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’

Iran

Mike Waltz

United Nations

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

Hamas

Israel

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

State Department

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

Donald Trump

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;

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

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

The United States didn’t hedge — it called Tehran out by name, publicly torching what it says are flat-out lies from the Iranian regime in a blunt, point-by-point takedown posted by U.S. Central Command, just hours after the joint United States–Israel operation that eliminated Iran’s supreme leader.
The fact-checking barrage comes in the wake of the coordinated strike by the United States and Israel that took out Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, a move officials have framed as a decisive blow against what they describe as the regime’s decades-long campaign of terror and regional destabilization.
In a pair of sharply worded statements on X, CENTCOM directly contradicted claims made by Iran’s ambassador at the United Nations and by Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, labeling them false and accusing Tehran of deliberately misleading the international community.
During a U.N. Security Council meeting, Iran’s ambassador claimed Tehran’s response had been directed “solely and exclusively at the bases and assets of the United States.”
CENTCOM <a href="https://x.com/CENTCOM/status/2028182813837828251">rejected</a> that claim outright.
“The Iranian Regime is actively targeting civilians and has attacked more than a dozen locations,” the command stated, listing sites it says were struck.
According to CENTCOM, those locations include:
<ul>
<li>Dubai International Airport</li>
<li>Kuwait International Airport</li>
<li>Zayed International Airport, Dubai</li>
<li>Erbil International Airport, Iraq</li>
<li>Fairmont Palm Hotel, Dubai</li>
<li>Burj Al Arab Hotel, Dubai</li>
<li>Crowne Plaza Hotel, Bahrain</li>
<li>Port of Dubai</li>
<li>Residential areas in Beit Shemesh, Israel</li>
<li>Residential areas in Tel Aviv, Israel</li>
<li>Residential area of Era Views Towers, Bahrain</li>
<li>Residential areas in Qatar</li>
</ul>
The public rebuttal marks a significant escalation in messaging, with the United States accusing Tehran of attacking civilian infrastructure while misrepresenting its actions before the international community.
In a separate claim, Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps asserted it had struck the USS Abraham Lincoln aircraft carrier with ballistic missiles.
CENTCOM again <a href="https://x.com/CENTCOM/status/2028124242273767557">dismissed</a> the claim.
“The Lincoln was not hit. The missiles launched didn’t even come close,” the command said. “The Lincoln continues to launch aircraft in support of CENTCOM’s relentless campaign to defend the American people by eliminating threats from the Iranian regime.”
The forceful denials come as the United States and Israel continue a coordinated military campaign targeting Iranian military assets, including air defenses, missile infrastructure, and naval capabilities.
By publicly labeling Tehran’s statements as false, Washington is waging an information battle alongside ongoing military operations — seeking to counter Iranian claims, reassure allies, and underscore that key U.S. assets remain fully operational.

