Women training to become midwives and nurses in Afghanistan have reportedly been barred from continuing their education, dealing another blow to women’s rights under the Taliban regime.

Five educational institutions across Afghanistan confirmed that the Taliban had ordered their closure. This decision effectively ends the last remaining avenue for women to pursue further education in the country. Videos circulating online show distraught students reacting to the announcement, highlighting the emotional toll of the ban.

The Taliban’s actions align with their broader policy on female education, which has barred teenage girls from secondary schools and women from higher education since they regained control in August 2021. Although the group has repeatedly claimed that these bans are temporary and dependent on “Islamic curriculum reforms,” no progress has been made toward reopening schools for girls.

The ban is particularly significant as midwifery and nursing are among the few professions still accessible to Afghan women under Taliban rules. These roles are crucial in Afghanistan’s healthcare system, as cultural norms prohibit male doctors from treating female patients without the presence of a male guardian. The removal of midwifery training risks exacerbating already severe healthcare challenges, particularly for women in rural areas.

This latest restriction further marginalizes Afghan women, who face increasing limitations in education, employment, and public life. The closure of midwifery courses signals not only a loss of professional opportunities but also a deepening crisis in women’s access to essential healthcare services.

International organizations and human rights advocates have condemned the Taliban’s policies, urging them to prioritize women’s rights and education. However, tangible action from the global community to influence these policies remains limited.

The fragile ceasefire between Israel and Hezbollah is under significant strain after deadly airstrikes and mortar exchanges raised fears of renewed conflict.

On Monday night, Israeli airstrikes in southern Lebanon killed ten people, according to Lebanon’s health ministry. The strikes targeted Hezbollah fighters, weapon launchers, and infrastructure, marking the most extensive Israeli action since the ceasefire was brokered last week. Israel called on Lebanese authorities to curb Hezbollah’s “hostile activity.”

Earlier in the day, Hezbollah launched two mortar rounds at an Israeli military base near the disputed border, citing what it described as “repeated violations” by Israel. The attack caused no casualties but heightened tensions.

The ceasefire, mediated by the United States and France, officially began last week to end 14 months of hostilities. The U.S. State Department acknowledged the violations but stated that the truce is “largely holding.”

The agreement includes:

• A 60-day window for Hezbollah to withdraw its armed presence from the area between the Blue Line—the unofficial Israel-Lebanon border—and the Litani River.
• A corresponding withdrawal of Israeli forces from the same region.
• Deployment of Lebanese army units and UN peacekeepers to secure the area.

The conflict erupted on October 8, 2023, when Hezbollah launched rockets into northern Israel following a Hamas-led attack in southern Israel. Israel responded with a robust military campaign against Hezbollah, citing security concerns for its displaced northern residents.

Lebanese officials report over 3,960 fatalities, predominantly civilians, and one million displaced individuals during the hostilities. These figures underscore the human toll of the violence, particularly in Hezbollah-dominated regions.

South Korea’s President Yoon Suk-yeol declared martial law on Tuesday night for the first time in over five decades, citing threats to national security and alleged “anti-state forces.” However, the dramatic move was swiftly struck down by parliament and met with widespread protests.

In a televised address at 23:00 local time, President Yoon announced his decision, framing it as necessary to “crush anti-state forces wreaking havoc” in the country. While referencing tensions with North Korea, the declaration appeared to be driven by escalating political pressures and a series of setbacks for Yoon’s administration.

The martial law decree placed the military in control, leading to the rapid deployment of troops, helicopters, and police around the National Assembly. It included orders to suspend parliamentary activity, restrict media freedom, and ban public gatherings.

The opposition, led by Democratic Party leader Lee Jae-myung, condemned the declaration as unconstitutional. Even members of Yoon’s own conservative People’s Power Party criticized the move, calling it a grave misstep.

Lee urged citizens to protest and called on lawmakers to convene immediately. “Tanks, armoured vehicles, and soldiers cannot silence democracy,” he said, rallying MPs and the public to resist.

Hundreds of demonstrators gathered outside the National Assembly, chanting “No martial law!” Despite the heavy military presence, protests remained largely peaceful. Lawmakers navigated through barricades and military personnel to reach the chamber.

Shortly after 01:00 Wednesday, parliament convened with 190 of its 300 members present. In a decisive vote, the martial law declaration was invalidated.

The failed attempt to impose martial law has significantly damaged Yoon’s political standing. Opposition leaders have labeled the move a “desperate power grab,” and even within his party, dissent is growing.

Observers note that this episode reflects deepening political divisions in South Korea, with the military’s brief involvement further complicating the situation. The swift parliamentary rejection highlights the resilience of democratic institutions in the country despite the crisis.