Connect with us

World

Harvard’s $2.3bn gamble: What Trump demanded; how the university resisted

Published

10 months ago

on

Harvard’s .3bn gamble: What Trump demanded; how the university resisted

United States President Donald Trump’s campaign to pressure universities into dropping diversity, equity and inclusion measures and punishing student protesters has faced its strongest pushback yet when Harvard University rejected a series of demands from his administration.

Monday’s decision quickly prompted the US Department of Education to freeze nearly $2.3bn in federal funding for the Ivy League institution ranked among the best universities in the US.

So what happened between Harvard and Trump, and why did the institution risk billions of dollars to go against the administration’s demands?

What did the Trump administration ask Harvard to do?

The heads of the US Department of Education, Department of Health and Human Services, and the General Services Administration co-signed a letter to Harvard on Friday. In this letter, they claimed “Harvard has in recent years failed to live up to both the intellectual and civil rights conditions that justify federal investment.”

This was followed by a list of demands for the university in Cambridge, Massachusetts, to fulfil. Key among them were:

Advertisement
  • Promoting faculty committed to the Trump administration’s demands of Harvard, as articulated in the letter, and “reducing the power” of faculty and administrators “more committed to activism than scholarship”.
  • Ending all affirmative action in faculty hiring and student admissions by August. At the same time, the letter demanded that the university ensure “viewpoint diversity” by abolishing criteria during admissions and hiring processes “that function as ideological litmus tests”.
  • Changing the admissions process “to prevent admitting international students hostile to the American values”, including “students supportive of terrorism or anti-Semitism”. The letter did not define what it meant by “American values”. For the 2024-2025 academic year, there were 6,793 international students at Harvard, making up 27.2 percent of its total enrolment – up from less than 20 percent in 2006-2007.
  • Changing disciplinary policies and forbidding the recognition and funding of student groups or clubs that promote “criminal activity, illegal violence, or illegal harassment”.
  • Implementing a comprehensive mask ban with immediate, serious penalties for violation “not less than suspension” after some students have protested while wearing masks. The letter did not list any exceptions to this rule, such as health reasons.
  • Closing all diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programmes and offices and carrying out organisational reform to ensure transparency with federal regulators.

Harvard was given a deadline of August to implement these changes. This is the second letter issued by the Trump administration to Harvard. The first one was issued on April 3 and called on Harvard to ban face masks and reform academic departments that it alleged were guilty of anti-Semitic bias. Charges of anti-Semitism have been levelled against numerous US universities and colleges since widespread campus protests were held against the war in Gaza.

How did Harvard respond to the demands?

Harvard’s lawyers responded to the Trump administration by saying the university rejected the demands, arguing they violated its First Amendment rights and freedoms recognised by the US Supreme Court. The US Constitution’s First Amendment upholds the rights to free speech, expression and assembly.

The university said Harvard strongly opposes anti-Semitism and continues to make structural changes to ensure that the institution is a welcoming and supportive learning environment for all students.

The university also published a separate letter online signed by President Alan Garber on Monday. In the letter, Garber said federal grants have led to research and innovation in fields pertaining to science and medicine. “These innovations have made countless people in our country and throughout the world healthier and safer,” he wrote.

The letter then referred to how the government had threatened to pull federal funding from several universities, including Harvard, over allegations of anti-Semitism on campus. The letter said the government retreating from its funding agreements with higher education institutions “risks not only the health and well-being of millions of individuals but also the economic security and vitality of our nation”.

The Harvard letter said that while some of the government’s demands are aimed at combating anti-Semitism, “the majority represent direct governmental regulation of the ‘intellectual conditions’ at Harvard.”

Advertisement

“The University will not surrender its independence or relinquish its constitutional rights,” Garber added.

The Harvard chapter of the American Association of University Professors filed a lawsuit on Friday in a federal court in Boston, accusing the Trump administration of “unlawful and unprecedented misuse of federal funding and civil rights enforcement authority to undermine academic freedom and free speech on a university campus”.

