The post UN Watch Welcomes Canada’s Reversal: Ottawa Opposes Iran on UN Committee Shaping Women’s Rights appeared first on UN Watch.

UN Watch Executive Director Hillel Neuer appeared on the Brian Kilmeade Show with Fox News to discuss Iran’s weakening regime, the future of Hamas disarmament in Gaza, and Europe’s growing crisis.

Conversation Highlights:

Brian Kilmeade: Hillel, as you look at what’s happening in the Middle East and Iran situation, how would you characterize the alliance between the Russians, the Iranians, and the Chinese?

Hillel Neuer: They’re working very closely. Their interests are the same. It’s to weaken the West. It’s to weaken America. It’s to support extremist elements like Hamas, and the things that are happening in France, we’re seeing a complete destabilization of one of the most important countries in Europe.

And according to French journalist Caroline Forest, there’s every reason to believe that elements from Russia and Iran might, in various ways, be encouraging the acts of vandalism and crime and riots that have been plaguing France.

It’s across Europe. It didn’t seem accidental; they were using similar tactics. So whether it’s all coordinated or there are state elements encouraging this to weaken the West, it’s something to be concerned about. These regimes also get involved in elections, sometimes trying to support extremist elements on different sides.

Brian Kilmeade:  The regime in Iran has got to change.

Hillel Neuer: That’s right. That is the head of the snake, and until it falls, you’re going to have Hezbollah, the Houthis, and all these other terrorists. We know the situation has deteriorated severely. The regime is having a hard time paying salaries, and it’s desperate.

It’s quite possible it will try to pick a fight with America or Israel. We see the Houthis picking a fight with Saudi Arabia. The Iranian regime is getting weaker every day, and America’s influence in the Strait of Hormuz and in getting oil out is far greater than anyone imagines.

If President Trump and Israel and the West as a whole stay the course, this regime can and must fall. It’s a matter of time. This regime will fall.

Brian Kilmeade: Who could get Hamas to disarm besides the Israelis going in and shooting them?

Hillel Neuer: The only ones willing to risk their lives to disarm Hamas are the Israelis. No French, Italian, or other peacekeepers are going to risk their lives to do it. Nor will Muslim countries like Indonesia or Turkey, or others that have talked about possibly sending people as part of an international force. No international force is going to risk its lives.

We’ve seen it. This isn’t theoretical or hypothetical. In Lebanon, thousands of international troops from UNIFIL — 10,000 troops — have been there for decades, and they didn’t disarm a single Hezbollah fighter. They were supposed to keep all of southern Lebanon disarmed. Instead, there were 150,000 rockets, massive bunkers, and terror tunnels, and they didn’t do a darn thing.

Years ago, when they tried to do something, Hezbollah would knock off one of the European peacekeepers, and that was it. They weren’t prepared to take casualties, so they gave Hezbollah a free pass. Peacekeepers aren’t going to disarm Hezbollah, and they aren’t going to disarm Hamas.

The post Hillel Neuer on the Brian Kilmeade Show: “The Iranian Regime Is Getting Weaker Every Day” appeared first on UN Watch.

Growing up under the Islamic Republic of Iran taught Shahrzad Eden Osterer exactly how dangerous ideological indoctrination can be. Now a journalist in Europe, she draws chilling parallels between the state propaganda of her childhood and the highly polarized, ideological echo chambers found in Western universities today.

While addressing UN Watch’s official side event at the 63rd session of the UN Human Rights Council, “Empowering Future Leaders through Human Rights Education,” Osterer argues that true human rights education must teach young people to apply universal standards consistently, not selectively based on political convenience.

Prepared Remarks:

The post De-ideologizing Human Rights Education | Shahrzad Eden Osterer appeared first on UN Watch.

After surviving 280 days as an ISIS hostage in Syria, Kurdish journalist and human rights defender Aram Aqil issues a stark warning to the world at UN Watch’s official side event at the 63rd session of the UN Human Rights Council, “Empowering Future Leaders through Human Rights Education.”

Extremist propaganda thrives where education fails. Aqil breaks down how the erasure of historical atrocities — like the Holocaust and the Armenian, Yazidi, and Anfal genocides — leaves youth dangerously vulnerable to dehumanizing terrorist narratives.

