Cholera Outbreaks: Nigeria’s Struggle with a Reoccurring Epidemic

March 31, 2025

Julia Kelley

Poor access to clean water and underdeveloped facilities has led Nigeria to face a decades-long, deadly battle against cholera.

Safe water sprouts in Nigeria — Access to Safe Water in Nigeria. EU Civil Protection and Humanitarian Aid. CC BY-NC-ND 2.0.

For decades, Nigeria has faced major cholera outbreaks throughout the country, posing a serious threat to public health. The disease, an acute diarrheal infection caused by ingesting food or water contaminated with the bacterium Vibrio cholerae, is a major indication of inequity, as well as a lack of social and economic development in the areas where it forms. Since 1972, cholera has plagued Nigeria in intermittent outbreaks that have claimed thousands of lives, the worst being in 1991, with a high of 59,478 reported cases and 7,654 deaths. Despite numerous attempts by the World Health Organization, the Nigeria Center for Disease Control and the Borno State Ministry of Health to provide support through free cholera vaccines and implement prevention and preparedness, the country continues to fight against large, destructive outbreaks.

Many factors make Nigeria especially prone to these widespread epidemics, including a lack of access to safe drinking water, a lack of infrastructure necessary for water supply and waste disposal and a lack of health facilities. Particularly in smaller communities and remote villages, sourcing clean water is a challenge that leads residents to dig their own wells. Moreover, during the dry season, these wells dry up and leave individuals only with the more hazardous alternative of shallow streams. Poor weather conditions worsen this significant obstacle to clean water and sanitation. Flooding, for example, increases food insecurity by destroying farmland, creating economic loss, demolishing sanitation facilities and contaminating sources of clean water. Several financial issues, including poor investment, funding allocation and low human capital, in conjunction with already deficient infrastructure and low community participation, also contribute to a lack of secure water infrastructure. Not only does this make for a higher potential of infection, but Nigera’s healthcare infrastructure is also underdeveloped, lacking the medical facilities and supplies necessary to treat those infected with cholera. Limited medical equipment and supplies, as well as a lack of internet connectivity, make it extremely difficult to heal patients and facilitate important reporting of cholera data.

These issues remain significant and continue to threaten the lives of Nigeria’s citizens. This is exemplified by the country’s most recent outbreak in 2024, which saw about 11,000 recorded cases and 359 deaths in October that year. Intense rains throughout the year led to widespread floods and dam breaks across Nigeria, weakening water infrastructure, destroying farmland and leaving many homeless in damaged areas, overall causing a large part of the country to be vulnerable to diseases like cholera. This most recent epidemic was met with policy and prevention program recommendations in the hope of impeding future spreads, the most critical of which being Water, Sanitation and Hygiene services. These accelerate and sustain access to safe water, sanitation services and good hygiene practices, all of which are the main deterrents of cholera spread. While this strategy proved effective when instituted by the Nigerian government during the 2018 outbreak, it still requires increased government funding and outside investment to remain effective. Public health and safety continue to endure disadvantages, as the threat of cholera looms over the country.

GET INVOLVED:

For those looking to get involved in supporting the fight against cholera outbreaks in Nigeria, check out organizations such as WaterAid, Bread and Water for Africa, Save the Children and The Water Project, groups focused on supplying safe drinking water and sanitation to Nigeria, as well as many other countries in Africa. In addition, organizations like Doctors Without Borders, the World Health Organization, ICAP Global Health and Gavi, The Vaccine Alliance provide medical support to cholera patients in Nigeria and contribute to the development of disease control and prevention.

Julia Kelley

Julia is a recent graduate from UC San Diego majoring in Sociocultural Anthropology with a minor in Art History. She is passionate about cultural studies and social justice, and one day hopes to obtain a postgraduate degree expanding on these subjects. In her free time, she enjoys reading, traveling, and spending time with her friends and family.

The Hidden Cost of Counterfeit Luxury

March 31, 2025

Zoe Lodge

Though the price tag might be tempting, counterfeit goods have a broader negative societal and environmental impact than many realize.

Street stand selling counterfeit bags. Nick Adams. CC BY-NC-SA 2.0.

The counterfeit goods market has expanded dramatically in recent years, moving far beyond street vendors in tourist hotspots to major online marketplaces like Temu, AliExpress and DHGate. Emma Warbey, Detective Chief Inspector of the Police International Property Crime Unit in London, noted that “it’s becoming easier for counterfeit goods to enter the marketplace, with online sales portals, social media, and apps.”

