The fact that it hates Israel more than North Korea is simply accepted as evidence that Israel is worse than North Korea, rather than evidence that the UN is a fundamentally unserious body.
None of this is to say that we should withdraw from the world stage or abandon the concept of diplomacy. But we must reject the pretense that the greatest country in the world requires the seal of approval of authoritarian thugs and academics masquerading as adjudicators.
The UN is not just a clown show. It’s a moral disgrace.

World Leaders Gather For The 80th Session Of The United Nations General Assembly

The UN Is A Failed Experiment

DW Opinion

United Nations

U.N. humanitarian organizations continue to obstruct an ongoing federal probe into whether U.S. financial aid and relief operations in Gaza are tied to Hamas, according to U.S. officials and congressional documentation.
The investigation, spearheaded by the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) Office of Inspector General under the directive &#8220;Operation Stop the Carousel,&#8221; aims to identify extremists within international relief groups and prevent suspect staff from moving between agencies, The Washington Free Beacon <a href="https://freebeacon.com/israel/exclusive-un-is-actively-obstructing-us-probe-into-links-between-its-gaza-relief-groups-and-hamas-as-americans-warn-un-to-divorce-cancerous-unrwa/">reports</a>. However, federal authorities report that key international bodies have repeatedly declined to share personnel files, contact lists, or details regarding their dealings with the terrorist group.
According to nonpublic oversight findings submitted to Congress, none of the six U.N. entities under review fulfilled the inspector general&#8217;s baseline request for employee identification records. Organizations such as the World Health Organization, UNICEF, the International Organization for Migration, and the Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs provided only &#8220;partial&#8221; answers. Meanwhile, the World Food Programme failed to submit a final response, and the U.N. Development Programme provided no reply.
Federal investigators have already verified that roughly 100 Hamas affiliates received salaries funded through the U.N. Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA). The probe&#8217;s scope has since expanded to examine roughly 1,500 individuals associated with UNRWA who are suspected of links to terrorism, sparking growing demands on Capitol Hill to officially label the organization a foreign terrorist entity.
Internal U.N. documents indicate that international investigators set aside intercepted communication records and location data linking aid workers to the October 7 assault, choosing not to evaluate whether agency staff maintained active status in Hamas&#8217;s armed wing.
State Department officials condemned the lack of transparency, reiterating that Washington will not allow international recipients to shield their payrolls from accountability. U.S. diplomats are pushing the U.N. to permanently dismantle UNRWA, signaling that future recovery efforts in Gaza will instead run through alternative bodies, including the U.S.-backed Board of Peace and an Israel-based Civil-Military Coordination Center designed to prevent aid diversion.
The pushback has drawn swift reaction from lawmakers. In April, U.N. Ambassador Mike Waltz <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7_bJQ1dLHBk">backed calls</a> from Sen. Ted Cruz to permanently end UNRWA&#8217;s funding by statute.
“A recent report in the Washington Free Beacon revealed that numerous U.N. agencies have been stonewalling the OIG&#8217;s efforts to track their ties to terrorism and how they spent American aid,” Cruz noted. “They are even refusing to disclose whether they used American money to directly pay the salaries of Hamas terrorists. The OIG sent letters to six separate UN agencies, asking them to name all of the employees &#8216;who worked on U.S. government funding awards and to provide their contact information. The agencies were unresponsive.&#8217; How concerned are you about these dynamics, and what should we be doing about them?”
“I share your concern, Senator. It&#8217;s one of the reasons that UNRWA in particular should be defunded,” Waltz replied. “I think we should put it in law that it is permanently defunded.”
Congressional leaders, including Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) and Rep. James Comer (R-KY), have pledged further legislative inquiries.

