First university class graduates from Saddam's palace
The American University of Baghdad has celebrated the graduation of its first cohort of students at a campus that was once a palace built by Saddam Hussein.
Officials say they hope the graduation will mark the beginning of a new era in higher education in Iraq rooted in modernity, openness and international academic standards.
The university was inaugurated in 2021 on the site of the al-Faw Palace, built on an island in the middle of an artificial lake by Saddam in the 1990s to mark the retaking of the peninsula of the same name during the war.
After the US-led invasion that unseated Saddam in 2003, it was used as a US coalition military headquarters called Camp Victory. It was later developed into an American-style university with a core liberal arts program through funding by influential Iraqi business owner Saadi Saihood.
A total of 38 students — 20 men and 18 women — graduated on Saturday with degrees in business administration, sciences and humanities at a ceremony attended by political dignitaries as well as families and faculty members.
Speaking to the attendees, university President Dr. Michael Mulnix reflected on the university's rocky beginnings.
"When I first arrived at the American University of Baghdad in 2018, the campus looked nothing like it does today," he said.
"Years of war and neglect had left the infrastructure in ruins, with many buildings damaged or destroyed. Today, we stand before an exceptional, nonprofit academic institution that ranks among the finest research universities."
University founder and owner Saihood called the graduation "a symbolic moment that affirms this institution was built to last and to make a real difference."
He acknowledged the economic challenges facing graduates, especially the scarcity of government employment, but emphasised that the university has equipped its students with the adaptability and initiative needed to thrive in the private sector or through entrepreneurship.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Perth Now
2 hours ago
- Perth Now
Israel military retrieves Thai hostage's body from Gaza
The Israeli military has retrieved the body of Thai hostage Nattapong Pinta, who had been held in Gaza since Hamas' October 7, 2023, attack on Israel, Defence Minister Israel Katz says. Pinta's body was held by a Palestinian militant group called the Mujahedeen Brigades, and was retrieved from the area of Rafah in southern Gaza, Katz said. His family in Thailand has been notified. Pinta, an agricultural worker, was abducted from Kibbutz Nir Oz, a small community near the border, where one in four people was killed or taken hostage during the Hamas-led 2023 attack that triggered the devastating war in Gaza. The Israeli military said Pinta had been abducted alive and killed by his captors, who had also killed and taken to Gaza the bodies of two more Israeli-American hostages that were retrieved this week. There was no immediate comment from the militant group. Hamas-led militants killed 1200 people in Israel in the 2023 attack, Israel's deadliest day, and took 251 hostages, 55 of whom remain in Gaza. Twenty hostages are believed to still be alive, according to Israeli authorities. Israel responded to the Hamas attacks with a military campaign that has killed more than 54,000 Palestinians, according to Gaza health authorities in the Hamas-run strip, and left much of the enclave in ruins, with a population of more than two million people largely displaced.
West Australian
2 hours ago
- West Australian
Israel military retrieves Thai hostage's body from Gaza
The Israeli military has retrieved the body of Thai hostage Nattapong Pinta, who had been held in Gaza since Hamas' October 7, 2023, attack on Israel, Defence Minister Israel Katz says. Pinta's body was held by a Palestinian militant group called the Mujahedeen Brigades, and was retrieved from the area of Rafah in southern Gaza, Katz said. His family in Thailand has been notified. Pinta, an agricultural worker, was abducted from Kibbutz Nir Oz, a small community near the border, where one in four people was killed or taken hostage during the Hamas-led 2023 attack that triggered the devastating war in Gaza. The Israeli military said Pinta had been abducted alive and killed by his captors, who had also killed and taken to Gaza the bodies of two more Israeli-American hostages that were retrieved this week. There was no immediate comment from the militant group. Hamas-led militants killed 1200 people in Israel in the 2023 attack, Israel's deadliest day, and took 251 hostages, 55 of whom remain in Gaza. Twenty hostages are believed to still be alive, according to Israeli authorities. Israel responded to the Hamas attacks with a military campaign that has killed more than 54,000 Palestinians, according to Gaza health authorities in the Hamas-run strip, and left much of the enclave in ruins, with a population of more than two million people largely displaced.