What was once a niche market has become a booming industry, driven in part by social media influencers showcasing “dupe hauls” of fake designer bags, shoes and clothing, promoting the overconsumption of counterfeit luxury goods. While these “dupe” items offer an affordable way to mimic luxury, the reality of their production and ethical impact is far less glamorous.

Luxury fashion is synonymous with exclusivity, as high-end designer items remain out of reach for most consumers due to high prices and limited availability. Through nearly identical copies of luxury items sold at a fraction of the price, counterfeit goods offer an illusion of prestige without the financial burden. Social media influencers have only fueled this trend by normalizing the purchase of fake goods, often describing them as “budget-friendly” alternatives rather than illegal imitations.

Growing demand has created an underground economy that thrives on accessibility and affordability. According to Keith Goldstein, the president and COO of VerifyMe, “the total amount of counterfeit goods sold each year comes in at around $1.7 trillion to $4.5 trillion, which would make counterfeiting at least the tenth largest economy […] It’s also responsible for 2.5 million jobs lost globally.”

Despite their popularity, purchasing counterfeit goods comes with a number of ethical issues. First and foremost, they are illegal to manufacture, sell, and, in many cases, even possess. Many countries have strict intellectual property laws prohibiting the production and distribution of fake designer products, with penalties ranging from hefty fines to imprisonment. Luxury brands invest significant resources in protecting their designs through trademarks, and counterfeit operations directly undermine these efforts.

Additionally, the quality of counterfeit goods is often leagues below the original. Many are made from cheap materials that do not match the durability or craftsmanship of genuine designer pieces. While the items may look similar at first glance, they can fall apart and show signs of wear after minimal use, making them a poor investment even at a lower price point.

Beyond the personal drawbacks of purchasing counterfeit items, the industry itself has serious ethical and environmental implications. Counterfeit production often relies on exploitative labor conditions, including underpaid workers, child labor and unsafe workplaces. Many counterfeit factories operate in countries with weak labor regulations, allowing manufacturers to cut costs and skirt the law at the expense of workers’ rights and safety.

The industry’s environmental impact is equally concerning. Counterfeit goods are frequently produced using toxic materials, synthetic dyes and low-quality plastics that contribute to pollution and waste. The sheer volume of goods produced and shipped worsens global overconsumption, contributing more products to landfills. Unlike reputable brands that are increasingly prioritizing sustainability and ethical sourcing, counterfeit manufacturers have no incentive to follow environmental guidelines. The result is a shadowy industry that promotes unsustainable practices while flooding the market with disposable, low-quality goods.

As counterfeit luxury items continue to gain popularity, consumers must be mindful of their purchasing decisions. The short-term benefit of a cheap designer look comes at the considerably higher cost of legal risks, poor quality, exploitative labor and environmental harm.

GET INVOLVED:

Instead of opting for counterfeits, consumers can explore ethical alternatives by shopping at second-hand luxury markets, designer rental services and brands that prioritize affordability without compromising quality or ethics.

For example, The RealReal is a verified online retailer featuring secondhand designer goods at reasonable prices, allowing consumers to shop at lower cost to both their wallet and the environment.

Apps and websites such as Pickle, Rent the Runway and Nuuly offer short-term rentals of designer items at a fraction of the cost, enabling a cyclical and sustainable use of well-crafted fashion items.

Zoe Lodge

Zoe is a student at the University of California, Berkeley, where she is studying English and Politics, Philosophy, & Law. She combines her passion for writing with her love for travel, interest in combatting climate change, and concern for social justice issues.

Is Ethical Tourism in Hawaii Possible?

March 31, 2025

Kleigh Carroll

How to visit the Hawaiian Islands while minimizing your environmental and cultural impact.

Hawaiian Airlines B717 Landing in Maui. Bryan S. CC0

It is no secret that the United States has a deeply problematic colonial relationship with the Hawaiian Islands. In 1993, Congress passed a resolution officially apologizing for the “illegal overthrow of the Kingdom of Hawaii” in 1893 and expressed “its commitment to acknowledge the ramifications of the overthrow in order to provide a foundation for reconciliation between the United States and the Native Hawaiian people.” But despite this, the violence associated with land grabs has left lasting effects still felt by Native Hawaiians today. Many are tired of having their land taken for purposes that benefit others, while their indigeneity and culture are overlooked at best and commodified, exoticized and misrepresented at worst.