PALESTINIAN-CONFLICT-US-UNRWA

U.N. Agencies Continue Obstructing U.S. Investigation Into Gaza Aid, Hamas Ties

Hamas

UNRWA

Just before dawn on Tuesday, hundreds of Iranians gathered in Isfahan hoping to stop two young men from being hanged. Instead, security forces violently dispersed the crowd and publicly executed 25-year-old Abolfazl Sepahi Badjani and 28-year-old Amirhossein Safari Hosseinabadi.
Both men were convicted on charges stemming from clashes that Iranian authorities say resulted in the deaths of four security officers. Human rights groups say the men were sentenced after proceedings marred by allegations of torture, forced confessions, and closed-door trials. 
The executions stem from the nationwide uprising that began in late December after a currency collapse, soaring inflation, and worsening living conditions sparked protests across Iran. Iranian regime forces responded with a sweeping crackdown that included internet shutdowns, mass arrests, and the widespread use of lethal force. 
The executions, which reportedly took place at 3:40 a.m. local time, coinciding with the morning call to prayer, came despite last-minute appeals from United Nations experts, international human rights organizations, and the State Department.
Days before the hangings, State Department Assistant Secretary of State for Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor Riley Barnes condemned Iran&#8217;s execution campaign, saying the United States stood with &#8220;brave young Iranians who dared to raise their voices&#8221; and calling on the regime to release political prisoners and stop executing individuals for peacefully exercising their fundamental rights.
President Donald Trump <a href="https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/116958077127443735">has continued </a>to call out the treatment of protesters and the executions, including last week, when he shared a graphic about the execution of another January protester, 23-year-old Gol-Mohammad Mohammadi. 
&#8220;The latest one of 52,000, plus, innocent protesters. Savages!!! When will the Dumocrats wake up??? Trump posted.
Human rights groups have not verified Trump&#8217;s figure of 52,000 protesters killed, though Amnesty International and U.N. officials have estimated that several thousand were killed during the regime&#8217;s January crackdown. Iran has acknowledged that 3,117 people were killed.
Rather than silencing dissent, the executions appeared to galvanize it for the first time since January.
Videos posted by <a href="https://www.rferl.org/a/iran-isfahan-protests-demonstration-execution-prison-human-rights/33816596.html">Radio Free Europe</a> showed crowds gathering in Isfahan to demonstrate during the executions, with demonstrators chanting &#8220;Without honor!&#8221; while security forces maintained a heavy presence.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
Iranian Demonstrators Protest State Executions In Isfahan
Videos posted on social media appeared to show crowds of protesters gathering in Isfahan on July 28 to demonstrate as state executions of two men took place.
With more executions feared, the videos show groups of people… <a href="https://t.co/6U550mm6od">pic.twitter.com/6U550mm6od</a>
— Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (@RFERL) <a href="https://x.com/RFERL/status/2082021684832285137?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">July 28, 2026</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.x.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<a href="https://www.iranintl.com/en/202607283664">Videos</a> shared by Iran International showed residents gathering overnight in hopes of stopping the executions before authorities dispersed the crowd.
Messages sent to Iran International from Bandar Abbas, Pardis, Khomein, and other cities described a country grieving but increasingly determined to continue resisting the Islamic Republic. Many said they stayed awake until morning hoping the executions would be called off.
&#8220;We wished until sunrise that morning would never come to Isfahan,&#8221; one person wrote.
&#8220;The people of Isfahan showed that when the next call comes, millions across the country will return to the streets,&#8221; one resident of Bandar Abbas said.
Another reaction shared by the outlet echoed that sentiment: &#8220;Did you think executing our brothers and sisters would make us retreat or become afraid? It has only made us more determined.&#8221;
The two men were among 12 defendants sentenced to death in what has become known as the Alikhani Square case, which stems from the January anti-government protests in Isfahan. They are reportedly accused of arson, vandalism, killing four security personnel, and “waging war on God.”
According to the Oslo-based <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/world/2026/jul/28/prisoners-iran-largest-jail-sew-lips-shut-hunger-strike-executions-soar">Iran Human Rights (IHRNGO)</a> organization, 62 people were initially arrested in connection with the incident and subjected to months of interrogation, during which rights groups allege many were tortured. 
Ahead of the executions, U.N. experts led by Special Rapporteur <a href="https://www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2026/07/un-experts-urge-iran-quash-death-sentences-12-protesters-single-hearing-halt">Mai Sato</a> urged Iranian authorities to halt the executions and claimed sentencing all 12 defendants to death in a single closed-door proceeding violated internationally recognized fair trial standards. The experts said the convictions relied heavily on televised confessions, while hearings were held behind closed doors and judgments were never made public. 
IHRNGO also alleged that some defendants were tried remotely from prison without lawyers present and that Iranian state television later aired forced confessions as part of a propaganda documentary. The organization also says families of death row prisoners are routinely threatened and coerced into remaining silent about their loved ones&#8217; cases.
According to IHRNGO, at least 26 protesters have been executed in connection with the December 2025–January 2026 uprising, including Sepahi and Safari, and more than 70 additional protesters remain at risk of execution in Isfahan&#8217;s Dastgerd Central Prison.
Even behind prison walls, resistance has continued. Hundreds of death row inmates at Ghezel Hesar Prison near Tehran have joined a mass hunger strike to protest Iran&#8217;s escalating use of the death penalty, reported The Guardian. According to Iranian rights groups, at least 1,500 prisoners have participated in the strike, which began after six men convicted on drug-related charges were transferred to solitary confinement ahead of possible executions. 
Videos shared by rights groups show prisoners holding signs reading &#8220;No to Executions&#8221; and chanting, &#8220;Be our voice.&#8221; 
In one video, a prisoner is seen sewing his lips shut after he said prison officials ignored the protest for days. 
According to <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/world/2026/jul/28/prisoners-iran-largest-jail-sew-lips-shut-hunger-strike-executions-soar">IHRNGO</a>, at least 424 people have been executed in Iran so far this year. The organization documented 795 executions in 2025, the highest annual total in years. 
While many of those executions involved drug-related offenses, rights groups say the Islamic Republic has increasingly used capital punishment against political dissidents and protesters in the months following the January anti-government uprising, with many convictions allegedly secured through torture and forced confessions. 
Iran Human Rights Director Mahmood Amiry-Moghaddam condemned Tuesday&#8217;s hangings, calling public executions &#8220;a cruel form of state terror&#8221; intended to instill fear and deter future protests. 
&#8220;By resorting once again to the medieval practice of public hangings, the Islamic Republic is trying to instill fear throughout society and deter future protests,&#8221; Amiry-Moghaddam said. &#8220;Public executions are a cruel form of state terror that the international community must not tolerate.&#8221; 
<a href="https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2026/07/iran-lack-of-international-justice-six-months-after-january-protest-massacres-risks-further-atrocity-crimes/">Amnesty International </a>warned that the international community&#8217;s failure to hold Tehran accountable for its crackdown risks emboldening further abuses.
“The international community’s failure to pursue international justice for these serious crimes has emboldened the Iranian authorities to threaten further mass killings by ‘trigger-ready’ security forces targeting protesters and dissidents they label as ‘enemies.’” Diana Eltahawy, Deputy Regional Director for the Middle East and North Africa at Amnesty International, said.

Belgium v IR Iran: Group G – FIFA World Cup 2026

Crowds Tried To Stop The Hangings. Iran Carried Them Out Anyway.