Prepared Remarks:

Growing up under the rule of a dictatorship — I mean here both Assads, the father and the son and coming from a politically active Kurdish family and belonging to a nation persecuted by four governments in the Middle East, human rights education became, for me, far more than a concept; it became something much more personal and embedded in the struggle we have carried on for decades.

From a very young age, I assisted in publishing a political magazine called “Jîn,” a Kurdish word meaning “Life.” That magazine covered topics related to human rights and democracy. Two topics where either one alone could land you in prison for years in the best-case scenario, or cost you your life in the worst.

I’ve spent around twenty years of my life under a dictatorial regime and about a year in the grip of ISIS; since gaining my freedom, I am experiencing the privilege of living in Western Europe where democracy and human rights are privileges that cannot be taken for granted, given that millions of people are deprived of them.

In December 2024, the dictator ran away, but the dictatorship remained standing, albeit with a new flavor. A jihadi terror regime came to power, entirely unconcerned with issues of human rights and democracy; it hasn’t even once mentioned these two topics; on the contrary, they view these concepts as “an abomination or the work of the devil.”

Why do I mention all this? Because here in Europe we speak freely about human rights education, we often think about classrooms, institutions and international conventions. In other corners of the world, it is obviously not the case. In the MENA region, among 25 countries, all UN member states, only a small number have integrated human rights education into their educational systems—no more than we can count on one hand.

My own journey as a youth educator made me see a huge gap: education about atrocities and genocides that took place in history. Many young people grow up with very limited opportunities to learn about the Holocaust, the Armenian genocide, the Yazidi genocide, the Anfal Genocide against Kurds, and other mass atrocities that deeply targeted the region and its communities.

If young people do not learn how genocides happen, how propaganda dehumanizes people, and how looking away makes it even worse, it becomes much harder for them to recognize these patterns when they appear before their eyes. I was a witness to the Yazidi genocide in 2014; I saw how Turkish and Qatari propaganda networks contributed to portraying an entire community as less human and therefore as a legitimate target of violence. Later on, the same happened on October 7; I saw disturbing parallels in the way propaganda and dehumanizing narratives were used to portray civilians as legitimate targets, rather than as human beings entitled to protection.

A big part of what I have experienced changed the way I now understand human rights and its education. Studying and talking about rights is something, and being prepared to defend it is something very different, and that is where I believe human rights education still has a gap. We need to ask young people not only: “What are human rights?” We need to ask: “What will you do when those rights are denied? What will you do for those who are deprived of their rights? Those whose rights are being violated?”

Awareness alone is not enough; young generations need to learn how to practice human rights; they need opportunities to meet people whose histories are different from their own. That means teaching them how to recognize discrimination and extremist propaganda. It means developing critical thinking and media literacy. It means giving young people opportunities to engage with civil society and communities beyond the classroom. And it means creating genuine platforms where people from minority and marginalised communities can speak for themselves.

Thank you.

The post Surviving ISIS and Confronting Extremist Propaganda | Aram Aqil appeared first on UN Watch.

How do you teach human rights in a country where the Taliban has systematically erased fundamental freedoms? On October 5th, Afghan women’s rights activist Husna Jalal addressed UN Watch’s official side event at the 63rd session of the UN Human Rights Council, “Empowering Future Leaders through Human Rights Education,” explaining why education must extend beyond physical classrooms to safely prepare young people to document violations.

She calls on the international community to fund scholarships, build secure digital pathways, and create a global network to support young Afghan defenders denied academic freedom.

Prepared Remarks:

Excellencies, distinguished colleagues, ladies and gentlemen.

Human rights education is often described as teaching people about their rights. I would like to suggest that its real purpose is larger: to prepare people to live, defend and sustain those rights, and above all to do so when it is hardest.

The case of Afghanistan also raises a more difficult question: what does human rights education mean in a country where human rights themselves are being systematically restricted?

It is relatively easy to speak about human rights education where institutions are functioning, universities are open to everyone, and students and teachers are able to express themselves freely. The real test comes when those conditions do not exist.

In such environments, knowing your rights is not enough. A young person may understand perfectly well that women and men are entitled to equality, that education is a human right, or that people should be able to participate in the life of their society.

But what happens when speaking about those principles carries personal risk? What happens when the institutions that should provide education are themselves places of exclusion? And what happens when young people have knowledge and motivation, but no safe space in which to use them?