Since Captain Cook first arrived on the Hawaiian Islands in the late 18th century, the Indigenous population has declined to account for a smaller and smaller fraction of the total population. About 10 million people visit Hawaii each year, amounting to more than seven times the residential population. Julie Au, Education, Research and Outreach director of Aina Momona, a nonprofit that focuses on land restoration and de-occupation in Hawaii, explained that “All of that is linked to tourism because at that time when we became a state, they really started marketing Hawaii as this paradise vacation destination. So we’re not even a normal state. We’re America’s vacation state.” In light of this history, is it possible for tourists to visit Hawaii responsibly, keeping in mind their positionality and the impact they leave on local communities and ecosystems?

ISSUES WITH TOURISM IN HAWAII:

Tourism is Hawaii’s largest driver of revenue, accounting for 21% of jobs. At the same time, the issues associated with tourism are numerous. For one, the overwhelming number of visitors each year contributes to plastic pollution which surpasses Hawaii's capacity for recycling. Tourism infrastructure has also entailed the destruction of habitats and ecosystems to make room for hotels and shopping malls. What’s more, numerous major resort developments have disrupted culturally significant sites, such as the Keoneloa development site in Kauai, which forced the relocation of burial grounds. Visitors often spend their time in large resorts and spaces designed for them without making a serious attempt to connect with local culture. This can contribute to both an environmental and cultural insensitivity to their surroundings and a disconnection from local issues faced by native Hawaiians. While tourism is an important supplier of revenue and jobs, these dollars are often reinvested into the tourism industry rather than the local community. Many resorts are owned and operated by non-Hawaiians while Hawaiian people occupy the lowest-paying service jobs.

HOW TO TRAVEL MORE ETHICALLY:

Responsible, sustainable tourism is possible and can even be an important driver of social change. Aside from the obvious practices, like abiding by the principles of Leave No Trace, following the local rules and signage when visiting particular sites and adequately preparing for excursions so that you don’t need to be rescued, there is more that you can do to earn your right to visitation. Taking a mindful approach to tourism in Hawaii means respecting the natural environment and making a genuine effort to learn about local history and culture. Regenerative tourism initiatives provide alternative ways to visit Hawaii while giving back to local communities. Prince Waikiki, for instance, is a hotel in Honolulu dedicated to regenerative and volunteer tourism. They provide opportunities to have fun while giving back through partnering with local nonprofits working on everything from workforce development programs to historical preservation projects. The Malama Hawaii Program, launched in 2021 by the Hawaii Visitors and Convention Bureau, provides a list of ways to give back on your trip, from beach cleanups to volunteering on local farms. Another way to minimize your environmental impact while traveling is to stay at eco-lodges, places committed to staying carbon-neutral and supporting conservation efforts.

Buying locally is an easy way to make sure your dollars are staying in the community. This looks like eating at locally-owned restaurants, staying at locally-owned hotels and shopping at locally-owned grocery stores. Britney Alejo-Fishell is the owner of a store specializing in traditional lei and lei-making workshops in Makawao, Maui. She claims that for many tourists visiting her store, it has “changed their view of this place.” She emphasizes the power of exploring outside of resorts and tourist traps and supporting small businesses. “This is a way that tourists can come learn but also play a part in helping us heal.”

To learn more about ethical travel in Hawaii, Go Hawaii provides helpful tips. The book “Detours: A Decolonial Guide to Hawaiʻi” by authors Hōkūlani K. Aikau and Vernadette Vicuna Gonzalez offers perspective on Hawaii's history and imagines new ways for visitors to move through the landscape.

Kleigh Carrol

Kleigh is a student at UC Berkeley studying Geography and Journalism. She hopes to integrate her skills in these fields in pursuit of a career in journalism. She is passionate about being outside, exploring, and writing in all of its forms.

First Amendment Freedoms in Danger: Greenpeace Ordered to Pay $667M to Oil Company

March 24, 2025

Julia Kelley

A North Dakota jury has ordered environmental group Greenpeace to pay Dakota Access Pipeline’s operating oil company in a case sparking controversy around Americans’ right to freedom of speech and protest.