What is the backdrop to this standoff?

In January 2024, Garber had set up presidential task forces on campus to combat anti-Semitism and fight bias against Muslims and Arabs as Israel’s war on Gaza raged, igniting tensions on campuses around the world, including in the US.

In April 2024, pro-Palestine protesters set up an encampment on the Harvard campus, called Harvard Out of Occupied Palestine (HOOP). The protesters demanded that Harvard divest from weapons companies and companies associated with Israel.

At that time, Garber said HOOP had disrupted educational activities on campus. In May, the university and protesters said they had reached an agreement to end the encampment, but the two parties gave different accounts about the terms of this agreement.

Advertisement

While the student protesters said Harvard had agreed to their demands, the university said it had only opened itself to dialogue on the demands. For example, pertaining to the students’ demand for the university to divest from companies with ties to Israel, Harvard said it had agreed to be more transparent with its students about how its endowment works.

How much federal funding could Harvard lose?

On Monday, hours after Harvard’s response, a task force created by the US Department of Education to tackle anti-Semitism released a statement announcing that  $2.3bn in federal funding to the university had been frozen.

“Harvard’s statement today reinforces the troubling entitlement mindset that is endemic in our nation’s most prestigious universities and colleges – that federal investment does not come with the responsibility to uphold civil rights laws,” the statement said. The frozen federal funds to Harvard include $2.2bn in grants and $60m in contracts, the statement added.

However, more money is at stake – about $9bn. On March 31, the Education Department, Department of Health and Human Services and the General Services Administration released a statement warning they would review $255.6m in contracts between the federal government and Harvard and its affiliates. The statement added that they would also review more than $8.7bn in multiyear grant commitments to Harvard and its affiliates.

Harvard’s endowment amounted to $53.2bn in the 2024 fiscal year — the largest of any university. However, donors decide which programmes, departments and purposes 70 percent of the annual endowment distribution is spent on. Endowment donations also dropped by $151m in 2024 as several billionaire donors stopped funding the institution over its response to concerns over anti-Semitism on campus, the university’s student-run newspaper, the Harvard Crimson, reported in October.

Advertisement

How have things unfolded at other US universities?

While Harvard is the first university to reject the Trump administration’s demands, it is not the first Ivy League school to be targeted.

Last year, Columbia University in New York emerged as the epicentre of pro-Palestine campus protests. Protesters occupied a campus building, Hamilton Hall, on April 30. The university called in the New York Police Department to crack down on student protesters.

In February, the Trump administration pulled back Columbia’s federal funding, worth $400m, citing the institution’s “failure to protect Jewish students from anti-Semitic harassment”. In March, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents arrested Mahmoud Khalil, a recent Columbia graduate and protest leader who had negotiated with the university during the campus demonstrations. Days earlier, the US Department of State revoked the visa of Ranjani Srinivasan, who was an urban planning doctoral candidate at Columbia. Soon after, Columbia unenrolled Srinivasan, who flew to Canada before she could be deported.

On March 13, the government’s Joint Task Force to Combat Anti-Semitism issued a letter to Columbia with nine demands for negotiations to restore the funding that was pulled. On March 18, Columbia accepted the government’s demands, listed in a new memo. The memo said protesting students will have to present university identification if prompted. It added that face masks would be banned if they are being used to conceal a person’s identity. However, face coverings are still allowed for religious or medical reasons. The memo also added that Columbia had hired 36 security officers who have special powers to arrest students, and the university continues to rely on New York police for additional security assistance.

Over the past few weeks, the Trump administration has suspended or frozen funding for Princeton, Cornell and Northwestern universities. The universities have responded by expressing frustration and highlighting how federal funding is important for critical research.

Advertisement

On April 11, the US Department of Energy, which funds research at many universities, announced a universal cap on the indirect costs it would finance for projects it supports. The agency said this would save the government $405m a year.