This is where I believe our approach to human rights education has to go further.

We need to prepare young people not only for environments in which human rights are respected, but also for environments in which those rights are contested, restricted or violated. That requires practical preparation: how to act responsibly and safely; how to preserve evidence and knowledge; how to build networks of solidarity; how to communicate across communities; how to continue learning when formal institutions become inaccessible; and how to remain connected to civil society even when civic space is shrinking.

Afghanistan has taught us another important lesson: when physical educational spaces disappear, we must find ways to ensure that the intellectual and civic space does not disappear with them.

For Afghan women and girls in particular, this means creating alternative pathways to education, mentorship and professional development, and connecting them with universities, educators, civil society organizations and peers beyond Afghanistan. It also means ensuring that qualifications, skillsand experience gained through alternative forms of learning can eventually lead to meaningful academic and professional opportunities.

We should also think differently about who we consider a future human rights leader. Leadership does not begin when someone receives a formal title or joins an established organization. It can begin with a student who questions discrimination, a teacher who protects the dignity of her students, a young journalist who insists on documenting what is happening, or a young person who creates a small space where others can continue to learn.

In countries experiencing serious human rights restrictions, these individuals may never have access to conventional leadership programmes. If we wait for them to reach established institutions before we support them, we may never reach the people who need that support most.

That is why human rights education must be resilient enough to continue beyond the classroom and, when necessary, beyond national borders. It should create relationships and communities that can survive even when institutions come under pressure.

For me, this is one of the most important lessons from Afghanistan: we should not only educate young people about human rights when conditions are favorable. We need to equip and accompany them precisely when defending those rights becomes difficult.

From this, I draw three lessons, and for each I want to suggest something practical. First, human rights education cannot be separated from the environment in which it takes place.

Students learn human rights not only from textbooks but from experience: when they can speak freely, when women participate equally, when minorities are respected, when disagreement is possible without fear. When discrimination and censorship become part of educational life, young people learn a very different lesson about whose rights matter.

Practically, every institution that teaches human rights should ask whether it practises them. Who is admitted? Who speaks? Who is protected when they dissent? Do students have a safe channel to raise complaints? Teaching the Universal Declaration is not enough if the campus contradicts it.

Second, human rights education must give young people the ability to act, not only to know. Knowing a right exists matters. Knowing how to defend it matters just as much. Young leaders need to document violations safely and responsibly, write a credible submission to a UN mechanism,advocate to decision-makers, organise a campaign, protect their digital security, and communicate across political and cultural divides.

They also need people. The greatest threat many young defenders face, especially under repression or in exile, is isolation. A single mentor who answers a message, opens a door or reviews a draft can decide whether a young person keeps going.

Practically, training should be built around real tasks, such as a mock submission to a treaty body, and every participant should leave with a named mentor and a peer network, not just a certificate.

Third, our commitment must continue when formal institutions are closed or captured. If Afghan women cannot enter universities, we cannot simply wait for the doors to reopen. We must ask how education can reach them now.

That means open learning pathways in Dari and Pashto that work on phones. It means universities agreeing to recognise what has been learned, so that interrupted education is not wasted.

It means scholarships in regional and international universities, support for Afghan educators inside and outside the country, and digital security and emergency support from the very first day, because learning in these conditions carries real risk.

Afghanistan raises an important question: what happens to the next generation of human rights leaders when the institutions that should educate, connect and support them are no longer accessible?

We cannot simply wait for conditions to improve. When classrooms and universities close, young people need alternative pathways to continue learning, remain connected and develop the skills to defend human rights safely and effectively.

So let me close with a concrete proposal. We should build an international network of universities, national human rights institutions and civil society organizations to provide sustained education, mentoring and practical leadership opportunities for young human rights defenders, especially those whose education has been restricted by repression, conflict or discrimination.

A network only matters if each of us does something specific. States can fund scholarships, recognize credible alternative and online learning, and create pathways for students and young defenders at risk.

Universities can open places and online programs, provide mentors, work with displaced and exiled academics, and protect academic freedom.

Human rights institutions and the UN system can create opportunities for young defenders to engage with human rights mechanisms safely and ensure that voices from the most restricted environments are heard.

Civil society can make training accessible in local languages, connect experienced defenders with emerging leaders, and integrate digital security and protection into their programs.