Protest Against Dakota Access Pipeline. John Duffy. CC BY 2.0

On March 19, 2024, a North Dakota jury found Greenpeace, a global environmental nonprofit network, guilty of defamation and destructive protest action against the Dakota Access Pipeline, ordering the nonprofit to pay its operating oil company $667 million. This decision comes after years of national pushback against the Dakota Access Pipeline due to the project’s potential environmental hazards; the 1,172-mile-long underground pipeline transfers crude oil from North Dakota to an oil terminal in Patoka, Illinois. Moreover, the pipeline stretches within a half-mile of the current Standing Rock Sioux Reservation boundaries, posing potential risks to significant cultural and burial sites. As such, since its approval in 2016, protests led by Native tribes and environmental groups such as Greenpeace began sprouting up around the pipeline’s construction sites and sacred Native American areas. In many instances, demonstrations resulted in violence between protesters and law enforcement. It is because of these protests that the builders of the pipeline, oil company Energy Transfer, praised the jury’s March 19 decision, echoed in its counsel’s statement: “Peaceful protest is an inherent American right; however, violent and destructive protest is unlawful and unacceptable.”

In response to this decision, however, environmental activists and Tribal nations have taken a much different position. Contrary to Energy Transfer’s sentiment, many have determined this verdict to be an attack on First Amendment rights rather than a protection against unnecessary violence and destruction. Those associated with Greenpeace have even named the case a Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation, or a suit that intentionally targets those speaking out against public interest issues in an attempt to intimidate critics and force them to spend money. To those opposing the pipeline, not only has this lawsuit silenced years-long appeals for environmental safety and Native land protection, but has also cost Greenpeace an immense amount of money to defend its position, thus delaying progress in such areas. Despite being a major nonprofit, Greenpeace has previously warned that losing this case could potentially lead to bankruptcy. Those involved now fear that this could be a reality, as financial reports demonstrate that its total assets from 2023 may not be enough to ensure a supersedeas bond, in which a surety insurer would put up the bond necessary to pay the court-ordered amount. If not, then Energy Transfer would be able to begin seizing Greenpeace’s assets, including all cash needed to keep it operating.

Moreover, Greenpeace has come to represent freedom of speech and protest in general. In an interview with Democracy Now, Steven Donziger described the trial as a way to “silence people’s legitimate constitutionally protected right to speak out,” founded on a false narrative that protesters were violent while it was actually “law enforcement agencies […] hired by Energy Transfer that were really committing violence.” Critics warn that this will have effects that go beyond support for environmental and Native protections, potentially posing detrimental risks to nonprofit work as a whole. With a rise in anti-protest bills since 2017 mirroring a rise in major protest movements, much of this newly proposed legislation calls for increased liability against organizations not directly involved with protests but who offer support, including nonprofits or religious groups. In addition, the potential bankruptcy of Greenpeace, a substantial and largely influential organization, signals even fewer protections for smaller nonprofits, who may not have the same amount of financial support or as wide of a network. This could significantly decrease charities’ ability to speak out on various issues, for fear that they could easily be sued by larger corporations. Such concern would halt imperative support for causes across the country, a major blow to many movements. .

In the wake of the lawsuit, supporters of Greenpeace, environmental protection and the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe have critiqued and denounced the jury’s final decision. Despite the shock that the trial has caused, such advocates find hope in Greenpeace’s intention to appeal the case, as the organization declared in a statement released a day after the verdict. In addition to this, Greenpeace also highlighted the increased support it has gained over the past year, as opposed to a dissolution of its movement risked by the court case. The statement’s overall message affirms Greenpeace’s continued efforts as well, signaling that their work is still not over: “we will not be silenced, and our movement will endure.”

GET INVOLVED:

For those looking to get involved with environmental protection in the United States, researching local or state legislation is a great place to start. Looking into advocacy on a federal scale can be powerful as well, especially through staying updated on EPA regulations and making comments. In addition, check out organizations like the Environmental Defense Fund, The Nature Conservancy, We Act For Environmental Justice or the National Environmental Education Foundation, all of which are focused on making environmental change and expanding awareness through public policy support and education. Those interested in supporting Native American rights can look into the Native American Rights Fund, the Association on American Indian Affairs, the American Indian Policy Institute or Cultural Survival.

The Price of Preservation: Famous Sites Limit Tourism

March 11, 2025

By: Zoe Lodge

As overtourism threatens popular sites, the only solution seems to be restricting access, a controversial move.

yellowstone crowd at geiser — Tourists crowd Yellowstone National Park. Neal Herbert. PDM 1.0.

From Yosemite to Machu Picchu, many of the world’s most incredible natural wonders and historical landmarks are facing the complex challenge of overtourism. While these destinations attract millions of eager visitors who enable economic circulation, the surge in foot and vehicle traffic has led to environmental, cultural and infrastructural concerns. To combat these issues, many national parks and heritage sites have implemented reservation systems and strict visitor limits, measures that while frustrating to some, are essential for long-term preservation.

