BIARRITZ, France: Iran’s foreign minister paid a visit to a G7 summit in France on Sunday, an unexpected twist to a meeting already troubled by differences between US President Donald Trump and Western allies over a raft of issues, including Iran.
A White House official said France’s invitation to Mohammad Javad Zarif for talks on the sidelines of the gathering in the southwestern beachside town of Biarritz was “a surprise.”
Zarif met his French counterpart to assess what conditions could lead to a de-escalation of tensions between Tehran and Washington, a French official said.
Zarif also saw French President Emmanuel Macron during his brief stay, but the White House official said the Iranian minister did not meet any US officials before he flew out of Biarritz airport.
European leaders have struggled to calm a deepening confrontation between Iran and the United States since Trump pulled his country out of Iran’s internationally brokered 2015 nuclear deal last year and reimposed sanctions on the Iranian economy.
Earlier on Sunday, Trump appeared to brush aside French efforts to mediate with Iran, saying that while he was happy for Paris to reach out to Tehran he would carry on with his own initiatives.
Macron has taken the lead in trying to defuse tensions, fearing that a collapse of the nuclear deal could set the Middle East ablaze. He met Zarif on Friday ahead of the G7 summit to discuss ways of easing the crisis, including reducing some US sanctions or providing Iran with a compensation mechanism.
Iran wants to export a minimum of 700,000 barrels per day of its oil and ideally up to 1.5 million bpd if the West wants to negotiate with Tehran to save the 2015 deal, two Iranian officials and one diplomat told Reuters on Sunday.
However, Trump’s fellow G7 leaders failed on Saturday to persuade the US president to reissue oil sanction waivers that were granted last year to some buyers, but which came to end in May, a European diplomat familiar with the discussion said.
Trump, a turbulent presence at last year’s G7 gathering, insisted on Sunday that he was getting along well with other leaders of a group that also includes Britain, Canada, France, Germany, Italy and Japan.
But rifts emerged on issues from his intensifying trade war with China to the nuclear ambitions of both Iran and North Korea, and the question of whether Russian President Vladimir Putin should be readmitted to the group.
Russia was excluded from what used to be the G8 in 2014 after it annexed Ukraine’s Crimea and then backed an anti-Kiev rebellion in the industrial region of Donbas in eastern Ukraine.
A European official who declined to be named said Russia was the thorniest issue discussed over dinner on Saturday.
“(The conversation) became a bit tense over this idea of the G7 being a club of liberal democracies ... that point was clearly not shared by the US president,” the official said.
Trump’s argument was that on a number of issues, like Iran and Syria, it made more sense to have Putin involved in the talks given that Russia is a key player there.
New British Prime Minister Boris Johnson on Sunday congratulated Macron for hosting a difficult encounter.
“You’re doing well,” Johnson said on the sidelines of the summit. “You did very well last night, my God, that was a difficult one, you did really, you did really well.”
The G7 gathering is taking place against a backdrop of worries that a global economic downturn could be exacerbated by the escalating tariff war between Washington and Beijing.
Britain’s Johnson voiced concern on Saturday about creeping protectionism and said those who support tariffs “are at risk of incurring the blame for the downturn in the global economy.” Sitting across from Trump on Sunday, he said: “We’re in favor of trade peace on the whole, and dialling it down if we can.”
Italian Prime Minister Giuseppe Conte warned other leaders of the dangers of protectionism and urged Washington not to carry through on its threat to impose tariffs on German autos.
However, the White House doubled down on its aggressive stance toward trade with China.
White House spokeswoman Stephanie Grisham, explaining what Trump meant when he said earlier on Sunday that he had had second thoughts after announcing more tariff raises on Chinese goods last week, said that he simply regretted not hiking them higher.
Looking to broaden the gathering, Macron invited several African leaders to discuss problems facing their continent, while leaders from India, Australia, Chile and Spain joined the group for dinner on Sunday where the focus was on the environment and other issues.
However, senior US officials accused Macron of looking “to fracture the G7” by focusing on “niche issues” rather than major global concerns.
France denied this, pointing to Sunday’s initial session covering the economy, trade and security — areas that used to draw easy consensus but are now sources of great friction.
Trump up-ended last year’s G7 meeting in Canada, walking out early and disassociating himself from the final communique.
Amid the wrangling this time around, some potential positives emerged, with Trump and Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe agreeing in principle to core elements of a trade deal.
“It’s billions and billions of dollars. Tremendous for the farmers,” Trump said.