Donald Trump

executions

Hanging

Iran

Iranian dissidents

Iranians

State Department

A Brooklyn, New York, state assemblyman is calling on New York Attorney General Letitia James to investigate whether New York City mayor Zohran Mamdani broke the law by threatening to arrest Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu during his upcoming visit to the U.N. General Assembly.
In a scathing letter to the state’s top prosecutor, Democrat state Assembly Member Simcha Eichenstein warned that Mamdani’s anti-Israel grandstanding crosses the line from political posturing into potential criminal official misconduct. Under New York law, mayors cannot simply order local police to arrest individuals without a judge-issued warrant or local probable cause. Because the U.S. does not recognize the International Criminal Court (ICC), and visiting heads of state enjoy absolute diplomatic immunity, Eichenstein argued that pressuring the NYPD to carry out an illegal arrest abuses executive power and threatens the independence of law enforcement.
“While elected officials possess the right to express their personal opinions, a public official cannot attempt to leverage their executive authority to direct local law enforcement actions against an individual based on personal, political, or ideological views,” Eichenstein wrote. “Furthermore, because the United States is not a party to the International Criminal Court (ICC), nor does it recognize the ICC, any ICC warrants carry no legal jurisdiction within the United States of America. &#8230; Under New York Penal Law § 195.00, a public servant who knowingly performs an unauthorized act, and misuses their official position to pressure law enforcement into making an arrest, may be guilty of official misconduct, a Class A misdemeanor.”
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
🚨Today, I asked Attorney General Letitia James to review if NYC Mayor Zohran Mamdani&#39;s actions ordering a city agency to explore arresting Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu violates NY state law. New York’s Criminal Procedure Law prohibits mayors from meddling with or… <a href="https://t.co/SBWlsWNEbv">pic.twitter.com/SBWlsWNEbv</a>
&mdash; Simcha Eichenstein (@SEichenstein) <a href="https://x.com/SEichenstein/status/2079300247017115774?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">July 20, 2026</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.x.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
“It is utterly ridiculous for the mayor of New York City to even suggest that he might have the authority to order the arrest of Benjamin Netanyahu or any visiting foreign head of state,” CNN’s Elie Honig <a href="https://www.foxnews.com/media/cnn-legal-analyst-calls-out-utterly-ridiculous-claim-mamdani-netanyahu-arrest">pointed out</a>. “First of all, the mayor of New York City has zero law enforcement authority. He does not tell the Manhattan D.A., the NYPD, who to arrest, who to indict. &#8230; This warrant that we&#8217;re talking about here was issued by the ICC, the International Criminal Court, which we are not signatories to here in the United States. So, that warrant, issued by the ICC, has zero legal effect here in the United States.”
Mamdani, however, remained unrepentant. He <a href="https://www.cbsnews.com/newyork/news/nyc-mayor-zohran-mamdani-israeli-prime-minister-benjamin-netanyahu/">doubled down</a> in recent comments, claiming his legal team is actively exploring the city&#8217;s legal authority to potentially execute the ICC’s warrant when Netanyahu arrives in Manhattan.
President Trump declared that Netanyahu will not be arrested &#8220;in any way, shape, or form,&#8221; while Pennsylvania Senator John Fetterman bluntly dismissed the mayor’s stunt as &#8220;clown&#8221; behavior. Local Jewish leaders and Israeli diplomats also slammed Mamdani, warning that his demagoguery actively fuels antisemitic hatred on New York streets.
Mamdani’s political theater looks even more absurd given the explosive scandal corrupting the tribunal he purports to enforce. The ICC faced severe backlash following shocking allegations that its then-chief prosecutor, Karim Khan, was <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/qatar-promised-to-look-after-icc-prosecutor-if-he-targeted-netanyahu-witness-claims">promised protection</a> by Qatar, which has hosted and funded Hamas, in exchange for pursuing warrants against Israeli leaders.
Reports reveal that Khan rushed the indictments just as serious sexual misconduct allegations involving a subordinate began to surface against him. Investigators probed audio recordings and evidence of a Qatar-linked intelligence operation designed to discredit Khan’s accuser by prying into her family background and attempting to tie her to Israeli intelligence. Khan allegedly used the pending Israeli warrants to pressure his accuser into silence, claiming any public scandal would undermine the tribunal&#8217;s cases.
Legal scholars have <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/the-international-criminal-court-is-in-bed-with-our-enemies-and-its-time-we-clean-house">argued</a> these revelations prove the ICC is not an impartial judicial body, but an unaccountable political tool easily co-opted by hostile states.

Midtown Manhattan Buildings Evacuated After Collapse Warning

Mamdani’s Netanyahu Threats May Have Broken The Law, NY Rep Says

Benjamin Netanyahu

Israel

New York City

Zohran Mamdani

America&#8217;s man at the United Nations unloaded on Iran&#8217;s chief diplomat Thursday, delivering a blistering smackdown after Tehran&#8217;s envoy tried to shut down an emergency Security Council session on the Gulf crisis — telling him bluntly that intimidation tactics don&#8217;t fly on East River soil.
&#8220;This is not Tehran,&#8221; U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Mike Waltz thundered at Iranian envoy Amir Saeid Iravani after the Iranian diplomat suggested the council shouldn&#8217;t even be meeting and accused Waltz and other members of spreading lies. &#8220;This is the United States of America. This is the United Nations Security Council. You will not silence this body.&#8221;
Waltz — the first Green Beret elected to Congress, who <a href="https://usun.usmission.gov/ambassador-michael-waltz/">served</a> 27 years in the U.S. Army, including multiple combat tours in Afghanistan, the Middle East, and Africa, and received four Bronze Stars, including two for valor — wasn&#8217;t done. He continued:
<blockquote>
The representative goes on to say that the ambassador from Bahrain, the foreign minister, myself, and other members of this body are full of lies; they were lying. Let me ask you. What here is a lie? Who&#8217;s lying here? Is this Arab family in Bahrain in a residential neighborhood whose home was destroyed by an Iranian Shahed drone, are they lying? Crowne Plaza Hotel, full of tourists? Are they lying? First responders whose headquarters were struck deliberately so that they couldn&#8217;t put out fires:  Were they lying? Is this hypocrisy? Is this what this council is here to denounce today? I ask the representative, are these lies? Are these photographs, are these lies? I&#8217;d say not.
</blockquote>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Iran will not silence us on our own soil.
That might work in Tehran, but not in the UN Security Council.
We will tell the truth. <a href="https://t.co/AwzEbdETzn">pic.twitter.com/AwzEbdETzn</a>
&mdash; Ambassador Mike Waltz (@USAmbUN) <a href="https://x.com/USAmbUN/status/2072736749671878682?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">July 2, 2026</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.x.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
The fireworks capped a brutal day at the U.N., where Bahrain&#8217;s Foreign Minister Abdullatif bin Rashid al-Zayani, <a href="https://www.iranintl.com/en/202607022230">laid out</a> a horror-show tally: 808 Iranian missile and drone strikes on his tiny kingdom since late February, killing three civilians and wounding 465 more. Al-Zayani said the barrage — 203 ballistic missiles and more than 600 armed drones — hammered homes, hospitals and infrastructure, and warned that an April strike on an ammonia tank came within a hair of triggering a toxic gas catastrophe.
Waltz, addressing the council earlier, had warned that President Donald Trump&#8217;s patience with Tehran was wearing thin, accusing the regime of strangling global trade by choking off the vital Strait of Hormuz — a chokepoint UN economists say threatens 61 developing nations. &#8220;Iran cannot, and we cannot allow it to, hold the world&#8217;s economy hostage,&#8221; Waltz declared, insisting a &#8220;transformative&#8221; opportunity for ordinary Iranians remains on the table if Tehran changes course.
Iranian envoy Iravani claimed Waltz&#8217;s remarks were &#8220;lies and disinformation,&#8221; <a href="https://www.aa.com.tr/en/middle-east/us-military-presence-in-persian-gulf-brings-nothing-but-insecurity-irans-un-envoy/3984794">insisting</a> Iran&#8217;s strikes were purely defensive retaliation against American bases used to launch attacks on Iranian soil. He argued Washington has no business dictating security in the Gulf, insisting only regional nations should call the shots.
Waltz was having no part of it.