National parks and global historical landmarks are not merely attractions; they are delicate sites that require careful management. Overtourism can lead to severe consequences such as soil erosion, damage to plant life, disruption of local wildlife and even structural harm to historical sites. In places like Yellowstone National Park, off-trail hiking, wildlife harassment and increased vehicle traffic have led to environmental destruction and tourist injury. Similarly, Machu Picchu has suffered from footpath erosion, instances of vandalism and structural strain due to the high number of daily visitors. Without intervention, these sites risk being permanently damaged or potentially lost to future generations.

Recognizing these risks, many national parks and historical sites have begun introducing reservation systems and ticketing policies to manage visitor numbers. These restrictions help reduce congestion, minimize environmental damage and ensure more responsible tourism. While ticketing specific attractions is not a new concept, regulations limiting the number of people allowed in a park or site at a given time are becoming increasingly common. Yosemite National Park, for example, has experimented with reservation-only entry during peak seasons to control the flow of tourists. Zion National Park has implemented a permit system for some of their most popular hiking routes to prevent environmental damage and danger caused by overcrowding. Similarly, Peru has imposed strict daily limits on visitors to Machu Picchu and even restricted access to certain trails to prevent excessive wear.

Some travelers have voiced frustration with these limitations, arguing that they complicate trip planning and reduce the chance for spontaneity. However, these restrictions exist precisely because the unrestricted flow of visitors has contributed to significant degradation of these sites. Unlimited access to national parks and heritage sites might seem appealing, but unregulated tourism is not worth the cost, causing irreparable damage to the landscapes, historical structures and environments that make these destinations so remarkable.

Beyond preservation, limits ultimately enhance visitors’ experience. With fewer crowds, tourists can enjoy these sites in a more serene environment, appreciating natural and cultural significance without the chaos of overcrowding. Less congestion also means improved safety and reduced strain on park staff and infrastructure, an already complicated issue in the United States.

While restrictions on tourism might be inconvenient for some, they are a necessary measure to protect the world’s most cherished natural and cultural landmarks. Managing visitor numbers is not about keeping people out but about protecting the environmental integrity of these sites. Ultimately, it is for the good of the sites, the world and visitors, as they will then have to deal with less traffic, fewer crowds and be able to enjoy these locations more in tune with the way that nature intended.

The History of Favelas, Brazil’s Impoverished Towns

March 10, 2025

Since their emergence in the 19th century, favelas have faced continuous struggles with poverty and crime, a symbol of the tension between Brazil’s government and its underrepresented communities.

Favela of Telegrafo Hillside Brazil — Favela of Telegrafo. patano. CC BY-SA 3.0.

Scattered throughout Brazil are built-up communities known as favelas. These towns, principally found on the outskirts of large cities like Rio de Janeiro or Sao Paulo, are settlements marked by their unique urban development. While they are often associated with drugs, crime and poverty, these neighborhoods are a symbol of Brazil’s complex history.

Finding their origins in the late 19th century, favelas emerged amid a period of tumultuous political and social change in Brazil. They initially formed after the country abolished slavery in 1888. With a large number of impoverished former slaves left homeless and unemployed, they started forming temporary shelters. These were mainly squatter settlements near their work, which was often found in cities. Over the years, these communities grew in number and size. However, it was only after the Canudos War in 1898 when they became the large settlements we know today. The War on Canudos, a deadly civil war that saw a massacre in the small town of Canudos, left almost 20,000 ex-soldiers homeless after their return from the conflict. With nowhere to live, the group established the first favelas in the federal state of Bahia.

As Brazil’s class divide grew, more favelas popped up from the 1940s to the 1970s, becoming more organized with newly created residents’ associations serving as communicators between the towns and the government. Collaboration between the two led to agreements about water and electricity accessibility and construction investment, playing a large role in the favelas’ maintenance. However, rising politicians during this era also targeted the favelas for political gain, stereotyping their existence as slums breeding disease, illiteracy, crime and moral corruption. Many favelas were “removed” as a result, but other methods were sought out to build up and sustain the communities’ infrastructure. Despite various programs intending to improve buildings, Brazil’s economic crisis led to failed attempts at providing adequate housing in many areas. At the same time, cocaine markets were growing globally, and Brazil became a prominent drug producer and transit point between European and U.S. markets. These criminal groups formed during the 1980s and solidified in the early 2000s, attracting more police attention to the neighborhoods.