The Advertiser
5 hours ago
- The Advertiser
Biosecurity not competition a meaty issue in beef talks
Even if the federal government lowers barriers blocking imports of US beef, it would be no match for higher quality and cheaper to produce Australian cattle. Australia is considering granting more American beef producers access to the local market as a potential bargaining chip to strike a deal on tariffs, as the two nations' leaders prepare to potentially meet face-to-face for the first time. For biosecurity reasons, Australia imposes a soft ban on US beef. Cattle that can be proven to have been raised and slaughtered in the US are allowed into the Australian market, but large amounts of beef sent to American abattoirs come from Mexico or Canada, which are barred from importation. Challenges in tracing the origin of cattle means in practice beef imports are not allowed, until the US can show the same traceability systems Australia has in place. Australian beef producers urged the government not to loosen biosecurity protections. "Australia's biosecurity status is integral to the success and sustainability of our agricultural industries," National Farmers Federation president David Jochinke said. Prime Minister Anthony Albanese assured farmers the government would make no compromises on biosecurity. But as long as biosecurity was protected, Mr Albanese said he would be open to discussions about easing restrictions. David Humphreys, vice chair of industry body Western Beef Association, was open to the idea as well. As long as Australia's biosecurity standards were protected, it would be a beneficial outcome for all Australian farmers if it could be used as leverage to lower US tariffs, he said. Assuming US beef imports posed no disease risk, the impacts for Australian farmers from extra competition would be limited. "Australia has very competitive and relatively cheap beef production in comparison," Mr Humphreys told AAP. "Any beef that's coming in from the US is probably going to be targeting quite select segments of beef consumption, probably the cheaper cuts, produced beef products. "So it's not really competing with the premium Australian beef products that our beef farms produce." The low exchange rate of the Australian dollar as well as the high cost of transporting US beef also reduced the likelihood of it outcompeting homegrown products, he said. Local consumers are accustomed to leaner, higher-quality Australian beef and unlikely to be won over by fatty, hormone-injected American competitors. "I think there's not a lot of risk to Australian producers of beef, with this possibility of some limited US beef being imported into Australia," Mr Humphreys said. Australia's Department of Agriculture is reviewing its ban on Mexican and Canadian beef slaughtered in the US. Agriculture Minister Julie Collins said any decision to allow greater access for US beef would be based on science and evidence. Even if the federal government lowers barriers blocking imports of US beef, it would be no match for higher quality and cheaper to produce Australian cattle. Australia is considering granting more American beef producers access to the local market as a potential bargaining chip to strike a deal on tariffs, as the two nations' leaders prepare to potentially meet face-to-face for the first time. For biosecurity reasons, Australia imposes a soft ban on US beef. Cattle that can be proven to have been raised and slaughtered in the US are allowed into the Australian market, but large amounts of beef sent to American abattoirs come from Mexico or Canada, which are barred from importation. Challenges in tracing the origin of cattle means in practice beef imports are not allowed, until the US can show the same traceability systems Australia has in place. Australian beef producers urged the government not to loosen biosecurity protections. "Australia's biosecurity status is integral to the success and sustainability of our agricultural industries," National Farmers Federation president David Jochinke said. Prime Minister Anthony Albanese assured farmers the government would make no compromises on biosecurity. But as long as biosecurity was protected, Mr Albanese said he would be open to discussions about easing restrictions. David Humphreys, vice chair of industry body Western Beef Association, was open to the idea as well. As long as Australia's biosecurity standards were protected, it would be a beneficial outcome for all Australian farmers if it could be used as leverage to lower US tariffs, he said. Assuming US beef imports posed no disease risk, the impacts for Australian farmers from extra competition would be limited. "Australia has very competitive and relatively cheap beef production in comparison," Mr Humphreys told AAP. "Any beef that's coming in from the US is probably going to be targeting quite select segments of beef consumption, probably the cheaper cuts, produced beef products. "So it's not really competing with the premium Australian beef products that our beef farms produce." The low exchange rate of the Australian dollar as well as the high cost of transporting US beef also reduced the likelihood of it outcompeting homegrown products, he said. Local consumers are accustomed to leaner, higher-quality Australian beef and unlikely to be won over by fatty, hormone-injected American competitors. "I think there's not a lot of risk to Australian producers of beef, with this possibility of some limited US beef being imported into Australia," Mr Humphreys said. Australia's Department of Agriculture is reviewing its ban on Mexican and Canadian beef slaughtered in the US. Agriculture Minister Julie Collins said any decision to allow greater access