None of this requires a new treaty or institution. It requires us to connect what already exists and make it accessible to those who need it most.

Afghanistan is an urgent example, but the lesson goes beyond Afghanistan. If we want the next generation to defend universal human rights, we cannot wait until they are established leaders.

We must invest in them while they are learning, while they are finding their voices, and especially when using those voices comes at a cost.

Thank you.

The post Human Rights Education Under Oppression in Afghanistan | Husna Jalal appeared first on UN Watch.

SHARE: Youtube | X.com | Facebook | Instagram | LinkedIn

Natalia Arno, a Russian dissident invited to speak by UN Watch, told the UN Human Rights Council how Russia’s repression follows dissidents beyond its borders.

After fleeing Russia in 2012 following threats of 20 years in prison for her democracy work, Arno faced surveillance, intimidation and cyberattacks in exile. Three years ago, she was poisoned in Europe.

“Dictatorships do not need to silence everyone. They only need to make everyone wonder: Am I next?”

Arno called on democracies to confront transnational repression and ensure that exile means safety.

Transcript:

Vice-President of the Human Rights Council: We shall now begin the Interactive Dialogue on the situation of human rights in the Russian Federation.

Natalia Arno: Mr. President, I fled my home country, Russia, in 2012 after security services threatened me with 20 years in prison for state treason for my democracy work.

I crossed the border, but the repression crossed it too.

In exile, I was followed, intimidated, and cyber-attacked.

Three years ago, I was poisoned in Europe. But I’m only one of thousands.

Russia imprisons dissidents at home and hunts us abroad. 

Exiled Russians face surveillance, threats against their families, extradition requests, digital and physical attacks. 

Dictatorships do not need to silence everyone. They only need to make everyone wonder: am I next?

This is the real power of transnational repression. 

So I ask this Council: what is the meaning of refugee if persecution can follow you even in democratic countries?

No one should escape repression at home only to face it again in exile. A border should be a line repression cannot cross. 

Democracies must be clear. Those who conduct and order transnational repression will face consequences. 

Exile must mean safety. And ultimately, our security depends on both a sovereign and secure Ukraine and free and democratic Russia. 

Victory to Ukraine. Freedom to Russia. 

The post Russian Dissident Warns The UN: Putin’s Repression Follows Exiles Abroad appeared first on UN Watch.

SHARE: Youtube | X.com | Facebook | Instagram | LinkedIn

In a dramatic showdown at the UN Human Rights Council, Iranian activist Daniyal Eyvazi directly confronted the Islamic Republic’s delegation. Eyvazi, who was shot by regime agents while attempting to assist a wounded protester, delivered a powerful testimony honoring the victims of regime violence and calling for a free, secular, and democratic Iran.

Visibly shaken by his words, the Iranian delegation attempted to interrupt his speech by raising a point of order to censor him, claiming his language was “provocative.” However, the UN Chair overruled Iran’s objection and allowed Eyvazi to finish his message: “Stand with the people of Iran against our Islamic Republic oppressors or face the judgment of history.”

Debate Highlights:

Islamic Republic of Iran: Today I wish to speak on behalf of the nation that over the past year, has endured profound consequences arising from a blatant and brutal aggression prepared by the United States and Israeli regime.

Multiple documented violations of international humanitarian law and human rights mark one of the darkest pages of human history.

Our people found themselves standing before some of the most criminal and reckless foreign states who showed utter disregard for international law and demonstrated no restraint in their brutality.

The dark pages of aggression were transformed into glorious chapters, written through the unwavering loyalty of our people to the motherland.

Vice-President of the Human Rights Council: We will now move to the list of NGOs.

Daniyal Eyvazi: In January of this year I was shot by agents of the Islamic Republic while trying to help a wounded protestor.

Iranians had loaded the streets peacefully seeking freedom. They were met with bullets.

From children to the elderly, everyone became a target.

Tens of thousands were murdered.

It was a crime against humanity.

I am fortunate to have survived and escaped so that I can honor the memory of those that did not.

The people of Iran are peace-loving.

We have no hostility toward the people of the United States, Israel, or any other nation.

The Islamic Republic’s policy of war and hate does not represent us. The Iranian people demand fundamental change.

Crown Prince Reza Pahlavi is the symbol of transition away from the Islamic Republic toward a free, secular, and democratic Iran.