Nine universities and three bodies representing higher education institutions have since filed a lawsuit challenging that cap. The plaintiffs in the case include the Association of American Universities, American Council on Education, Association of Public and Land-Grant Universities, Brown University, California Institute of Technology, Cornell University, Board of Trustees of the University of Illinois, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, the regents of the University of Michigan, Board of Trustees of Michigan State University, the trustees of Princeton University and the University of Rochester.

What are the reactions to Harvard’s dispute with Trump?

Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders congratulated Harvard on X on Monday “for refusing to relinquish its constitutional rights to Trump’s authoritarianism”.

Former US President Barack Obama posted on Tuesday: “Harvard has set an example for other higher-ed institutions – rejecting an unlawful and ham-handed attempt to stifle academic freedom.”

Massachusetts Governor Maura Healey posted a statement on X congratulating Harvard for “standing against the Trump Administration’s brazen attempt to bully schools and weaponize the US Department of Justice under the false pretext of civil rights”.

Related Topics:
Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

World

Leonardo DiCaprio, Emma Stone and ‘Hamnet’ Win at Irish Film and TV Awards With Indie Drama ‘Christy’ Taking Top Prize

Published

4 hours ago

on

February 21, 2026

By

Leonardo DiCaprio, Emma Stone and ‘Hamnet’ Win at Irish Film and TV Awards With Indie Drama ‘Christy’ Taking Top Prize

Leonardo DiCaprio, Emma Stone and the independent Irish drama “Christy” were among the winners at the 2026 Irish Film and Television Awards, announced in Dublin on Friday.

The Brendan Canty-directed “Christy” (not to be confused with the Sydney Sweeney boxing drama of the same name) entered the night as the top-nominated title with 14 mentions and delivered in key races, winning best film, director and casting, along with editing and a supporting actor prize for Jamie Forde. The film follows a young man seeking independence after leaving the foster system.

Elsewhere in the film categories, “Hamnet” notched wins for best international film, lead actress for Oscar frontrunner Jessie Buckley, supporting actor for Paul Mescal and script for Maggie O’Farrell and Chloé Zhao. Other Oscar hopefuls that received notices in the international lead acting races ahead of Sunday’s BAFTA ceremony were Leonardo DiCaprio’s work as a former revolutionary in Paul Thomas Anderson’s “One Battle After Another” and Emma Stone, for her work as an executive who may or may not be an alien, in Yorgos Lanthimos’ “Bugonia.”

At the same time, Éanna Hardwicke took lead actor for “Saipan” while the double-nominated Kerry Condon prevailed with a supporting actress prize for Joseph Kosinski’s “F1.”

On the television side, “Blue Lights” won best TV drama, while Ailbhe Keogan won script for “Trespasses.” Anthony Boyle took lead actor in drama for “House of Guinness,” and Lola Petticrew won lead actress for “Trespasses.” Chris Walley won supporting actor for “The Young Offenders,” and Alison Oliver was named supporting actress for “Task.” Louisa Harland won the Rising Star Award.

Advertisement

“Christy” and “Saipan” led the nominations heading into the ceremony, with “Saipan” earning 12. The ceremony also marked a record number of women nominated in directing categories, with seven across film and TV.

This year, Ciarán Hinds is set to receive the Lifetime Achievement Award.

The list of winners is below.

Best Film

  • “Aontas”
  • “Blue Moon”
  • “Christy” (WINNER)
  • “Four Mothers”
  • “Saipan”
  • “Steve”

Director – Film

  • Lisa Barros D’Sa, Glenn Leyburn — “Saipan”
  • Brendan Canty — “Christy” (WINNER)
  • Myrid Carten — “A Want in Her”
  • Lorcan Finnegan — “The Surfer”
  • Ruán Magan — “Báite”
  • Edwin Mullane, Adam O’Keeffe — “Horseshoe”