FACT-CHECK: U.S. Destroys Iran’s UN ‘Lies’ After Supreme Leader Strike

Fact Check

World

President Donald Trump convened the inaugural Board of Peace in Washington, D.C., telling attendees that the United Nations has failed to live up to its potential, adding that the newly-formed board will be “making sure it runs properly.”
“I think the United Nations has great potential. It has not lived up to that potential,” Trump said. “The United Nations, I think, is going to be much stronger, and the Board of Peace will be looking over the United Nations and making sure it runs properly.”
Trump went on to say he plans to assist the United Nations by improving its facilities and ensuring its viability. 
When Trump spoke at the United Nations Headquarters in September, the escalator abruptly stopped, and the teleprompter did not work during his remarks.
“We will make sure that the United Nations is viable and that you have good people at the United Nations doing a good job,” he said. “As I said, for years, the United Nations has had tremendous potential. It&#8217;s really important, and I think it will eventually live up to its potential. That will be a big day.”
The meeting, which took place at the newly renamed Donald J. Trump U.S. Institute of Peace, was attended by representatives of 48 countries, the European Union, and FIFA.
Over a dozen representatives made pledges on behalf of their countries to the board to improve the situation in Gaza.
In addition to President Trump announcing a $10 billion U.S. commitment to the Board of Peace, the United Arab Emirates pledged $1.2 billion, and Saudi Minister of State for Foreign Affairs Adel al-Jubeir committed $1 billion. Qatari Prime Minister Mohammed Abdulrahman Al Thani announced over $1 billion to support “a final resolution that fulfills Palestinian aspirations for statehood and recognition and Israeli aspirations for security and integration.”
Along with unspecified contributions from Kazakhstan, Azerbaijan, Morocco, Bahrain, Uzbekistan, and Kuwait, the total pledged by countries other than the United States adds up to roughly $7 billion, according to Trump.
Indonesia, Morocco, Kazakhstan, Kosovo, and Albania pledged troops for an International Stabilization Force. Turkey’s Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan said his country would also contribute forces, but Israel has said it would reject Turkish troops from entering Gaza.
Kazakhstan President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev pledged “significant” funding for the Board of Peace and scholarships for 500 Gazan students to study in his country. Romania’s President Nicușor Dan said his country would provide medical treatment for 4,000 sick children and their family members, as well as assistance in rebuilding Gaza’s fire safety system.
Trump also declared that the war in Gaza is over and warned that if Hamas did not give up their weapons, they would be “very harshly met.”
“This is a tremendous group of powerful people, they&#8217;re brilliant people, and I think that we can do things that other people would not be able to conceive or think of,” Trump said. “The Board of Peace is going to lead the way in Gaza. We&#8217;re going to make Gaza an example of success and safety and unity, and it&#8217;s an honor that you&#8217;re here.”
In addition to the European Union, the countries that participated include: Albania, Argentina, Armenia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Bulgaria, Cambodia, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Egypt, El Salvador, Finland, Germany, Greece, Hungary, India, Indonesia, Israel, Italy, Japan, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kosovo, Kuwait, Mexico, Mongolia, Morocco, Netherlands, Norway, Oman, Pakistan, Paraguay, Poland, Qatar, South Korea, Romania, Saudi Arabia, Slovakia, Switzerland, Thailand, Turkey, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom, Uzbekistan, Vietnam, and the European Union.

US-POLITICS-DIPLOMACY-TRUMP

Trump Throws Down Gauntlet At UN — Launches New Global Initiative

Board of Peace

Iranian women&#8217;s rights activist Masih Alinejad, speaking at the United Nations Geneva Summit, excoriated European politicians whom she said have looked the other way while thousands of her countrymen and women have been killed, tortured, and mutilated by the despotic Islamic regime.
“I am supposed to talk only in three minutes,” the woman who has been targeted in three alleged assassination plots linked to the regime. “But in my country, in 24 hours, they killed 40,000 people in Iran. And I am here at the United Nations while the killers are walking here. I saw them with expensive Gucci bags. I saw them with expensive brands walking here at the United Nations. &#8230; I am going to talk the truth.”
“The Secretary General of United Nations stands with dictators,” she alleged. “The Secretary General of United Nations sends a congratulation letter to Islamic Republic for the anniversary of this murderous regime. You tell me, do they stand with dictators or the victims? The victims are here, these two women. One of them lost her eye because the Revolutionary Guard shot her in her eye. One of them carried a bullet in her arm. Do they stand with them?”
“Right now, after killing 40,000 people, they storm into hospitals; they&#8217;re finishing off the injured ones; they&#8217;re arresting doctors and nurses; they put the political prisoners on death row; they&#8217;re executing them,” she continued. “I want to ask Geneva to host a peace conference, invite the opposition from Iran, invite the leaders of Europe, invite the leaders from European countries and free world here to talk about an Iran without an Islamic Republic.”
Tearing a photo of Ayatollah Khomeini into pieces, she declared, “The West waited too long,” adding that it would not be “Islamophobic” to “treat ISIS the way they deserve to be treated.”
“The West waited too long, too long,” she said. “When I was fighting against compulsory hijab, they were like, ‘Oh, this is Islamophobic. Oh no, we have to respect others&#8217; culture.’ All the female politicians from West, they went to my country, they borrowed compulsory hijab from Sweden, Netherlands, Germany, France, from everywhere, high representative of Europe. &#8230; Suddenly, they realized, ‘Oh, this is not their culture.&#8217; They started to cut their hair to show their solidarity with us.”
“Stop cutting your hair,” she demanded. “Cut your ties with our killers.”
“And now 40,000 people have been killed,” she noted. “Now the time has come to understand. Don&#8217;t wait that long. &#8230; You call them reformists. We call them killers.”
“When I see my sister standing here, my sister, with bullets in their body, being blinded, standing here, I feel ashamed that I am alive that I don&#8217;t carry the bullet,” she said.
“I&#8217;m going to leave Geneva forever,” she said. “You can kick me out forever. But I couldn&#8217;t keep silent because I feel the guilt on my shoulder. I don&#8217;t know how to save my people with empty hands. I cannot sometimes sleep; I cannot breathe; I cannot even eat because I feel guilty. I cannot believe how come the leaders of European countries do not feel guilty by shaking the hand of those Islamic Republic officials full of blood. Shame on you.”
“I need you to promise me that we&#8217;re going to stand together, all of us, with my brother in Venezuela, my sister from Belarus. I need you all to stand with us and help my people in Iran. We have to stop the massacre and kick these f***ing killers from Europe, from everywhere,” she concluded.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Rare Moment of Truth at UN: Iranian women&#39;s rights activist <a href="https://twitter.com/AlinejadMasih?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@AlinejadMasih</a> takes the floor at United Nations <a href="https://twitter.com/GenevaSummit?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@GenevaSummit</a> to blast European politicians who for years failed to call out the regime&#39;s terrorism and gender apartheid, points to victims in the room shot by the regime. <a href="https://t.co/zvgdS2J8Ld">pic.twitter.com/zvgdS2J8Ld</a>
&mdash; Hillel Neuer (@HillelNeuer) <a href="https://twitter.com/HillelNeuer/status/2023925966905479383?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 18, 2026</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