UN-US-ISRAEL-IRAN-WAR

Waltz Blasts Iran Envoy: ‘This Is Not Tehran. This Is The United States Of America’

Mike Waltz

The hall of the United Nations Human Rights Council fell into an uneasy silence earlier this week as a small woman walked to the microphone and prepared to do something the world&#8217;s most powerful human rights body had failed to do: bear witness.
Ilana Gritzewsky, a survivor of Hamas&#8217; October 7 massacre, stood before Reem Alsalem — the U.N.&#8217;s own special rapporteur on violence against women, who is Jordanian — and refused to be erased.
What followed was one of the most searing moments in recent U.N. history, not because of what the diplomat said in response.
Because of what she didn&#8217;t say.
Gritzewsky recounted the morning terrorists stormed her kibbutz — the murders, the burning, the kidnapping. She described being touched, beaten, and sexually abused until she lost consciousness, waking half-naked with seven Hamas fighters standing over her. She described the broken hip, the broken jaw, the scarred soul she carried home from captivity. She spoke of how the wail of an air raid siren or the thunder of an Iranian rocket still hurls her back into that darkness.
&#8220;In captivity, Jewish women were raped, abused, and humiliated. And you, special rapporteur, you choose silence and denial. You say there was no evidence of sexual violence on October 7th,&#8221; she told Alsalem directly. &#8220;I&#8217;m standing here today, not as a report, not as a statistic. I am a woman who survived. I am the living proof of sexual violence by Hamas.&#8221;
Then she asked the question that hung over the chamber like smoke: &#8220;When I, another Israeli woman, begged not to be raped — why were you silent? Please look at me. Do you believe us now? Will you apologize?&#8221;
Alsalem sat silent after Gritzewsky&#8217;s testimony. She did not apologize.
She smirked.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
This is the UN. Look at the face of the UN special rapporteur who is meant to stand up for women but has refused, again and again, to speak up for Israeli women. Look at her face when a former hostage challenges her. <a href="https://t.co/whThRNG92u">pic.twitter.com/whThRNG92u</a>
&mdash; Nicole Lampert (@nicolelampert) <a href="https://x.com/nicolelampert/status/2069691978707513797?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 24, 2026</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.x.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
The confrontation laid bare a record that is nothing short of a scandal. As U.N. Watch <a href="https://unwatch.org/analysis-of-reem-alsalems-violence-against-mothers-report-omissions-distortions-and-double-standards/">noted</a>, Alsalem publicly declared last November that &#8220;no independent investigation found that rape took place on October 7&#8221; — a claim directly contradicted by a U.N. report issued months earlier that found reasonable grounds to believe Hamas committed sexual violence during the attack, with an even higher evidentiary threshold met for assaults on hostages held in captivity. As recently as April 2026, she was still dismissing survivor testimony as &#8220;misinformation&#8221; deployed to &#8220;justify genocide against Palestinians.&#8221;
Her June 2026 report to the Human Rights Council, titled &#8220;Violence against Mothers,&#8221; completed the picture. It accused Israel of reproductive violence and genocide, cited a single article from an openly anti-Israel outlet, and lamented that U.S. and Israeli action against Iran might undermine Tehran&#8217;s record on women&#8217;s rights — a position that drew immediate ridicule from prominent Iranian women&#8217;s rights activist Masih Alinejad, who had publicly celebrated those same strikes. The report made no mention of Hamas. It said nothing of Israeli mothers murdered in front of their children, nothing of hostage families psychologically tortured for over two years, nothing of the deliberate phenomenon so systematic it has been given its own name: kinocide.
Ilana Gritzewsky offered Reem Alsalem a simple human choice on June 23: look at her, and reckon with what she represents.
The special rapporteur looked away.