Script – Film

  • Sarah Gordon, Damian McCann — “Aontas”
  • Maggie O’Farrell, Chloé Zhao — “Hamnet” (WINNER)
  • Alan O’Gorman — “Christy”
  • Sheena Lambert — “Báite”
  • Darren Thornton, Colin Thornton — “Four Mothers”
  • Enda Walsh — “Die My Love”

Lead Actor – Film

  • Steve Coogan — “Saipan”
  • Daniel Day-Lewis — “Anemone”
  • Colin Farrell — “Ballad of a Small Player”
  • Éanna Hardwicke — “Saipan” (WINNER)
  • Cillian Murphy — “Steve”
  • Daniel Power — “Christy”

Lead Actress – Film

  • Jessie Buckley — “Hamnet” (WINNER)
  • Carolyn Bracken — “Horseshoe”
  • Carrie Crowley — “Aontas”
  • Fionnula Flanagan — “Four Mothers”
  • Eleanor O’Brien — “Báite”
  • Fiona Shaw — “Hot Milk”

Supporting Actor – Film

  • Liam Cunningham — “Palestine 36”
  • Jamie Forde — “Christy”
  • Paul Mescal — “Hamnet” (WINNER)
  • Diarmuid Noyes — “Christy”
  • Seán T. Ó Meallaigh — “Aontas”
  • Andrew Scott — “Blue Moon”

Supporting Actress – Film

  • Brid Brennan — “Aontas”
  • Kerry Condon — “F1” (WINNER)
  • Kerry Condon — “Train Dreams”
  • Sarah Greene — “Trad”
  • Dearbhla Molloy — “Four Mothers”
  • Emma Willis — “Christy”

International Film

  • “Bugonia”
  • “Hamnet” (WINNER)
  • “One Battle After Another”
  • “Palestine ’36”
  • “Sentimental Value”
  • “Sinners”

International Actor

  • Leonardo DiCaprio — “One Battle After Another” (WINNER)
  • Ethan Hawke — “Blue Moon”
  • Michael B. Jordan — “Sinners”
  • James McArdle — “Four Mothers”
  • Sean Penn — “One Battle After Another”
  • Jesse Plemons — “Bugonia”

International Actress

  • Chase Infiniti — “One Battle After Another”
  • Jennifer Lawrence — “Die My Love”
  • Margaret Qualley — “Blue Moon”
  • Renate Reinsve — “Sentimental Value”
  • Emma Stone — “Bugonia” (WINNER)
  • Teyana Taylor — “One Battle After Another”

George Morrison Feature Documentary

  • “A Want in Her” (WINNER)
  • “The Essence of Eva”
  • “Listen To The Land Speak”
  • “Sanatorium”
  • “Testimony”
  • “Útoipe Cheilteach”

Rebbreast Short Film Award

  • “The Ban”
  • “No Mean City”
  • “No Time Wasters”
  • “Nostalgie” (WINNER)
  • “Punt”
  • “Three Keenings”

Animated Short

  • “Éiru”
  • “Inside, The Valley Sings”
  • “Rerooted”
  • “Retirement Plan” (WINNER)

Cinematography

  • “Bugonia” — Robbie Ryan
  • “Christy” — Colm Hogan
  • “Die My Love” — Seamus McGarvey (WINNER)
  • “Saipan” — Piers McGrail
  • “Severance” — Suzie Lavelle

Casting

  • “Christy” — Amy Rowan (WINNER)
  • “Four Mothers” — Louise Kiely
  • “The Rainmaker” — Emma Gunnery
  • “Ready Or Not” — Maureen Hughes
  • “Saipan” — Aine O’Sullivan

Costume Design

  • “Blue Moon” — Consolata Boyle (WINNER)
  • “Christy” — Hannah Bury
  • “Four Mothers” — Joan O’Cleary
  • “Saipan” — Lara Campbell
  • “Video Nasty” — Joanne O’Brien

