Over 230,000 Afghans left Iran in June ahead of return deadline
More than 230,000 Afghans left Iran in June, most of them deported, as returns surge ahead of a Tehran-set deadline, the United Nations migration agency said on Monday.
From June 1-28, 233,941 people returned from Iran to Afghanistan, International Organization for Migration spokesman Avand Azeez Agha told AFP, with 131,912 returns recorded in the week of June 21-28 alone.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Arab News
an hour ago
- Arab News
Israel must be pressured into a full ceasefire
For a dozen days, the eyes of the world were focused on Israel's aggression on Iran and its consequences. The ramifications could have been 100 times worse, with the region plunged into a catastrophic war. Yet, in those two weeks, Israel's genocide in Gaza was not on hold, with more than 860 Palestinians killed in that time. The regime of occupation and apartheid in the West Bank also intensified. Palestinians can only dream of a ceasefire. Unlike the rest of the world, the Israeli leadership has shown itself willing and capable of prosecuting multiple fronts at the same time. Yes, European leaders did make references to Gaza throughout the Iran war, but they made no new policy shifts. Netanyahu successfully distracted them, releasing the pressure that was building on Israel and obtaining bizarre commitments to the country's right to self-defense even though it was undeniably the aggressor. Palestinians also have a right to self-defense, in theory, but it is akin to blasphemy to invoke it — ditto for Syrians, Lebanese and Iranians. In more than 30 years, I have yet to hear this expressed a single time by a European or American leader. Selective morality is barely camouflaged. Palestinians in Gaza await their doom. A lethal lottery of life haunts their existence. The death rattle may come courtesy of bombs, disease or starvation. Families have told me how they crave instantaneous collective death, not the macabre and tortuous process of emaciation, the transition from human to spectral presence. The horrors in Gaza have become normalized. When Israel first bombed a hospital, a degree of shock wafted around the globe. Since then, every single one of Gaza's 35 hospitals has endured an Israeli attack. When one Israeli hospital was struck by an Iranian missile, Israelis stood appalled. European leaders did make references to Gaza throughout the Iran war, but they made no new policy shifts Chris Doyle The starvation of Palestinians in Gaza continues unabated. The fuel blockade is in force, meaning water wells cannot be pumped. Potable water is akin to liquid gold. A fresh way to die is imminent — death by thirst. The Gaza hunger games has food distribution points nestled in the heart of militarized zones. This means walking miles to join the starving hordes who dare to dodge the bullets and shells to scrap for lifesaving food boxes. Thus far, at least 549 Palestinians have been killed at these four locations since May 26, according to Gaza Health Ministry figures. Sixty lives alone were terminated by a barrage of tank shells. Anti-Palestinian groups ranted that Israeli forces had not committed these atrocities. This latest lie fell apart when even Israeli officials conceded the point. Israeli forces have also admitted they were ordered to open fire at unarmed Palestinians in food queues, even if they posed no threat. Who knows how many of Gaza's 2.3 million inhabitants remain alive? The official death toll hovers at about 56,000, but academic evaluations show the figure could be far higher. Two surveys indicate the official figures may be as much as 40 percent too low. One survey estimated that excess mortality — those who have died due to the indirect consequences of Israel's genocide — may have been 8,500 in January. The survivors have been hemmed in to just 17 percent of the Gaza Strip. Rumors encircle Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, as ever. Does he want to prepare the way for elections? Will he bring military operations in Gaza to a halt? This does not guarantee the release of the hostages. Given that he has just terminated the last remaining UN food distribution program in the north, the militarized food distribution system will not be abandoned. Can the hostages' families dent the bloodied will of the coalition's leaders? Their cause is backed by as many as three-quarters of Israelis, who want a ceasefire in exchange for the return of hostages. Trump issued the most dramatic ultimatum in recent history, ordering Israeli planes back from their mission to bomb Iran Chris Doyle The ceasefire with Iran must be buttressed with an end to the genocide in Gaza. Halting the genocide in Gaza requires a reheating of the cauldron of pressure on Israel that saw two Cabinet ministers sanctioned last month by the UK, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and Norway. It means retreading the weary debates of what other measures are required. Above all, it requires determined steps from the US and European powers that compel Israel to stop. President Donald Trump last week issued the most dramatic ultimatum in recent history, ordering Israeli planes back from their mission to bomb Iran. 'All planes will turn around and head home, while doing a friendly 'Plane Wave' to Iran,' he posted on social media. It is time for just such a decisive blow to the Netanyahu solar plexus from Trump by demanding that Israel permanently halt its attacks on Gaza and the West Bank and allow all humanitarian agencies full unhindered access to Gaza, while Hamas releases the remaining hostages. Trump should also insist on an end to the Israeli occupation and the creation of a viable Palestinian state — but that is wishful thinking. Trump could back this up by encouraging, in private if needs be, European states to be even tougher on Israel. Do this and the president could be heading to Oslo in October to pick up a much-cherished peace prize.