Ilana Gritzewsky, former hostage by Hamas speaks during

Watch U.N. Official’s Sickening Reaction To Oct. 7 Survivor

October 7

WASHINGTON—The nominee to serve as United Nations Secretary General is a pro-abortion extremist who is unfit to serve in the role, Republicans told Secretary of State Marco Rubio in a letter first obtained by The Daily Wire.
The bicameral group of lawmakers, led by Republican Congressman Chris Smith of New Jersey, told Rubio on Thursday that former Chilean president Michelle Bachelet &#8220;does not match the qualifications&#8221; President Donald Trump&#8217;s administration is seeking in the next secretary general, given her record of pro-abortion advocacy and the support she has from abortion proponents around the world.
As one of the five permanent members of the U.N. Security Council, the United States has the power to veto Bachelet&#8217;s selection to be the next Secretary General. The lawmakers urge Rubio to instruct U.N. Ambassador Michael Waltz to exercise that veto.
&#8220;Dr. Bachelet’s resume reveals a pro-abortion zealot intent on using political authority to override state sovereignty in favor of extreme agendas,&#8221; the lawmakers write. &#8220;She has both overtly attacked pro-life laws — including those of the United States — and sought to weaken them through intimidation and coercion.&#8221;
Bachelet served as the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, as Executive Director of United Nations Women, and as the president of Chile. In each of these roles, the Republicans stressed, she has pushed for abortions of unborn babies as a woman&#8217;s right. President Donald Trump actually pulled the United States out of U.N. Women in January 2026, saying that participation in U.N. Women is contrary to U.S. interests.
&#8220;Dr. Bachelet has repeatedly prioritized an extreme abortion agenda at the expense of state sovereignty,&#8221; the lawmakers told Rubio. &#8220;She is an unsuitable candidate, and the United States, as a permanent member of the Security Council, should veto Dr. Bachelet’s selection.&#8221;
<div id="attachment_1066457" style="width: 874px" class="wp-caption aligncenter"><a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/exclusive-republicans-press-rubio-to-block-pro-abortion-zealot-un-secretary-general-nominee/chile-election-runoff-vote" rel="attachment wp-att-1066457"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" aria-describedby="caption-attachment-1066457" class="wp-image-1066457 size-large" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/GettyImages-2251241254-864x576.jpg" alt="" width="864" height="576" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/GettyImages-2251241254-864x576.jpg 864w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/GettyImages-2251241254-300x200.jpg 300w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/GettyImages-2251241254-768x512.jpg 768w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/GettyImages-2251241254.jpg 1024w" sizes=" (max-width: 864px) 100vw, 864px" /></a>Chile&#8217;s former president (2006-2010 and 2014-2018) Michelle Bachelet speaks to the press after casting her ballot during the presidential runoff election in Santiago on December 14, 2025. (Photo by Raul BRAVO / AFP via Getty Images)</div>
The United States has previously emphasized that it wants a Secretary General who shares the American vision of &#8220;returning the UN to its founding purpose of maintaining international peace and security,&#8221; as Ambassador Dorothy Shea argued in October 2025, during remarks at a United Nations Security Council Briefing. &#8220;The next Secretary-General should reject initiatives that fall outside the Charter’s founding purpose, prioritize accountability and transparency, and respect state sovereignty.&#8221;
The lawmakers argue that Bachelet would not match such a vision, and that she would instead promote &#8220;divisive ideologies.&#8221;
&#8220;However, Dr. Bachelet’s previous promotion of an extreme abortion agenda suggests that, if selected as the next UNSG, she would 
continue the UN practice of engaging in &#8216;the propagation of divisive ideologies that undermine national sovereignty and stir controversy rather than bring member states together to address issues of common concern.&#8217;  Her demonstrated ambitions and priorities, outlined below, conflict with the United States determination to bring the UN &#8216;back to the basics.'&#8221;
They note that Bachelet, when she served as the High Commissioner for Human Rights, deplored the United States Supreme Court overturning Roe v. Wade in June 2022, calling the decision a &#8220;major setback,” a “huge blow to women’s human rights,” and a decision that “strips autonomy” from women. They note that she described abortion as &#8220;firmly rooted in international human rights law,&#8221; saying that the procedure, which brutally ends the life of a human baby, &#8220;is at the core of women and girls’ autonomy.”
Since Bachelet has set the precedent of &#8220;using her office to attack United States pro-life law,&#8221; she cannot be trusted to respect the United States&#8217; &#8220;right to enforce pro-life laws and policies, include the Protecting Life in Foreign Assistance policy and the executive order Enforcing the Hyde Amendment,&#8221; the Republicans argue.
Bachelet has spent her career arguing for more abortions and fewer pro-life laws: in 2022, as the lawmakers point out, she said that &#8220;restrictive abortion laws and practical barriers pose a threat to human rights&#8221; and praised the weakening of pro-life laws in Colombia, Argentina, and Mexico.
&#8220;The truth is that killing an unborn child by abortion can never be construed to be a human right,&#8221; the Republicans wrote. &#8220;Every person — born and unborn—deserves to have his or her human rights secured and protected.&#8221;
They also point to a 2020 fact sheet from the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, published under Bachelet&#8217;s purview, that claims &#8220;treaty body jurisprudence has indicated that denying women access to abortion can amount to violations of the rights to health, privacy and, in certain cases, the right to be free from cruel, inhumane and degrading treatment.”
Failure to abort babies is &#8220;a form of gender based violence against women, which can amount to torture and/or cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment,&#8221; the fact sheet asserts. The Republicans argue that these claims are in contradiction to the Geneva Consensus Declaration, a document signed by the United States and 30 other nations affirming there is no international right to abortion.
Bachelet has also failed to oppose coerced abortion in China, traveling to the nation at the invitation of the Chinese Communist Party in order to investigate reports of human rights abuses in the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region, the lawmakers tell Rubio.
&#8220;She should have honestly identified the atrocities committed by the CCP against the Uyghurs as a genocide,&#8221; they wrote. &#8220;Instead, she released a watered-down report literally minutes before her term expired. She allowed the CCP to blatantly shield itself from an honest assessment and to sidestep responsibility for its horrific human rights abuses. In an appalling failure of leadership, Dr. Bachelet crumbled under pressure and enabled the CCP to manipulate the visit for its own advantage.&#8221;
As she campaigned for the Chilean presidency, Bachelet promised to weaken the country&#8217;s pro-life law that protected all unborn babies. She followed through by authoring a bill legalizing abortion and sending it to Chile&#8217;s Congress. The bill was approved and established into law, allowing abortions when the baby was a risk to the mother&#8217;s life, had fatal fetal abnormalities, or was the result of a rape.
While the change in law might seem minimal or even standard for Americans, for Chileans, the law change was a cultural shift and a door opened to future pro-abortion laws.
The State Department did not immediately respond to a request for comment for this story.

CHILE-POLITICS-UN-DIPLOMACY

EXCLUSIVE: Republicans Press Rubio To Block ‘Pro-Abortion Zealot’ UN Secretary General Nominee

Abortion

Marco Rubio

Kuwaiti dissident and journalist Jasem Aljuraid delivered a blistering rebuke of the United Nations Human Rights Council this week, criticizing what he described as the international body’s systemic bias against Israel.
Aljuraid, a human rights activist now living as a political refugee in Canada, risked his life and remaining ties to his homeland to expose what he called a &#8220;ritual of condemnation&#8221; that enshrines historical lies.
Speaking before the Council, Aljuraid took direct aim at &#8220;Agenda Item 7,&#8221; a permanent fixture that singles out Israel for mandatory scrutiny at every session — a &#8220;standing requirement&#8221; not applied to any other nation.
“I ask the UN, when will you end the ritual of condemning Israel?” he began. “Is it not time, instead, to learn from Israel how to defeat terror, defend free societies, and pursue peace?&#8221;
Aljuraid also challenged the use of the term &#8220;colonizers&#8221; in reference to Israel, arguing that the label ignores the region&#8217;s complex history.
&#8220;A Jewish kingdom ruled in Judea for a thousand years. We, the Arabs, took this land,&#8221; he said. “So why does the council enshrine a lie by keeping a permanent agenda item on Palestine while ignoring the indigenous heart of Israel returning home?”
He described Israel&#8217;s fight against Hamas and Iran&#8217;s Revolutionary Guard Corps as part of a broader struggle affecting other nations.
&#8220;Today, Israel is fighting for peaceful nations, freeing Gaza from Hamas, and saving Iranians from the Islamic Republic. What Israel is doing to the IRGC is a gift to humanity,” he said.
Aljuraid went on to emphasize the broader regional context, noting the number of Muslim-majority countries compared to Israel.
“There are 57 Islamic countries and only one Jewish state, Israel,” he noted. “Despite the ongoing hateful desire to eliminate it, Israel has not only survived, it has thrived. I don&#8217;t believe in miracles, but this is one. So I ask the UN: when will you end the ritual of condemning Israel? Is it not time instead to learn from Israel how to defeat terror, defend free societies, and pursue peace?”
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
IDI fellow <a href="https://twitter.com/JJJuraid?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@JJJuraid</a> educating a group of useful idiots at the UN in Geneva. <a href="https://t.co/KYWSImom1x">pic.twitter.com/KYWSImom1x</a>
&mdash; IDI (@idicenter) <a href="https://twitter.com/idicenter/status/2036985934302806350?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 26, 2026</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Aljuraid, a former senior columnist for Kuwait’s Al-Qabas, was fired and forced into exile in 2022 after engaging with an Israeli journalist and advocating for normalization under the Abraham Accords. Under Kuwaiti law, such engagement can carry legal consequences.
Despite being labeled a &#8220;Mossad agent&#8221; by extremists and facing legal referral to the Public Prosecutor in Kuwait, Aljuraid remains undeterred.
His plea to the UN was simple but profound: stop the obsession with condemnation and start learning from a nation that successfully defeats terror while maintaining a free society. For Aljuraid, speaking the truth is the only way to honor the indigenous history of the region and secure a peaceful future for all its inhabitants.