Vice-President of the Human Rights Council: Point of order from the Iranian delegation.

Islamic Republic of Iran: We urge the vice president to ensure that no speaker use provocative languages that could violate the principles of this Council.

The Human Rights Council should not be allowed to be misused by anyone.

Tone, language, and contents of speeches by NGOs should be in accordance with U.N. standards.

Vice-President of the Human Rights Council: In a statement from representative of the NGO I did not hear any term that’s contrary to the practice of the Council.

So I would ask you to continue your statement from where you left off.

Daniyal Eyvazi: Our message to the world is clear: stand with the people of Iran against our Islamic Republic oppressors or face the judgement of history.

The post Iranian Massacre Survivor Slams Regime to Their Faces at UN appeared first on UN Watch.

SHARE: YouTube | Facebook | Instagram

Venezuelan human rights lawyer Omar Mora Tosta addressed the United Nations to call for the immediate and full release of Venezuela’s political prisoners and an end to the judicial persecution of dissidents.

Mora Tosta, a lawyer for Comando Con Venezuela who represents political detainees, denounced the use of terrorism courts against government opponents, the denial of due process and private legal counsel, and the discriminatory application of amnesty—including in the case of opposition lawyer Perkins Rocha.

His message to the international community: Venezuela’s transition to democracy requires the release of political prisoners, the restoration of fundamental rights, separation of powers, and justice for victims.

Transcript:

Vice-President of the Human Rights Council: Excellencies, we will continue with the report of the International Fact-Finding Mission on Venezuela, and we continue with the list of speakers.

Omar Mora Tosta: Thank you, President.

I am Omar Mora Tosta, a lawyer with “Comando con Venezuela” and a defender of its political prisoners arbitrarily detained in the context of the 2024 elections.

In Venezuela, despite the events of January 3rd, the structure of repression remains intact.

To ensure a transition to democracy, there must be the immediate and full release of more than 400 imprisoned and persecuted politicians, civilians and soldiers.

Their lives are in immediate danger due to mistreatment and conditions of imprisonment to which they have been subjected.

Unfortunately, many of them have died.

Ad hoc terrorism courts were illegally created by proclamation and not by law.

In them, they prosecute dissidents for political reasons, enforcing unconstitutional laws that should be repealed to restore human rights.

Even today in those ongoing processes, private legal defense is denied, as well as access to expediency, and hearings are held virtually that violate due process and the right to defense.

All of this is akin to treating them as criminal foreign enemies.

Amnesty was promoted without fulfilling proper standards and applied discriminatorily as in the case of lawyer Perkins Rocha and the campaign chiefs of the opposition.

The international community must seek the separation of powers in Venezuela, since with impunity and without justice to the victims, we will not move forward as a society.

Transcripción:

Vicepresidente del Consejo de Derechos Humanos: Excelencias, vamos a seguir con el informe de la Misión Internacional Independiente de Determinación de los Hechos sobre Venezuela, y seguimos con la lista de oradores.

Omar Mora Tosta: Gracias, señor presidente.

Soy Omar Mora Tosta, abogado del Comando con Venezuela y defensor de sus presos políticos detenidos arbitrariamente en el marco de las elecciones de 2024.

En Venezuela, a pesar del 3 de enero, la estructura represiva continúa intacta.

Para garantizar una transición a la democracia deben ser liberados de inmediato y plenamente los más de 400 presos y perseguidos políticos, civiles y militares, cuyas vidas corren peligro en virtud de los maltratos y condiciones de reclusión a los que han sido sometidos.

Lamentablemente, muchos de ellos han fallecido.

Fueron creados ilegalmente tribunales ad hoc de terrorismo por resolución y no por una ley. En ellos se procesa a disidentes por motivos políticos, aplicando leyes inconstitucionales que deben ser derogadas para restituir los derechos humanos.

Aún al día de hoy, en esos procesos en curso se niega la defensa privada, el acceso al expediente, y se realizan audiencias telemáticas que violan el debido proceso y el derecho a la defensa. Todo ello equiparable al derecho penal del enemigo.

Fue promovida la amnistía sin cumplir los estándares y aplicada discriminatoriamente, como en los casos del abogado Perkins Rocha y los jefes de campaña de la oposición.

La comunidad internacional debe procurar la separación de poderes en Venezuela, ya que con impunidad y sin justicia para las víctimas no avanzaremos como sociedad.