However, the two men appeared at odds over North Korea’s series of short-range missile launches.
Trump, who prizes his relationship with North Korean leader Kim Jong-un, said the launches did not violate an agreement and were in line with what others were doing. Abe, sitting across from him, said they breached UN resolutions.
At the start of the day, Trump said Britain would have a major trade deal with Washington after it leaves the European Union. Asked what his advice on Brexit was for Johnson, he replied: “He needs no advice, he is the right man for the job.”
While the transatlantic rift is the most stark, there are also deep divisions within the European camp, with Johnson making his G7 debut at a time when he is struggling to persuade EU capitals to renegotiate Britain’s exit from the bloc, which Johnson has said will happen on Oct. 31 come what may.
Trump caught off guard as Iranian foreign minister Zarif flies in to G7 summit
Trump caught off guard as Iranian foreign minister Zarif flies in to G7 summit
- Iranian foreign ministry says Zarif will not hold talks with Trump and his team
- Earlier Trump dampened down Emmanuel Macron's optimism on Iran talks
Iran’s supreme leader makes first public statement since ceasefire declared in Israel-Iran war
Khamenei spoke in a video broadcast on Iranian state television, his first appearance since June 19, looking and sounding more tired than he did only a week ago.
He told viewers that the U.S. had only intervened in the war because “it felt that if it did not intervene, the Zionist regime would be utterly destroyed.”
But he said, however, that the U.S. “achieved no gains from this war."
“The Islamic Republic was victorious and, in retaliation, delivered a hand slap to America’s face,” he said, in apparent reference to an Iranian missile attack on an American base in Qatar on Monday, which caused no casualties.
The 86-year-old Khamenei hasn't been seen in public since taking shelter in a secret location after the outbreak of the war June 13 when Israel attacked Iranian nuclear facilities and targeted top military commanders and scientists.
Following an American attack on June 22 that hit the nuclear sites with bunker-buster bombs, U.S. President Donald Trump was able to help negotiate a ceasefire that came into effect on Tuesday.
In his appearance on Thursday, he sat in front of plain brown curtains to give his address, similar to his June 19 message.
Spain PM says Gaza in ‘catastrophic situation of genocide’
- Sanchez mentioned a recent human rights report by the EU’s diplomatic service
- The report found “indications” that Israel was breaching its human rights obligations
BRUSSELS: Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez on Thursday said Gaza was in a “catastrophic situation of genocide” and urged the European Union to immediately suspend its cooperation deal with Israel.
The comments represent the strongest condemnation to date by the leader, an outspoken critic of the Israeli offensive in Gaza.
Speaking to reporters before an EU summit in Brussels, Sanchez mentioned a recent human rights report by the bloc’s diplomatic service which, he said, addressed “the catastrophic situation of genocide unfolding in Gaza.”
The report published last week found “indications” that Israel was breaching its human rights obligations under the deal, which forms the basis for trade ties.
The text cited Israel’s blockade of humanitarian aid for the Palestinian territory, the high number of civilian casualties, attacks on journalists and the massive displacement and destruction caused by the war.
Sanchez said it was “more than obvious” that Israel was violating its obligations and that the bloc should suspend the cooperation deal “immediately.”
“It makes no sense” that the bloc has imposed 18 rounds of sanctions on Russia for its invasion of Ukraine but, “in a double standard, is not even capable of suspending an association deal,” he added.
Suspending the EU-Israel accord outright would require unanimity among member states, something diplomats see as virtually impossible due to divisions within the bloc.
The Gaza war began after Hamas’s October 7, 2023 attack on Israel resulted in the deaths of 1,219 people, mostly civilians, according to an AFP tally based on official figures.
Palestinian militants also seized 251 hostages, with 49 still held in Gaza, including 27 the Israeli military says are dead.
Israel’s retaliatory military campaign has killed at least 56,156 people in Gaza, also mostly civilians, according to the territory’s Hamas-run health ministry. The United Nations considers its figures reliable.
Pope Leo laments ‘diabolical intensity’ of Middle East conflicts
- Leo appealed last month for Israel to allow more humanitarian aid to enter Gaza
VATICAN CITY: Pope Leo said on Thursday that conflicts in the Middle East were raging with an unprecedented “diabolical intensity” and appealed for greater respect for international law, in comments to Catholic bishops and aid agencies operating in the region.
At a meeting in the Vatican, the pontiff said countries in the region were being “devastated by wars, plundered by special interests, and covered by a cloud of hatred that renders the air unbreathable and toxic.”