Israeli Flag at Masada

Dissident Takes On UN Over Targeting Israel, Calls Out ‘Ritual’ No One Else Faces

Kuwait

Ben Saul, the U.N. Rapporteur on human rights and counter-terrorism, accused the Trump administration of “naked aggression” and “renewed imperialism,” while lauding Somalia’s record on human rights.
“Countering terrorism has excused naked aggression and renewed imperialism against Iran and Venezuela, raining death and making us all less safe,” he told the U.N. Human Rights Council. “Despite these abuses, many responsible states remain committed to human rights while countering terrorism. My report on visiting Somalia last year shows how a country facing an existential terrorist threat is strengthening, not sacrificing, human rights.”
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
U.N. SAYS SOMALIA LEADS ON HUMAN RIGHTS: Ben Saul, the U.N. Rapporteur on human rights and counter-terrorism, says the U.S. is “raining death”—but Somalia is a model “responsible state” that “is committed to strengthening human rights.”
FYI: China donated $150,000 to Ben Saul. <a href="https://t.co/74ILPalq2P">pic.twitter.com/74ILPalq2P</a>
&mdash; UN Watch (@UNWatch) <a href="https://twitter.com/UNWatch/status/2033918733693997279?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 17, 2026</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
&nbsp;
Last week, Saul <a href="https://www.reutersconnect.com/item/un-expert-rejects-us-justification-for-iran-war-warns-of-risk-for-further-destabilisation/dGFnOnJldXRlcnMuY29tLDIwMjY6bmV3c21sX1ZBMzQ0MzEyMDMyMDI2UlAx?utm_source=chatgpt.com">asserted</a> the United States had no lawful right to attack Iran because its only justification would be to intercept &#8220;an order to the state’s military to fire a weapon in the very near future,&#8221; meaning that a nation would have to wait until the nuclear bomb was ready to be sent before acting.
“There must be an armed attack occurring, or an armed attack must be imminent,” he stated. “Imminent means ‘about to occur,’ there’s some elasticity in that concept, of course, but it does not extend to bombing a country when they don’t even have the weapon yet that you say you fear, let alone having made any decision to use them against any other country. Imminent means you’ve intercepted an order to the state’s military to fire a weapon in the very near future.”
Saul&#8217;s office <a href="https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/4079072/files/A_HRC_58_70_Add.1-EN.pdf?utm_source=chatgpt.com">received</a> $150,000 from China in 2025.
As for Somalia’s record, even left-wing Amnesty International <a href="https://www.amnesty.org/en/location/africa/east-africa-the-horn-and-great-lakes/somalia/report-somalia/">acknowledged</a> in 2024:
<blockquote>
Civilians continued to bear the brunt of the ongoing armed conflict between the Somali government, supported by its international allies, and the armed group Al-Shabaab. While large numbers of civilian casualties were reported, there was no accountability for violations of international humanitarian and human rights law.
The UN Assistance Mission in Somalia reported 854 civilian casualties (295 killed and 559 injured) between January and September. Al-Shabaab was responsible for 65% (560) of all recorded casualties, while the others were attributed to state security forces, clan militias, and international and regional forces. Internally displaced people continued to face significant human rights violations and abuses. More than 552,000 were internally displaced due to floods, drought, conflict and food insecurity. According to the UN, nearly 200,000 people – most of whom were already internally displaced – were forcibly evicted nationwide between January and December. Women and children, who faced risks of gender-based violence, sexual exploitation and evictions, constituted more than 80% of the displaced population.
</blockquote>
The Coalition of Somalia Human Rights defenders <a href="https://cshrds.org/somalia-annual-human-rights-report-2025">reported</a> in 2025: “This report documents grave human rights violations committed in Somalia during 2025, including abusive use of the death penalty, torture, extra-judicial killings, conflict-related sexual violence, violations against women and children, enforced evictions, and mass displacement. In 2025, Human Rights Defenders (HRDs) in Somalia operated in an increasingly hostile and high-risk environment marked by systematic intimidation, violence, and repression.”
Human Rights Watch <a href="https://www.hrw.org/world-report/2025/country-chapters/somalia?utm_source=chatgpt.com">noted</a> last year, “In May, the Somali government called on the United Nations Security Council to terminate the UN political mission in Somalia (UNSOM), later walking back on the timeframe. &#8230; The government did not review the country’s outdated penal code or establish a national human rights commission.”

SWITZERLAND-UN-ISRAEL-PALESTINIAN-CONFLICT

UN Official Accuses Trump Of ‘Naked Aggression,’ Heaps Praise On Failed State Instead

UN ‘Human Rights’ Official Slanders U.S. As ‘Imperialist,’ Praises Somalia, Takes Cash From China