for US beef would be based on science and evidence. Even if the federal government lowers barriers blocking imports of US beef, it would be no match for higher quality and cheaper to produce Australian cattle. Australia is considering granting more American beef producers access to the local market as a potential bargaining chip to strike a deal on tariffs, as the two nations' leaders prepare to potentially meet face-to-face for the first time. For biosecurity reasons, Australia imposes a soft ban on US beef. Cattle that can be proven to have been raised and slaughtered in the US are allowed into the Australian market, but large amounts of beef sent to American abattoirs come from Mexico or Canada, which are barred from importation. Challenges in tracing the origin of cattle means in practice beef imports are not allowed, until the US can show the same traceability systems Australia has in place. Australian beef producers urged the government not to loosen biosecurity protections. "Australia's biosecurity status is integral to the success and sustainability of our agricultural industries," National Farmers Federation president David Jochinke said. Prime Minister Anthony Albanese assured farmers the government would make no compromises on biosecurity. But as long as biosecurity was protected, Mr Albanese said he would be open to discussions about easing restrictions. David Humphreys, vice chair of industry body Western Beef Association, was open to the idea as well. As long as Australia's biosecurity standards were protected, it would be a beneficial outcome for all Australian farmers if it could be used as leverage to lower US tariffs, he said. Assuming US beef imports posed no disease risk, the impacts for Australian farmers from extra competition would be limited. "Australia has very competitive and relatively cheap beef production in comparison," Mr Humphreys told AAP. "Any beef that's coming in from the US is probably going to be targeting quite select segments of beef consumption, probably the cheaper cuts, produced beef products. "So it's not really competing with the premium Australian beef products that our beef farms produce." The low exchange rate of the Australian dollar as well as the high cost of transporting US beef also reduced the likelihood of it outcompeting homegrown products, he said. Local consumers are accustomed to leaner, higher-quality Australian beef and unlikely to be won over by fatty, hormone-injected American competitors. "I think there's not a lot of risk to Australian producers of beef, with this possibility of some limited US beef being imported into Australia," Mr Humphreys said. Australia's Department of Agriculture is reviewing its ban on Mexican and Canadian beef slaughtered in the US. Agriculture Minister Julie Collins said any decision to allow greater access for US beef would be based on science and evidence. Even if the federal government lowers barriers blocking imports of US beef, it would be no match for higher quality and cheaper to produce Australian cattle. Australia is considering granting more American beef producers access to the local market as a potential bargaining chip to strike a deal on tariffs, as the two nations' leaders prepare to potentially meet face-to-face for the first time. For biosecurity reasons, Australia imposes a soft ban on US beef. Cattle that can be proven to have been raised and slaughtered in the US are allowed into the Australian market, but large amounts of beef sent to American abattoirs come from Mexico or Canada, which are barred from importation. Challenges in tracing the origin of cattle means in practice beef imports are not allowed, until the US can show the same traceability systems Australia has in place. Australian beef producers urged the government not to loosen biosecurity protections. "Australia's biosecurity status is integral to the success and sustainability of our agricultural industries," National Farmers Federation president David Jochinke said. Prime Minister Anthony Albanese assured farmers the government would make no compromises on biosecurity. But as long as biosecurity was protected, Mr Albanese said he would be open to discussions about easing restrictions. David Humphreys, vice chair of industry body Western Beef Association, was open to the idea as well. As long as Australia's biosecurity standards were protected, it would be a beneficial outcome for all Australian farmers if it could be used as leverage to lower US tariffs, he said. Assuming US beef imports posed no disease risk, the impacts for Australian farmers from extra competition would be limited. "Australia has very competitive and relatively cheap beef production in comparison," Mr Humphreys told AAP. "Any beef that's coming in from the US is probably going to be targeting quite select segments of beef consumption, probably the cheaper cuts, produced beef products. "So it's not really competing with the premium Australian beef products that our beef farms produce." The low exchange rate of the Australian dollar as well as the high cost of transporting US beef also reduced the likelihood of it outcompeting homegrown products, he said. Local consumers are accustomed to leaner, higher-quality Australian beef and unlikely to be won over by fatty, hormone-injected American competitors. "I think there's not a lot of risk to Australian producers of beef, with this possibility of some limited US beef being imported into Australia," Mr Humphreys said. Australia's Department of Agriculture is reviewing its ban on Mexican and Canadian beef slaughtered in the US. Agriculture Minister Julie Collins said any decision to allow greater access for US beef would be based on science and evidence.