Editing

  • “Blue Lights” — Helen Sheridan
  • “Christy” — Allyn Quigley (WINNER)
  • “House of Guinness” — Ben Yeates
  • “Saipan” — John Murphy, Gavin Buckley
  • “The Surfer” — Tony Cranstoun

Make-up & hair

  • “Blue Moon” — Linda Gannon, Liz Byrne
  • “Christy” — Jennie Readman, Edwina Kelly
  • “Saipan” — Polly McKay
  • “Trespasses” — Natalie Reid (WINNER)
  • “Wednesday” — Lynn Johnston

Original Music

  • “Aontas” — Daithí Ó Drónaí
  • “Báite” — Eimear Noone, Craig Stuart Garfinkle (WINNER)
  • “Christy” — Daithí Ó Drónaí
  • “Saipan” — David Holmes, Brian Irvine
  • “Video Nasty” — Die Hexen

Production Design

  • “Blue Moon” — Susie Cullen, Kevin Downey
  • “Christy” — Martin Goulding
  • “Saipan” — John Leslie
  • “Wednesday” — Philip Murphy, Neville Gaynor (WINNER)
  • “Video Nasty” — Tara O’Reilly

Sound

  • “Anemone” — Steve Fanagan (WINNER)
  • “Blue Moon” — Hugh Fox
  • “Saipan” — Tim Harrison, Andrew Graham, Paul Maynes
  • “The Surfer” — Aza Hand
  • “Video Nasty” — Patrick Downey

VFX

  • “Anemone” — Tom Fagan
  • “Foundation” — Ed Bruce, Andrew Barry
  • “House of Guinness” — Eoin O’Sullivan, David Sewell (WINNER)
  • “One Battle After Another” — Ed Bruce, Amrei Bronnenmayer

Television Categories

Best TV Drama

Advertisement
  • “Blue Lights” (WINNER)
  • “Leonard and Hungry Paul”
  • “Trespasses”
  • “The Walsh Sisters”
  • “Wednesday S2”
  • “The Young Offenders”

Director — Drama

  • Rachel Carey — “Obituary” (WINNER)
  • Megan K. Fox — “Video Nasty”
  • Oonagh Kearney — “The Au Pair”
  • Mia Mullarkey — “Hidden Assets”
  • Hugh O’Conor — “Showkids”
  • Aisling Walsh — “Miss Austen”

Script Drama

  • Peter Foott — “The Young Offenders”
  • Ailbhe Keogan — “Trespasses” (WINNER)
  • Declan Lawn, Adam Patterson — “Blue Lights”
  • Cara Loftus — “Hidden Assets”
  • Stefanie Preissner — “The Walsh Sisters”
  • Hugh Travers — “Video Nasty”

Lead Actor – Drama

  • Anthony Boyle — “House of Guinness” (WINNER)
  • Pierce Brosnan — “MobLand”
  • Domhnall Gleeson — “The Paper”
  • Martin McCann — “Blue Lights”
  • Aaron Monaghan — “Hidden Assets”
  • Alex Murphy — “The Young Offenders”

Lead Actress – Drama

  • Niamh Algar — “The Iris Affair”
  • Caitriona Balfe — “Outlander”
  • Siobhán Cullen — “Obituary”
  • Louisa Harland — “The Walsh Sisters”
  • Nora-Jane Noone — “Hidden Assets”
  • Lola Petticrew — “Trespasses” (WINNER)

Supporting Actor – Drama

  • Jack Gleeson — “House of Guinness”
  • Cal O’Driscoll — “Video Nasty”
  • Dónall Ó Héalai — “Hidden Assets”
  • Fionn O’Shea — “House of Guinness”
  • Aidan Quinn — “The Walsh Sisters”
  • Chris Walley — “The Young Offenders” (WINNER)

Supporting Actress – Drama

  • Cathy Belton — “Hidden Assets”
  • Ruth Bradley — “Slow Horses”
  • Katherine Devlin — “Blue Lights”
  • Danielle Galligan — “House of Guinness”
  • Alison Oliver — “Task” (WINNER)
  • Genevieve O’Reilly — “Andor”