China

Somalia

Venezuela

At the high-profile United Nations Commission on the Status of Women this week, the United States was the only nation in the world to vote against a woke document that failed to define what a woman is and promoted gender ideology and diversity, equity, and inclusion principles, The Daily Wire can first report.
Thirty-six nations are members of the United Nations Commission on the Status of Women, and every single year during the commission, there is an agreed-upon document that focuses on topics affecting women around the world, including injustices.
This year&#8217;s document was a disappointment to Bethany Kozma, Director of Global Affairs (OGA) at the Department of Health and Human Services, as well as the other members of President Donald Trump&#8217;s administration who had traveled to the commission in New York.
The document was filled with mentions of DEI, gender ideology, and ambiguous language about &#8220;reproductive rights,&#8221; but was bereft of language unique to womanhood, according to Kozma. &#8220;No mention of motherhood or unique female experiences,&#8221; she said, adding, &#8220;and it failed to define what a woman is.&#8221;
In short, The Daily Wire has learned, it was not aligned with the Trump administration&#8217;s policies and views on these issues. Since the president took office again in 2025, the United States has clearly defined what a woman is, banned boys from girls&#8217; spaces and sports, fought back against transgenderism in the medical world, and shut down many DEI projects in corporations and academia.
&#8220;The UN Commission on Women is supposed to be for women, yet for years, it’s been co-opted to include men pretending to be women,&#8221; she explained. &#8220;Many countries claim to support and empower women, yet some of them cannot even answer the simple question: &#8216;What is a woman?'&#8221;
&#8220;Thanks to the moral leadership of President Trump, the tide is changing and we&#8217;re standing up for women and girls,&#8221; she emphasized. &#8220;And I really was hopeful that we could come to an agreement.&#8221;
Kozma and her delegation from the United States worked hard to participate in good faith, offering amendments to the document that they knew some countries might sign onto. Natalie Dodson, senior advisor to HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., shared that their delegation worked aggressively to negotiate with the other countries in order to include language defending the integrity of women.
&#8220;The text was not something that the U.S. liked at all,&#8221; Kozma explained. &#8220;It would not have been something that we would have ever put out on behalf of the United States government, but we had offered several amendments that were just very common sense.&#8221;
One amendment that they had been asking for, over and over, was an amendment that essentially defined men and women so that there would be no ambiguity.
<div id="attachment_1056463" style="width: 2570px" class="wp-caption alignnone"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" aria-describedby="caption-attachment-1056463" class="size-full wp-image-1056463" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/IMG_6039-scaled.jpeg" alt="" width="2560" height="1920" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/IMG_6039-scaled.jpeg 2560w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/IMG_6039-300x225.jpeg 300w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/IMG_6039-768x576.jpeg 768w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/IMG_6039-1536x1152.jpeg 1536w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/IMG_6039-2048x1536.jpeg 2048w" sizes=" (max-width: 2560px) 100vw, 2560px" />Members of the United States Delegation at the United Nations Commission on the Status of Women.</div>
The Commission on the Status of Women wasn&#8217;t interested in the American amendments, Kozma and Dodson explained to The Daily Wire. Minutes before midnight on Sunday night, the council sent the final draft to the United States without acknowledging any of the American red lines that Kozma&#8217;s team had outlined.
And when it came time to vote on the amendments, which were intended to be voted on separately, the council bundled all the amendments together. Some nations might have voted for one amendment but not another, and bundled together, the amendments failed.
During Monday&#8217;s vote, the United States was the only nation in the world to vote against the document. Six nations abstained: Côte d&#8217;Ivoire, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Egypt, Mali, Mauritania, and Saudi Arabia.
Kozma believes it was a deliberate attempt at &#8220;isolation&#8221; by the council to make the United States look like &#8220;we won&#8217;t don&#8217;t defend women and girls.&#8221;
&#8220;I&#8217;m really proud of us,&#8221; she told The Daily Wire over the phone. &#8220;We were the only country that was voting to protect women and girls.&#8221;

U.S. Stands Alone Defending Women In Gender Identity Fight At United Nations

Department of Health and Human Services

Social Issues

Transgender

U.S.