“Today, violent conflict seems to be raging... with a diabolical intensity previously unknown,” he said, adding that the humanitarian situation in the Palestinian enclave of Gaza was “tragic and inhumane.”
Leo, elected on May 8 to replace the late Pope Francis, appealed last month for Israel to allow more humanitarian aid to enter Gaza. He did not name Israel in his remarks on Thursday.
The US-born pope also did not directly address the recent 12-day war between Israel and Iran that also saw the United States bomb suspected Iranian nuclear facilities but he called for countries to show better respect for international law.
“It is truly distressing to see the principle of ‘might makes right’ prevailing in so many situations today, all for the sake of legitimising the pursuit of self-interest,” he said.
“It is troubling to see that the force of international law and humanitarian law seems no longer to be binding, replaced by the alleged right to coerce others,” Leo added.
Can US-Iran nuclear diplomacy still work after strikes?
- Trump tells NATO summit US strikes ‘obliterated’ nuclear sites, says ‘we’re going to talk’ with Iran next week, may sign an agreement
- Analysts say inconclusive strikes may push parties back to the negotiating table — only this time including regional powers
LONDON: Speaking at the NATO summit in The Hague on Wednesday, US President Donald Trump indicated that the door is open to diplomacy with Iran, just days after he ordered B-2 bombers to attack Iranian nuclear facilities.
Trump once more hailed what he calls the “massive, precision strike” on three of Iran’s nuclear sites, Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan, on June 22, adding that “no other military on Earth could have done it.”
His comments followed claims in a leaked assessment by the US Defense Intelligence Agency suggesting the US strikes had failed to destroy Iran’s stockpile of enriched uranium or its centrifuges — succeeding only in setting back the program mere months.
In response to the leaked report, Trump doubled down on earlier statements that Tehran’s nuclear program had been “obliterated.” He went on to say “we’re going to talk” with Iran next week, adding they may sign an agreement.
Asked if Washington is planning to lift sanctions on Iran, Trump said the Iranians “just had a war” and they “fought it bravely,” adding that China can buy oil from Iran if it wants, as the country will “need money to get back into shape.”
Whether Trump’s comments are a sign that the US intends to draft a new nuclear deal with Iran remains to be seen. What such a deal might look like in the wake of the past fortnight’s events is also anyone’s guess. One thing that is clear is that diplomacy seems the only viable option.
It was almost 10 years ago, on July 14, 2015, that representatives of the US, China, France, Germany, Russia, the UK, EU and Iran gathered in Vienna to finalize the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, better known simply as the Iran nuclear deal.
In exchange for sanctions relief, among other things, Iran agreed to limit enrichment of a reduced stockpile of 300 kg of uranium to 3.7 percent — insufficient to produce a bomb but aligned with its claims that its nuclear program was designed solely for generating electricity.
The architect of the deal, which was several years in the making, was US President Barack Obama, who said “principled diplomacy and … America’s willingness to engage directly with Iran opened the door to talks.”
Within three years, the deal was in ruins, undone by Obama’s successor, Donald Trump.
According to inspectors from the UN’s International Atomic Energy Agency, the IAEA, Iran had been sticking to its side of the bargain. But on May 8, 2018, during his first term as president, Trump unilaterally terminated America’s participation in the JCPOA and reimposed sanctions.
Iran, he said, had “negotiated the JCPOA in bad faith, and the deal gave the Iranian regime too much in exchange for too little.”
This week, in the wake of Israel’s surprise attack targeting the heart of Iran’s nuclear program — and Trump’s equally surprise decision to join in — the prospect of reviving any kind of deal with Tehran might seem distant, at best.
But some analysts believe that a new nuclear rapprochement between the US and Iran could be closer than ever — and not only despite the clashes of the past two weeks, but perhaps because of them.
Ibrahim Al-Marashi, associate professor in the Department of History at California State University San Marcos, said there was no doubt that “among the Iranian public, previously ambivalent about the nuclear issue, the optics of being bombed for programs still under IAEA inspection may rally new domestic support for pursuing a deterrent.”
Furthermore, the attacks by Israel and the US have also “degraded the credibility of international institutions such as the IAEA.
“When countries that comply with inspections and international law are attacked anyway, it undermines the incentive structure that sustains the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons regime, NPT, which Iran ratified in 1970, and the Islamic Republic of Iran endorsed in 1996.