Rising Star Award

  • Carolyn Bracken (Actor, “Horshoe,” “Oddity”)
  • Brendan Canty (Director, “Christy,” “Gealtra”)
  • Myrid Carten (Director, “A Want in Her”)
  • Louisa Harland (Actor, “The Walsh Sisters,” “Derry Girls”) (WINNER)
Continue Reading

World

Potential US military strikes on Iran could target specific individuals, pursue regime change: report

Published

5 hours ago

on

February 21, 2026

By

Potential US military strikes on Iran could target specific individuals, pursue regime change: report

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

Potential U.S. military strikes on Iran could target specific individuals and even pursue regime change, a report said. 

Two U.S. officials who spoke to Reuters on condition of anonymity reportedly said those are options that have emerged in the planning stage, if ordered by President Donald Trump. They did not say which individuals could be targeted, but Trump, notably, in 2020 ordered the U.S. military attack that killed Iranian Gen. Qassem Soleimani, the head of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps’ elite Quds Force. 

Fox News Digital has reached out to the White House and the Department of War for comment. 

Trump already said Friday that he is “considering” a limited military strike on Iran to pressure its leaders into a deal over its nuclear program, when asked by a reporter at the White House.

Advertisement

BUILT FOR WEEKS OF WAR: INSIDE THE FIREPOWER THE US HAS POSITIONED IN THE MIDDLE EAST

President Donald Trump speaks during a press briefing at the White House, on Friday, Feb. 20, 2026, in Washington. Trump said Friday he is “considering” a limited military strike on Iran. (Allison Robbert/AP)

Last week, when questioned if he wanted regime change in Iran, the president said, “Well it seems like that would be the best thing that could happen.” 

Trump on Thursday suggested the window for a breakthrough is narrowing in talks with Iran, indicating Tehran has no more than “10, 15 days, pretty much maximum” to reach an agreement. 

“We’re either going to get a deal, or it’s going to be unfortunate for them,” he said.

Advertisement

TRUMP GIVES IRAN 10-DAY ULTIMATUM, BUT EXPERTS SIGNAL TALKS MAY BE BUYING TIME FOR STRIKE

The USS Gerald R. Ford is heading to the Middle East as the U.S. is building up its military presence there, amid talks with Iran. (U.S Naval Forces Central Command / U.S. 6th Fleet / Handout via Reuters)

A Middle Eastern source with knowledge of the negotiations told Fox News Digital this week that Tehran understands how close the risk of war feels and is unlikely to deliberately provoke Trump at this stage.  

However, the source said Iran cannot accept limitations on its short-range missile program, describing the issue as a firm red line set by Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei.  

Iranian negotiators are not authorized to cross that boundary, and conceding on missiles would be viewed internally as equivalent to losing a war.

Advertisement

In 2020, the Pentagon said President Donald Trump ordered the U.S. military strike that killed Iranian Gen. Qassem Soleimani, left, in Iraq. (Getty Images)

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

The source indicated there may be more flexibility about uranium enrichment parameters if sanctions relief is part of the equation. 

Fox News’ Emma Bussey and Efrat Lachter contributed to this report. 

Advertisement

Greg Norman is a reporter at Fox News Digital.

Continue Reading

World

Iran demands ‘evidence’ as Trump, UN experts highlight protest killings

Published

7 hours ago

on

February 21, 2026

By

Iran demands ‘evidence’ as Trump, UN experts highlight protest killings

Tehran, Iran – The Iranian government has again blamed “terrorists” for the killings of thousands during last month’s nationwide protests after United States President Donald Trump and human rights experts weighed in.

Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said on Saturday that the government has released a list of 3,117 people, whom he described as “victims of recent terrorist operation”, including about 200 security personnel.