In 2022, about 8.1% of Brazil’s population lived in favelas. Because of their densely built-up infrastructure and continuous struggles with crime and drugs, favelas have also become synonymous with slum life. Widespread poverty, in particular, has grown to be favela residents’ largest struggle, with economic hardship producing limits on food, healthcare and education. The government has proposed various methods to help tackle these ongoing issues and support the overall conditions of these communities. Authorities have introduced programs to help residents: setting up training programs, providing low-interest loans or materials to construct accommodations and building facilities such as health clinics or schools. Despite these attempts, favela residents still lack full sociopolitical representation and face police violence. Thus, activism in favela communities remains imperative, as residents continue to search for peace and draw attention to the need for social development and increased rights.

GET INVOLVED:

Residents living in favelas struggle against police brutality, discrimination and stark poverty daily. Those looking to help address these issues can do so in several ways, including through making donations. Outreach organizations include: The Favela Foundation, focusing on the development of sustainable social and educational programs; Catalytic Communities, an NGO based in Rio de Janeiro bringing sustainable programs and legislative support to favelas; and The Gerando Falcões Fund of BrazilFoundation, bringing education and economic development to the favelas. Supporting favela locals in their fight to speak out against systemic violence is also very important. Using social media to follow, share and repost activism can help circulate news and reframe the stereotypes usually associated with favela communities.

Learn more

How Afghan Women Are Combating the Ban on Education

March 3, 2025

After losing access to education, Afghan women advocate for rights through silent schools and public outcry.

Women’s Learning about Education in Afghanistan — Women’s Education in Afghanistan. United Nations Photo. CC BY-NC-ND 2.0.

In August 2021, the Taliban returned to power in Kabul, Afghanistan, after the previous government collapsed. An Islamic fundamentalist organization, the Taliban emerged in Afghanistan in the mid-1990s as a small religious group focused on combating corruption, but quickly grew into a harsh regime based on an extreme understanding of Sharia, or Islamic law. While the regime was overthrown in 2001, Taliban offensives and the withdrawal of US and NATO forces from the country allowed their return. Along with instituting several bans on popular culture, the Taliban banned girls from attending secondary school, violating their right to education.

Following this initial ban, Afghanistan’s gender inequality has grown exponentially. In conjunction with this educational ban, the Taliban has prioritized a focus on religious studies over traditional curriculum, dictating what women are supposed to wear, how they act, where they travel and how sex segregates the workplace. As a result, Afghan women have grown more vulnerable — constricted in their livelihoods and forced to be dependent on men. However, in the wake of this inequality, a fight for women’s right to education has grown against the Taliban. For example, many Afghan women are continuing their education despite the ban. In underground locations, usually inside homes, volunteer teachers and families educate girls in secret schools. If any of these schools were to be discovered by the Taliban, those involved would face harsh punishment, including imprisonment, beating or even execution. Even with this daily threat, teachers and students bravely continue in the fight for equal education.“I know I cannot give up and must keep going for their sake,” secret teacher Maryam Ahmadi said in an interview with Al Jazeera. “The other teachers and I are doing our best to keep the hope of Afghan girls and young women alive.” Some instructors have found loopholes in the unjust system, setting up learning centers as girls’ religious schools or tutoring centers. In an interview with NPR, female teacher Zainab described how the Taliban allowed her to informally run her tutoring center since it “offers classes for English and Quran memorization.”

Since 2021, women have fought through protest in a public outcry for equality. A large demonstration in December 2022 saw Afghan women gathering in the streets of Herat, after an initial ban on female university attendance. In response, Taliban groups threatened protestors and forced them to disperse. Protests continued, with another occurring in March 2023, as women gathered outside Kabul University after men returned to school for a new academic year. The Taliban again responded by dispersing the group and forcing them to leave the university. With the rise of such protests, those involved have not only faced aggressive counterattacks by Taliban militants but also have been jailed, undergoing further degradation and abuse. However, despite constant pressure and intimidation by the Taliban, women continue to fight for their right to education. “It is the power of women to stand against the Taliban and demand their rights,” echoed Wahida Amiri, a member of Afghanistan's Women Spontaneous Movement, in an interview with Amnesty.

GET INVOLVED:
Those looking to help protect the right to education can donate to numerous organizations dedicated to supporting Afghan women, including the International Rescue Committee, Women for Afghan Women, the Malala Fund, Sahar Education or Afghan Relief. Individuals can also champion equal rights by getting involved with work done by groups such as UNICEF, Education Cannot Wait or Care, who speak out to the government and international institutions about making a change.