“Why sign treaties or allow inspectors in if they do not shield you from military coercion? This is a dangerous message.”
But, he added, “diplomatic alternatives were, and still are, available” and, for all its flaws, the JCPOA model is not a bad one to consider.
“The 2015 deal, although imperfect, successfully rolled back large portions of Iran’s nuclear program and subjected it to the most intrusive inspection regime in the world,” he said.
“Its collapse was not inevitable; it was a political choice, dismantled by unilateral US withdrawal. Efforts to revive the deal have sputtered, and with the bombs falling the path back to diplomacy looked more distant than ever.
“But it is the only path that has worked before — and the only one likely to work again.”
But only with key adjustments.
As Saudi Arabia and other members of the GCC argued at the time, the JCPOA — put together in great secrecy and without consulting the Gulf states — was insufficiently tough and always doomed to fail.
Now experts argue that a return to diplomacy is not only vital for the stability of the region but that any new nuclear deal must be framed with the direct input of those states most exposed to the consequences of diplomatic failure: the Arab Gulf states.
“All that is true,” said Sir John Jenkins, former UK ambassador to Saudi Arabia, Iraq and Syria.
“The core point is that the JCPOA bought us between 10 and 15 years, depending on the issue and the associated sunset clause. That was designed to provide time for a new regime to be put in place to contain and deter Iran after the JCPOA expired — which would now only be five years away.
“But the Obama administration, followed by the E3 (the security coalition of the UK, Germany and France), seemed to think that once it had been signed it was such a wonderful achievement that they could turn to other things entirely. That was a mistake.
“This time it needs to be different. And there is an opportunity to start constructing a new security order in the region which involves regional states from the moment of creation rather than as some afterthought.”
Jim Walsh, senior researcher at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s Security Studies Program, is adamant that when Trump pulled the plug in 2018, “the JCPOA was already working.
“Every intelligence agency said that Iran was in compliance with the agreement and I defy you to find one serious entity that was charging that Iran was in violation of the JCPOA in the three years from 2015 to 2018.
“They even hung on to their end of the bargain after Trump pulled out, for a solid year, until it was politically untenable.”
The IAEA had large teams of inspectors on the ground, Iran had agreed to requirements that no country had ever agreed to before, “and this was consistent with what people in my trade would call a capability or latency decision.”
This meant “you have the option so that you can move in that direction if you need to, but you do not cross the line because the costs of crossing it are higher than the benefits.”
And, he says, despite all that has happened since, especially in the past fortnight, Iran is fundamentally in the same place today — ready to deal.
“What is Iran’s leverage here in negotiations with the IAEA or with the Europeans or with the Americans? It’s that they can turn the dial up on enrichment and turn it down, and they can install advanced centrifuges and then take them apart.
“This is part of a political game, because they don’t have a lot of ways to put leverage on their opponents.”
He believes that if Iran really wanted an actual bomb, rather than the threat of one as a bargaining chip, it would have had one by now.
“Producing highly enriched uranium is the technically hardest part of the project, and moving to weaponization is more of an engineering problem.” The fact that Iran has not done so is the real clue to the way ahead.
“I’ve worked for 20 years to prevent Iran from getting a nuclear weapon, but it would be hard to argue that they don’t have some justification. Let’s be super clear: the country that’s attacking them, Israel, is a nuclear state.
“But if they wanted to build a bomb, they’ve had 18 years to do so, so someone has to explain to me why that hasn’t happened.
“As far back as 2007 the director of US national intelligence said Iran had the technical wherewithal to build a weapon, and the only remaining obstacle was the political will to do so.”
And, despite Trump’s claim that the US attacks had “obliterated” the Iranian nuclear program, political will may still be all that is preventing Iran becoming a nuclear state.
Dan Sagir, an Israeli researcher and lecturer on the topic of Israel’s own nuclear deterrence and its impact on the Arab-Israeli conflict in the Middle East, says that if the US and Iran do return to the talks that were already underway when Israel launched “Operation Rising Lion” on June 12, “any deal that emerges is not going to be as solid as the previous one.”
“So Trump bombed Fordow,” said Sagir. “But where is the 400 kg of highly enriched uranium? The Iranians, who are very talented in this field, will say, ‘You bombed it. You buried it.’ But do we know that’s correct? We’ll never know.
“If they still have it, they can get the bomb within a year. If they don’t have it, it’s two-and-a-half years. In any case, the game is not over.”