Women

Saturday’s strikes on Iranian terrorist infrastructure have predictably revived the familiar debate about “preemptive” self-defense under international law. But the debate often misses the practical, fact-bound question: was the United States responding to a speculative future risk, or to an ongoing campaign of hostile action that has already crossed the threshold? On the public record, Iran’s hostility looks less like rhetoric and more like sustained operations.
This distinction matters. In strategic theory, there is a difference between initiating violence and terminating a pattern of violence, between starting and ending a conflict. Iran’s campaign against U.S. military forces and interests did not begin this week. It has spanned decades. The relevant legal and strategic question is not whether Tehran might one day act. It is whether a pattern of armed attacks, proxy operations, missile strikes, and assassination attempts already constitutes an ongoing armed attack under Article 51 of the U.N. Charter.
Article 51 preserves the “inherent right of individual or collective self-defense if an armed attack occurs.” Some read that as a strict sequencing rule, but state practice treats it differently. Where a state faces a continuing pattern of force, or repeated, closely linked strikes, it may treat the series as meeting the “armed attack” threshold and act to prevent further attacks, so long as its response is necessary and proportionate.
The hard limits are factual, not semantic: What is the threat? Is it ongoing or imminent? What alternatives exist? And is the response calibrated to prevention rather than punishment? Once that line is crossed, lawful self-defense can aim not only to repel the last attack, but to stop the next one.
Iran’s record is not ambiguous. 
Since the Islamic Revolution, Iran has fueled attacks through Hezbollah, Hamas, and the Houthis, killing hundreds of American service members — <a href="https://www.militarytimes.com/news/your-military/2019/04/04/iran-killed-more-us-troops-in-iraq-than-previously-known-pentagon-says/">603 in Iraq</a> alone, according to a 2019 Pentagon report. On January 8, 2020, Iran launched a ballistic-missile strike on Al-Asad Air Base and Erbil, injuring more than <a href="https://www.cbsnews.com/news/iranian-attack-al-asad-air-base-60-minutes-2021-08-08/">100 U.S. troops</a>. Between October 2023 and February 2024, Iran-backed forces conducted over 170 attacks on American bases in Iraq, Syria, and <a href="https://www.war.gov/News/News-Stories/Article/Article/3659809/3-us-service-members-killed-others-injured-in-jordan-following-drone-attack/">Jordan</a>, killing and injuring Americans. Additional rocket attacks followed. Authorities in the United States have reportedly disrupted multiple Iranian assassination plots targeting American officials.
This is not conjecture; it is a documented operational pattern.
Alongside kinetic attacks, Iran’s cyber campaign reflects the same logic of persistent pressure. American authorities have attributed or linked Iran-connected actors to operations <a href="https://www.nsa.gov/Press-Room/Press-Releases-Statements/Press-Release-View/Article/4229506/nsa-cisa-fbi-and-dc3-warn-iranian-cyber-actors-may-target-vulnerable-us-network/">targeting American</a> institutions and infrastructure, including denial-of-service attacks on banks, attempted hospital intrusions, and infrastructure targeting. Cyber operations do not always meet the legal threshold of “armed attack,” but they form part of an integrated coercive strategy: normalize aggression below the threshold, blur attribution through proxies, and test the limits of American restraint.
Nor did that pattern end after the June 2025 confrontation. American interests remained in the crosshairs. Rocket attacks were foiled. U.S.-funded infrastructure was struck. Militia networks continued to operate within Iran’s broader apparatus of support and enablement. Whether carried out directly or through proxy layers, the operational reality was unchanged: American personnel and interests remain targets.
That is why calling this attack “preemption” obscures more than it clarifies.
On the domestic side, the constitutional picture is equally clear. Under Article II, presidents have the authority to repel attacks and protect American forces and interests abroad. The War Powers Resolution even presupposes that authority by requiring reporting after hostilities begin. It does not require advance permission to defend Americans under attack, and there is longstanding bipartisan recognition that the commander-in-chief may act swiftly in defense of U.S. personnel and national security interests. 
As it relates to urgency and imminence, according to officials, in the hours leading up to the operation, the United States had indicators that Tehran was going to launch a strike against American assets in the region. The President decided to prevent those launches from occurring. The law does not require the commander-in-chief to wait until American lives are lost to prove a point about process.
Critics argue that decisive responses are destabilizing. But instability does not originate in the act of defense. It originates in sustained aggression. 
The present debate has also mischaracterized the stated objectives of the mission. The president did not frame this as a project of political transformation. In fact, he articulated defined security objectives: ending Iran’s pursuit of nuclear weapons, halting expansion of its ballistic missile arsenal, preventing development of longer-range missile systems capable of reaching the United States, neutralizing threats to close the Strait of Hormuz, and degrading networks responsible for killing Americans. The purpose of limited, calibrated strikes is not regime change for its own sake. It is to degrade capability, restore deterrence, and reduce the probability of future attacks. Regime change, if it occurs, is a byproduct. The strategic objective is threat elimination tied directly to the national security interests of the United States.
Those interests are concrete. Iran’s nuclear trajectory threatens to convert a chronic threat into an acute one. A nuclear-armed Tehran would constrain America’s freedom of action, embolden proxy networks under a nuclear umbrella, and accelerate proliferation across the Middle East. It would place U.S. military forces in Qatar, Bahrain, Iraq, and elsewhere under greater strategic risk. It would increase the chance that a miscalculation becomes a catastrophe.
Iran’s ballistic missile expansion compounds that risk. Its medium-range missile arsenal already threatens regional allies and American forces. Its pursuit of longer-range systems raises the specter of expanded reach into Europe and beyond. Combined with repeated threats to disrupt the Strait of Hormuz — a globally vital economic chokepoint — these capabilities directly implicate American economic and security interests.
Deterrence is not about punishment. It is about prevention. It seeks to convince an adversary that aggression will not pay. Against a regime that finances terrorism, threatens leaders, probes infrastructure, and openly declares hostility, restraint without consequence invites repetition.
Iran’s proxy model deliberately manufactures legal and ethical confusion. Attacks are launched from dense civilian environments. Responsibility is diffused. Blame is inverted. International humanitarian law does not excuse that tactic; it condemns it. The legal standard under Article 51 is necessity and proportionality, not passivity. International law was never intended to require a state to absorb attacks while debating terminology.
Peace is not sustained by wishful thinking. It is sustained by credible lines and credible consequences. “Peace through strength” is not rhetorical flourish. It reflects a long-standing deterrence principle: aggression declines when it becomes predictably costly.
In the end, the choice is not between war and peace in the abstract. It is between allowing a sustained campaign of violence to continue or lawfully acting to prevent its next phase. When a regime finances terrorism, launches missiles, supports attacks on American troops, attempts assassinations, and advances capabilities that magnify those threats, the right of self-defense is not theoretical.
Article 51 is not a suicide pact. It exists for precisely these circumstances.
* * *
Mark Goldfeder is an international lawyer, CEO of the National Jewish Advocacy Center and a law professor at Touro Law School.
John Spencer is Chair of War Studies at the Madison Policy Forum and Executive Director of the Urban Warfare Institute. He served 25 years as an infantry soldier, including two combat tours in Iraq. He is author of the book Connected Soldiers: Life, Leadership, and Social Connections in Modern War and coauthor of Understanding Urban Warfare.

TOPSHOT-IRAN-US-ISRAEL-WAR

Ending A Campaign Of Violence Is Not Starting A War

Middle East

Opinion

First Lady Melania Trump will &#8220;make history&#8221; on Monday as the United States takes over the United Nations Security Council presidency and she becomes the first sitting First Lady to control the gavel and address the body.
Trump&#8217;s speech, set to focus on achieving peace through better education, will not just mark the first time an American First Lady has presided over the Security Council — it will also be the first time a sitting First Lady from any member nation has done so.
The Office of the First Lady released a statement on Monday, declaring, &#8220;First Lady Melania Trump is set to make history at the United Nations, taking the gavel as the United States assumes the Security Council Presidency to emphasize education’s role in advancing tolerance and world peace.&#8221;
The statement went on to say that Trump would preside over the council as members addressed topics relating to &#8220;education, technology, peace, and security.&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
First Lady Melania Trump to Preside Over U.N. Security Council Calling for Peace Through Education
Today at 3PM ET <a href="https://t.co/d2UXUdNmhh">pic.twitter.com/d2UXUdNmhh</a>
— Office of the First Lady (@FirstLadyOffice) <a href="https://twitter.com/FirstLadyOffice/status/2028532475400425642?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 2, 2026</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
U.S. Ambassador to the UN Mike Waltz gave a brief statement to Fox News Digital, saying that given Melania Trump&#8217;s long history of being &#8220;a passionate and tireless advocate for children,&#8221; it was only &#8220;fitting&#8221; that she address the Security Council to promote education and advocate for its use as a path to peace.
&#8220;Her message of helping the helpless through education and technology fits exactly with our mission at the U.N., to achieve meaningful and lasting peace,&#8221; Waltz explained. &#8220;As a green beret and now diplomat, I have seen firsthand that peace prevails where children are taught and not terrorized.&#8221;
Melania Trump&#8217;s personal initiatives have almost always been geared toward children, beginning with her BE BEST program announced in 2018 — which promoted online safety and anti-cyber-bullying programs for children, as well as efforts to combat opioid addiction. In her time away from the White House, she also introduced Fostering the Future to promote digital safety and AI education — and to provide scholarship funds for children in the foster care system.

US-POLITICS-TRUMP

First Lady Melania Trump To Make History, Preside Over United Nations Security Council

Global Politics

Melania Trump

Politics

Menu