Al Arabiya
an hour ago
- Al Arabiya
Lebanon seeks guarantees from Israel as US demands Hezbollah disarmed
Lebanon seeks guarantees that Israeli forces fully withdraw from Lebanese territory in response to a US demand that Beirut formally commit to disarming militant group Hezbollah, a Lebanese official said Monday. Lebanese leaders who took office in the aftermath of a war between Israel and Hezbollah last year have repeatedly vowed a state monopoly on bearing arms while demanding Israel comply with a November ceasefire that ended the fighting. The Lebanese government official told AFP that in a recent visit, US envoy Tom Barrack had presented the demand for Beirut to officially commit to start disarming the Iran-backed group as stipulated in the November agreement, along with a full Israeli withdrawal. President Joseph Aoun, Prime Minister Nawaf Salam and parliament speaker Nabih Berri -- who is a key Hezbollah ally -- 'are preparing a response,' said the official on condition of anonymity as they were not authorized to brief the media. With Barrack, Washington's ambassador to Turkey and special envoy to Syria, expected back in Beirut by mid-July, the Lebanese leaders 'will demand a halt to Israeli violations of the ceasefire, Israel's withdrawal from southern Lebanon, the release of prisoners (detained during the war) and the demarcation of the border,' said the official. According to the official, Barrack in his June 19 visit also asked that Lebanon work on securing its border with Syria and pursue economic reforms demanded by international creditors. Aoun and Salam took power early this year as the balance of power shifted following the Israel-Hezbollah war that left the militant group -- long an important player in Lebanese politics -- severely weakened. Lebanese authorities say they have been dismantling Iran-backed Hezbollah's military infrastructure in the south, near the Israeli border. Israel has continued to strike Lebanon despite the November ceasefire, claiming to hit Hezbollah targets and accusing Beirut of not doing enough to disarm the group. According to the ceasefire agreement, Hezbollah is to pull its fighters back north of the Litani river, some 30 kilometers (20 miles) from the Israeli frontier. Israel was to withdraw its troops from all of Lebanon, but has kept them deployed in five points it deemed strategic. Meanwhile Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Saar said on Monday that his government was 'interested' in normalizing ties with Lebanon and neighboring Syria, which both do not recognize Israel and have been technically at war with it since its creation in 1948. There was no comment from Beirut or Damascus, but the Lebanese government official told AFP normalization was not among the US envoy's demands.
Arab News
an hour ago
- Arab News
The earthquake's lessons and the maps in the balance
The latest war in the Middle East, both in terms of the course it took and its outcomes, resembled an earthquake. It was the latest of the earthquakes to hit the region: following the 1967 war, the 1973 war, Anwar Sadat's visit to Jerusalem, the victory of the Iranian revolution and the US invasion of Iraq, to give a few examples. Earthquakes tend to change the trajectory of nations and the configuration of maps. Especially consequential in this regard are the conclusions that decision-makers draw from their assessment of the epicenter and its surroundings. One day, I was going over Dr. Osama Al-Baz's journey with him. President Sadat's trip to Jerusalem and its aftermath was the first issue President Hosni Mubarak's chief of staff and I discussed. He told me the story of Sadat's visit to Damascus before the famous trip. He told me about the visible discomfort he had seen on President Hafez Assad's face after his guest informed him of his decision. He then cited Sadat, saying that a leader must sometimes make difficult and unpopular decisions if he concludes that it is vital to his country's future. Sadat added that he respected Assad's decision to prioritize the stability and popular standing of his regime. However, he also spoke of his apprehension for Syria, as he feared the latter could be compelled to take the path of peace later on, accepting even more unpalatable terms than it could have obtained if Assad had joined Egypt. The same, he said, applied to Yasser Arafat. Al-Baz said that Sadat came up with the idea of visiting Jerusalem, not the Americans. It was the conclusion he drew from his reading of Egypt's economic trajectory and its need for peace, as well as his reading of the balance of power, the strategic relationship between the US and Israel, and the Soviet Union's decline. He added that short-sighted policies only serve to perpetuate suffering: our countries must join the march of progress and development; they must strive to reclaim their rights without artillery, corpses and carnage. Short-sighted