In fact, said Walsh of MIT, there is “every indication” that the uranium, which the IAEA says has been enriched to a near-weapons-grade 60 percent — a claim dismissed by Iran as based on “forged documents provided by the Zionist regime” — is not buried within the Fordow complex.
“In May, Iran’s foreign minister warned the IAEA that they would take precautions. On June 13, the head of Iran’s Atomic Energy Organization also said they were going to take action, and on that day, according to satellite imagery, a convoy of trucks was outside Fordow, and the next day they were gone.
“So I would guess that they still have a lot of nuclear material somewhere that they could very quickly upgrade to weapons-grade material (which requires 90 percent enrichment).”
Whether or not the current fragile ceasefire between Israel and Iran lasts, details emerging of America’s attack on Fordow and the other Iranian nuclear facilities appear only to reinforce the conclusion that a new nuclear deal with Iran is the only way forward.
“You cannot bomb the knowledge of how to build a centrifuge out of the heads of the Iranians,” said Walsh. “You can’t bomb away 18 years of experience.
“This is a big, mature program and dropping a few bombs isn’t going to change that. You can blow up equipment, and kill scientists, but we’re not talking about Robert Oppenheimer (the US physicist who led the team that made the first atomic bomb) in 1945.
“They’ve been at this for 18 years and now we’re at the management phase, not at the invention stage. They’re going to be able to reconstitute that program if they want to. There is no military solution to this problem.”
Security Council hears of record violations against children in conflicts, as UN report sparks outcry over Gaza
- Abuses span 25 countries and include killings, maiming, recruitment, abductions, sexual violence, attacks on schools and hospitals, denial of humanitarian aid
- Israel guilty of most violations by a single country: 2,000 children verified killed or maimed in 2024; UNICEF reports more 50,000 children killed, injured or maimed since Oct. 7, 2023
- Algerian envoy slams report author over ‘insufficient public engagement’ given scale of Gaza tragedy; US envoy says report does not do enough to highlight Hamas crimes
NEW YORK CITY: The UN Security Council convened on Wednesday to address what officials described as an unprecedented surge in grave violations against children during armed conflicts around the world.
It followed the publication of a devastating annual report by the secretary-general’s special representative for children and armed conflict, Virginia Gamba. It documented 41,370 grave violations during 2024, a 25 percent increase compared with the previous year, and the highest number since the UN’s Monitoring and Reporting Mechanism was established in 2005.
Verified abuses of children spanned 25 countries and included killings, maiming, recruitment, abductions, sexual violence, attacks on schools and hospitals, and denial of access to humanitarian assistance.
“This year marked a devastating new record,” Gamba told council members. “Behind these numbers are the shattered stories, dreams and futures of over 22,000 children.”
She cited a sharp increase in “compounded violations,” in which children were abducted, recruited and sexually abused, often simultaneously, in the context of deteriorating humanitarian crises.
Israel was responsible for the highest number of violations by a single country against children in 2024, the report found. Gamba’s office was able to verify more than 2,000 children killed or maimed; more than 500 attacks on schools and 148 on hospitals; and over 5,000 incidents in which humanitarian access was denied, including 2,263 in Gaza alone.
Algeria’s ambassador to the UN, Amar Bendjama, delivered a pointed rebuke of what he described as “insufficient public engagement” by the special representative’s office, noting that Gamba had made only two public statements on Gaza during 2024, despite the staggering toll of the conflict there on children.
“How can we ignore the 7,188 verified grave violations attributed to Israeli forces?” Bendjama asked. “This is a man-made crisis … The children of Gaza deserve immediate, effective protection and accountability for those perpetrating these abhorrent violations.”
He also underscored the fact that the statistics in the report reflected only verified violations and added: “For sure, the reality is far worse.
“The (special representative’s) statements fall critically short of the decisive and sustained condemnation warranted by the immense scale of the crisis. This limited public engagement starkly contrasts with the rapidly deteriorating reality on the ground, where children’s right to life is denied every single moment in Gaza.”
He then presented to council members the numbers of incidents reported by international humanitarian organizations, including UNICEF, which is operating on the ground in Gaza and has reported more than 50,000 children killed or injured since the war between Israel and Hamas began in late 2023.
As of May this year, 5,000 children between the ages of 6 months and 5 years old had been diagnosed with acute malnutrition, he said, nearly double the total number reported the previous month. About half of the 1.9 million people internally displaced within Gaza are children, who are living amid the widespread destruction of water, sanitation and healthcare infrastructure.