The post Lawyer of Comando Con Venezuela Exposes Venezuela’s Illegal Courts & Political Persecution appeared first on UN Watch.

SHARE: YouTube | X.com | Facebook | Instagram | LinkedIn

At the United Nations Human Rights Council, UN Watch Executive Director Hillel Neuer asked George Katrougalos, the Chair of UN human rights experts, why his report glorifies China while erasing its victims — and how he used Beijing’s $100,000 donation. Katrougalos and the Chinese regime failed to answer the questions, instead choosing to attack UN Watch. Read more here.

Debate Highlights:

George Katrougalos, Chair of UN Human Rights Experts: China, not the United States, is the leading trade partner of most of Latin America. The five principles of peaceful coexistence are traceable to China’s global governance initiative.

China: China commends the independent expert for his thematic report. China supports the independent expert in continuing to fulfill his important mandate.

Islamic Republic of Iran: We thank the independent and expert for their valuable report. The United States has become a major threat to international order.

Vice-President of the Human Rights Council: Now I give the floor to the representative of United Nations Watch.

Hillel Neuer: Mr. President, thank you for allowing us to pose several questions to the Expert.

Mr. Katrougalos, your report mentions China 33 times.

At page 9, you say China is a “central actor” defending international order; Xi Jinping is the “new guardian of global rules for free trade”; and Chinese discourse “closely aligns” with the UN Charter and “peaceful co-existence.”

At page 10, you recite numerous Chinese initiatives, that contribute, and I quote, “to the enjoyment of alll human rights.”

Mr. Katrougalos, we ask: if your report is truly about human rights, then where are China’s victims?

Where are the million Uyghurs subjected to mass detention, forced labour, and religious persecution?

Where are the Tibetans whose culture, language and religion Beijing systematically crushes?

Where are Hong Kong’s imprisoned democracy activists, such as 78-year-old Jimmy Lai?

Where are the human rights lawyers, journalists, dissidents, and religious minorities jailed across China?

Where is Beijing’s mass censorship? Its surveillance state? Its threats against Taiwan?

Mr. Katrougalos, one fifth of humanity are denied free elections, free speech and basic political rights.

Why does none of this appear in your account of China’s contribution to a “democratic and equitable” world order?

Now, you also chair the UN committee overseeing all human rights experts — and the UN disclosed that China chose to donate $100,000 to your mandate.

Why did Beijing choose you?  What exactly did its money finance?  Did it support this report?  Who funded your two trips to China, mentioned on Page 2?

Will you acknowledge that such funding creates a conflict?

Will you commit today that all China’s money will be returned?

George Katrougalos: UN Watch organizes a smear campaign against the Special Procedures and the United Nations system as a whole. Denying the genocide while orchestrating a campaign of lies against the United Nations actually feeds the very venom of antisemitism. Thus, ironically, by result, UN Watch has become a champion of antisemitism.

China: Mr. President, this morning, certain NGO’s fabricated lies and maliciously smearing China’s economic cooperation with UN Special Procedures mandate holders, contributing over 20% of UN finances.

Why China’s goodwill has not been cherished but instead distorted and maligned? China has repeatedly reaffirmed that Taiwan, Xinjiang, Xizang, and Hong Kong affairs are purely China’s internal affairs.

CHINA TAKES OVER U.N. RIGHTS BODY
We asked the chair of UN human rights experts:
Why did China give you $100,000?
Why did you cite China 33 times—yet ignore all its victims?

Katrougalos called us “a champion of antisemitism.”

China lashed out: “We will brook no interference.” pic.twitter.com/3OBIndqqjO

— UN Watch (@UNWatch) September 28, 2026

The post China Attacks UN Watch After Hillel Neuer Questions $100,000 Payment to UN Expert’s Mandate appeared first on UN Watch.

GENEVA, Aug. 6, 2026 — UN Watch today strongly condemned the appointment of the Eritrean regime as Chair of the United Nations Human Rights Council’s 2026 Social Forum, calling the decision “a grotesque farce that places one of the world’s most repressive dictatorships in charge of a body tasked with advancing human rights.”

The post UN Watch Condemns Appointment of Eritrea as Chair of UN Human Rights Council Social Forum: “Inmates Running the Asylum” appeared first on UN Watch.