politics amounts to leaving the resolution of crises in the hands of a doctor called 'time' Ghassan Charbel Al-Baz's remarks came to mind as I followed the trajectory Syria has taken, deciding to withdraw, at least militarily, from this conflict. Our conversation also came to me as I watched Israeli jets raining death on the Palestinians, who have resorted to banging pots and pans in the hope of bringing an end to the famine and the suffering of their children in Gaza. I was also struck by Al-Baz's remarks toward the end of our second session. He felt that he had gone too far in praising Sadat when he was serving Mubarak. He glanced at the walls of his office and said, 'I'll say more over dinner at the restaurant in Cairo,' seemingly hinting that the walls in our countries have ears. His comments about short-sighted policy stood out to me. Short-sighted politics amounts to leaving the resolution of crises in the hands of a doctor called 'time.' It is to prefer fleeting victories, regardless of their cost, to durable solutions and the gains they bring. Benjamin Netanyahu is a master of such policies and his have left the region bloodied. In his first meeting with Arafat, Netanyahu, with a blunt tone that verged on disrespectful, told the Palestinian leader that he did not support the Oslo Accords. He then did everything he could to push his legitimate Palestinian partner aside, chasing his dream of erasing the Palestinian people and seizing what remains of their land. With regard to Oslo's failure, we should also mention the role played by the suicide bombings of Hamas and Islamic Jihad. These operations led to the militarization of the Palestinian Intifada. Arafat had himself failed to resist the allure of militarization, which he felt would create a bulwark against the rising popularity of Hamas and Islamic Jihad. Israeli society was beginning to gear toward the right at the time. Netanyahu's political program was gaining ground. President Mahmoud Abbas tried to keep Palestinian decisions in the hands of the Palestinian Authority and the Palestine Liberation Organization, but shifting regional balances in the aftermath of the American invasion of Iraq drastically reduced his capacity to do so. Iran was developing its missile and tunnel programs, effectively placing the decision of war with Israel in its hands. As a result, the fate of Gaza, the West Bank, the Golan Heights and Lebanon became tied to the Iranian-Israeli conflict, and the years of proxy conflict between the two finally came to a head with the recent direct clashes. Will the Trump administration conclude that Israel must be forced to take the path of peace with the Palestinians? Ghassan Charbel In recent years, the maps of several regional countries have seemed to hang in the balance. The side these maps would fall on seemed to hinge on the outcome of the conflict between Iran and Israel, and on the outcome of the deep, long-standing rivalry between the US and Iran. During this time, Tehran repeatedly told visitors, including the late Iraqi President Jalal Talabani, that it was ready to negotiate with the Americans on everything 'from Afghanistan to Lebanon.' But 'the tumor' (Israel) would not be included in any settlement, Iran emphasized, as its Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei consistently insisted on the need to eradicate it. We are now watching truly horrifying scenes. The Israeli military machine is at the height of its powers. The chasm has never been bigger. Iran, meanwhile, has just watched its generals and scientists being buried after Israeli warplanes had dominated its airspace for days. The American strike on its nuclear facilities was a brutal and highly symbolic message, regardless of Tehran's insistence that it had won the war. It is clear that the US is the arbiter of the truce between Iran and Israel. It is also the only channel through which an agreement to end the Gaza massacre can pass. It is the only power capable of helping Lebanon if it chooses to rein in Israeli aggression. It alone can keep Iraq from going up in flames and can stabilize Syria's new authorities. The question remains: will the Trump administration conclude that Israel must be forced to take the path of peace with the Palestinians? The fate of the maps also depends on the conclusion Netanyahu draws from his wars on multiple fronts. It also depends on the lesson Khamenei sees in the funeral processions and the American offensive. Some calm is needed to determine whether any reassessment is possible. Could a government capable of making a difficult decision be formed in Israel, putting the country on a path toward a two-state solution? Can Iran show that it is willing to return to a less risky, less confrontational approach? The fate of the region's nations and maps hinges on the conclusions that Trump, Netanyahu and Khamenei reach. This article first appeared in Asharq Al-Awsat.