“How can we ignore these figures? How can we ignore these children?” Bendjama asked.
Stephane Dujarric, the spokesperson for UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, said that Guterres fully supports Gamba’s work, adding: “The report is done under a very specific methodology of verification, and we are very clear in the report that this is the tip of the iceberg.
“(Gamba’s) report is done according to a methodology which is given to her through her mandate by the Security Council, which is extremely specific. And I think the report itself is extremely clear in saying these are only the cases they have been able to verify in what is an ongoing conflict, and also being very clear by the fact that this only represents, very likely, a fraction of the children who’ve been killed or maimed.”
Asked by Arab News about the value of a report when the monitoring system on which it is based is admittedly very flawed, and whether it might be time to update the mechanisms, Dujarric said: “I will leave it to the wisdom of the Security Council members to decide whether or not to change the mandate they have given the secretary-general in creating that office many years ago.
“I think we’ve all said that the system could be perfected. At minimum, it ensures that the plight of children who are suffering on the front lines of armed conflict is not forgotten.”
Dorothy Shea, the US charge d’affaires to the UN, defended Israel over its military operations in Gaza and placed the blame for the ongoing conflict squarely on Hamas. She emphasized Israel’s right to self-defense, and told fellow council members that the country had “taken numerous measures to limit harm to civilians and address humanitarian needs.”
She added: “The loss of civilian life in Gaza is tragic. But the responsibility for this conflict rests with Hamas, which could stop the fighting today by freeing the hostages and agreeing to the ceasefire terms already accepted by Israel.”
Shea cited the attacks by Hamas against Israel on Oct. 7, 2023, that killed 1,200 people, including 40 children, and in particular highlighted the deaths of Ariel and Kfir Bibas, Israeli siblings who were 4 years old and 9 months old, respectively.
“Hamas murdered the Bibas children and then paraded their coffins through the streets,” she said. “This terrorist organization continues to use civilians, including children, as human shields and refuses to accept a ceasefire that would bring calm to Gaza.”
Shea also accused Hamas of obstructing deliveries of aid and targeting humanitarian workers. “On June 11, Hamas murdered eight innocent Palestinians working on behalf of the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation,” she told the council.
The US envoy expressed disappointment that the latest report did not sufficiently highlight what she described as the “full scale” of abuses by Hamas and added: “We strongly condemn Hamas’ actions.”
UNICEF’s director of child protection, Sheema Sen Gupta, told council members that “the world is failing to protect children from the horrors of war.”
In 2024, more than 11,900 children were killed or maimed worldwide, she said, with explosive weapons in populated areas cited as the leading cause of deaths and injuries. She described this as a “systemic failure,” and the use of such weapons as “a death sentence waiting to be triggered.”
Sen Gupta also highlighted a 35 percent increase in sexual violence against children, a form of abuse that remains severely underreported because of stigma and fear.
“These are not just grave violations in technical terms,” she said. “These are acts of brutality that destroy lives.”
Conflict zones such as Somalia, Nigeria, the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Haiti were highlighted as major hot spots for violations of children’s rights.
In Congo alone, nearly 10,000 rapes were reported in the first two months of 2025, 40 percent of which involved children. In Haiti, where gangs control vast areas, there has been a dramatic surge in gang rapes and child abductions.
Both Gamba and Sen Gupta emphasized the fact that many of the violations stem from the deliberate targeting of civilians, disregard for ceasefire agreements, and the systematic undermining of humanitarian access. The secretary-general’s report also underscored the continuing sense of impunity that perpetrators enjoy.
However, the officials pointed to some progress. In 2024, for example, more than 16,000 children formerly associated with military forces and other armed groups were released and received reintegration support.
Agreements were also reached with armed forces in Syria, Colombia, the Central African Republic and Haiti, with commitments made to end the recruitment of children and protect civilian infrastructure.
“These examples remind us that where there is political will, progress is possible,” said Sen Gupta.
The UN officials called for urgent measures to address the problems, including: an end to the use of explosive weapons in populated areas; protection of aid workers and humanitarian access; engagement with nonstate armed groups to implement action plans; funding for reintegration and mental health services to help affected children; and the enforcement of international humanitarian law and accountability for violators.
Gamba urged all states to ensure that any political, financial or military support provided to parties involved in conflicts comes with explicit conditions regarding the protection of children.
“Children are not soldiers, they are not collateral damage, they are not bargaining chips,” Sen Gupta said. “They are children and they deserve justice, safety and a future.”