Recommended Stories

list of 3 itemsend of list

“If anyone disputes accuracy of our data, please share any evidence,” the diplomat, who has previously stated that 690 people on the list were “terrorists” armed and funded by the US and Israel, wrote on X.

Araghchi’s comments come hours after the US president told reporters that 32,000 people were killed during the protests, adding that “the people of Iran have lived in hell” under the theocratic establishment.

The Iranian foreign minister has also been speaking with multiple US media outlets to advocate for a “fair” agreement with Washington over Iran’s nuclear programme.

Advertisement

The threat of war looms increasingly large over the country and potentially the region, with Serbia on Saturday becoming the latest country to call on all its citizens to immediately leave Iran.

‘Majority of those killed are ordinary people’

Mai Sato, United Nations special rapporteur on human rights in Iran, has said more than 20,000 civilians may have been killed, but information remains limited amid heavy internet filtering by the state, six weeks after a nationwide communications blackout was imposed.

The US-based HRANA says it has documented more than 7,000 people killed during the nationwide protests, and is investigating nearly 12,000 more cases.

Sato was among 30 special rapporteurs and international human rights experts who signed a joint statement on Friday calling on Iranian authorities to fully disclose the fate and whereabouts of tens of thousands arrested, forcibly disappeared or missing in the aftermath of the nationwide protests, and to halt all related death sentences and executions.

“The true scale of the violent crackdown on Iranian protesters remains impossible to determine at this point,” the experts said. “The discrepancy between official figures and grassroots estimates only deepens the anguish of families searching for their loved ones and displays a profound disregard for human rights and accountability.”

Advertisement

The international experts added that “the vast majority of those detained or killed are ordinary people, including children, from all provinces and diverse ethnic and religious backgrounds, as well as Afghan nationals”, in addition to lawyers representing protesters, medical professionals who treated the wounded, journalists and writers, artists and human rights defenders.

Iranian state media were accused of regularly broadcasting what the experts said are “widely regarded as forced confessions”.

The latest such incident came on Saturday, when the official Mizan news agency of the Iranian judiciary released footage from a court session for three men who said they regret setting fire to motorcycles, a mosque and copies of the Quran in Tehran during the unrest.

Also on Saturday, some students in Tehran and across the country returned to university campuses for the first time, as authorities kept universities closed and took some classes and exams online in the aftermath of the protests.

In Tehran’s Sharif University, one of the most prestigious in the country, students clashed after two separate demonstrations. Videos circulating online showed students shouting “dishonourables” at a group of paramilitary Basij students affiliated with the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), who chanted back in favour of the establishment.

Advertisement

The clashes come amid a heightened security atmosphere in Iranian schools and university dormitories. Teachers and schools in a number of cities near the capital went on strike last week to protest the killing of at least 230 children and teenagers, as well as increased presence of security forces in classrooms.

Families dance in defiant grief

The Iranian government held mourning events on Tuesday and Wednesday in Tehran, with some officials in attendance.

Culture Minister Reza Salehi-Amiri announced on Saturday that the government has decided to call the upcoming ceremonies around Newroz, the new Iranian year starting in late March, an exercise in “unity and empathy” with the aim of “getting past the grief” of thousands killed.

But numerous families have been holding defiant commemoration events of their own over the past week to mark 40 days since the killing of their loved ones during the anti-establishment protests.

Footage from many ceremonies across the country this week showed family members, and large crowds gathered to support them, proudly holding up images of those killed and celebrating their shortened lives.

Advertisement

Many chose to clap, play traditional drums and cymbals, and even dance in symbolic shows of resistance and defiance that heavily clash with religious rituals favoured by the theocratic state.

“May your pen break, O fate, if you do not write about that which befell us,” the father of Abolfazl MirAeez, a 33-year-old killed in the city of Gorgan in the northern province of Golestan, told crowds gathered at a ceremony on Thursday.

“My son was neither a rioter, nor an embezzler nor an aghazadeh [child of an elite]. He was the son of a farmer.”

Continue Reading

Trending