TOPSHOT-SWITZERLAND-US-IRAN-ENERGY-DIPLOMACY-NUCLEAR-UN

MIC DROP: Women’s Rights Activist Torches Europe’s Appeasement With Explosive Final Line

Masih Alinejad

The United Nations is at serious risk of “imminent financial collapse” after President Trump slashed U.S. funding last month, Secretary-General António Guterres warned in a letter.
In a letter sent to all 193 member states last week, Guterres warned that the U.N. could run out of money by July. &#8220;I cannot overstate the urgency of the situation we now face. We cannot execute budgets with uncollected funds, nor return funds we never received,&#8221; the secretary-general <a href="https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cr579mdv4m7o">wrote</a>, according to the BBC.
President Trump pulled out of UNESCO, the U.N. cultural agency; the World Health Organization; and the U.N. Human Rights Council in January, citing waste, mismanagement, and a lack of financial commitment from other countries.
“We walked away from WHO, the World Health Organization; UNRWA, the U.N. agency in Gaza that’s been completely infiltrated by Hamas. We walked out of it and defunded that, too. The so-called human rights councils that cater to countries like North Korea and Venezuela and Iran. We’ve walked away from that,” United States Ambassador to the U.N. Mike Waltz <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/mike-waltz-says-the-trump-administration-has-a-plan-to-save-the-united-nations">told</a> The Daily Wire in December. “It’s really about focusing our effort on the parts that align with an America First agenda and defunding and walking away from the rest of it — the nonsense.”
The U.S., previously the U.N.&#8217;s largest contributor, did not pay its regular budget contribution in 2025 and provided only 30% of the expected funding for U.N. peacekeeping operations. In December, the U.S. pledged $2 billion to U.N. humanitarian programs, a fraction of the $17 billion it spent in 2022, according to the BBC.
“[The U.N.] needs to get back to basics, stop with all of the other nonsense, trying to do everything for everybody all over the world. Stop with the focus on climate, stop with the focus on gender and all of these other social issues, regardless of how you feel about them, and let’s get back to peace,” Waltz said.
Prior to recent funding reductions, U.S. taxpayers had been providing 22% of the U.N.&#8217;s regular budget, more than the next three highest contributors <a href="https://www.cfr.org/articles/funding-united-nations-what-impact-do-us-contributions-have-un-agencies-and-programs">combined</a>.
President Trump has shifted his focus to his newly established Board of Peace, which is intended to <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/trump-asked-putin-to-join-his-board-of-peace-heres-what-that-means">oversee</a> the technocratic transitional government for Gaza, among other geopolitical objectives.
The Board has a $1 billion permanent membership fee, and with 60+ countries invited, is seen by many as a potential challenger to the United Nations.
Several other major donor nations have also announced funding reductions. The United Kingdom and Germany have implemented significant cuts to their foreign aid budgets, further compounding the U.N.&#8217;s financial troubles.
Guterres’ letter described the current crisis as &#8220;categorically different&#8221; from previous financial challenges, noting that only 77% of assessed contributions were paid in 2025, leaving billions in unpaid dues.
The Secretary-General concluded that the “integrity of the entire system” depends on all nations honoring their &#8220;assessed contributions,” and should the budget shortfalls remain unaddressed, the U.N. must &#8220;fundamentally overhaul our financial rules to prevent an imminent financial collapse.&#8221;

United Nations Chief Warns Of ‘Imminent Financial Collapse’ After Trump Slashes Funding

America First

foreign affairs

Trump Administration

Menu