As Famine Ravages Sudan, the UN Can’t Get Food to Starving Millions

Raous Fleg sits outside a hut in a displaced persons camp she fled to in Sudan’s South Kordofan state. There’s no food in the camp, so Fleg and the other residents have resorted to eating boiled leaves and seeds. REUTERS/Thomas Mukoya
Raous Fleg sits outside a hut in a displaced persons camp she fled to in Sudan’s South Kordofan state. There’s no food in the camp, so Fleg and the other residents have resorted to eating boiled leaves and seeds. REUTERS/Thomas Mukoya
TT

As Famine Ravages Sudan, the UN Can’t Get Food to Starving Millions

Raous Fleg sits outside a hut in a displaced persons camp she fled to in Sudan’s South Kordofan state. There’s no food in the camp, so Fleg and the other residents have resorted to eating boiled leaves and seeds. REUTERS/Thomas Mukoya
Raous Fleg sits outside a hut in a displaced persons camp she fled to in Sudan’s South Kordofan state. There’s no food in the camp, so Fleg and the other residents have resorted to eating boiled leaves and seeds. REUTERS/Thomas Mukoya

More than half the people in this nation of 50 million are suffering from severe hunger. Hundreds are estimated to be dying from starvation and hunger-related disease each day.

But life-saving international aid – cooking oil, salt, grain, lentils and more – is unable to reach millions of people who desperately need it. Among them is Raous Fleg, a 39-year-old mother of nine. She lives in a sprawling displaced persons camp in Boram county, in the state of South Kordofan, sheltering from fighting sparked by the civil war between the Sudanese army and the Rapid Support Forces.

Since Fleg arrived nine months ago, United Nations food aid has gotten through only once – back in May. Her family’s share ran out in 10 days, she said. The camp, home to an estimated 50,000 people, is in an area run by local rebels who hold about half the state.

So, every day after dawn, Fleg and other emaciated women from the camp make a two-hour trek to a forest to pick leaves off bushes. On a recent outing, several ate the leaves raw, to dull their hunger. Back at the camp, the women cooked the leaves, boiling them in a pot of water sprinkled with tamarind seeds to blunt the bitter taste.

For Fleg and the thousands of others in the camp, the barely edible mush is a daily staple. It isn’t enough. Some have starved to death, camp medics say. Fleg’s mother is one of them.

“I came here and found nothing to eat,” said Fleg. “There are days when I don’t know if I’m alive or dead.”

The world has an elaborate global system to monitor and tackle hunger in vulnerable lands. It consists of United Nations agencies, non-governmental aid groups and Western donor countries led by the United States. They provide technical expertise to identify hunger zones and billions of dollars in funding each year to feed people.

Sudan is a stark example of what happens when the final, critical stage in that intricate system – the delivery of food to the starving – breaks down. And it exposes a shaky premise on which the system rests: that governments in famine-stricken countries will welcome the help.

Sometimes, in Sudan and elsewhere, governments and warring parties block crucial aid providers – including the UN’s main food-relief arm, the World Food Program (WFP) – from getting food to the starving. And these organizations are sometimes incapable or fearful of pushing back.

In August, the world’s leading hunger monitor reported that the war in Sudan and restrictions on aid delivery have caused famine in at least one location, in the state of North Darfur, and that other areas of the country were potentially experiencing famine. Earlier, the hunger watchdog, known as the Integrated Food Security Phase Classification (IPC), announced that nine million people – almost a fifth of Sudan’s population – are in a food emergency or worse, meaning immediate action is needed to save lives.

It was just the fourth time the IPC has issued a famine finding since it was set up 20 years ago. But despite this year’s dire warnings, the vast majority of Sudanese who desperately need food aid aren’t getting it. A major stumbling block: the main provider of aid, the United Nations relief agencies, won’t dispense aid in places without the approval of Sudan’s army-backed government, which the world body recognizes as sovereign.

Parts of Sudan have become a “humanitarian desert,” said Christos Christou, the president of Doctors Without Borders, which is active on the ground in Darfur. The UN is in “hibernation mode,” he said.

A RISING DEATH TOLL

People are dying in the meantime: A Reuters analysis of satellite imagery found that graveyards in Darfur are expanding fast as starvation and attendant diseases take hold. More than 100 people are perishing every day from starvation, the UK’s Africa minister, Ray Collins, told parliament this month.

Aid is being distributed far more widely in areas controlled by the army. But relief workers say the military doesn’t want food falling into the hands of enemy forces in areas it doesn’t control and is using starvation tactics against civilians to destabilize these areas. The army-backed government, now based in Port Sudan, has held up aid delivery by denying or delaying travel permits and clearances, making it tough to access areas controlled by an opposing faction.

In internal meeting minutes reviewed by Reuters, UN and NGO logistics coordinators have reported for four months in a row, from May to August, that Sudanese authorities are refusing to issue travel permits for aid convoys to places in South Kordofan and Darfur.

The UN’s reticence to confront Sudan’s government over the blocking of aid has effectively made it a hostage of the government, a dozen aid workers told Reuters.

“The UN has been very shy and not brave in calling out the deliberate obstruction of access happening in this country,” said Mathilde Vu, the Norwegian Refugee Council’s advocacy adviser for Sudan.

Four UN officials, speaking on condition of anonymity, said they fear that if they defy the military, aid workers and agencies could be expelled from Sudan. They point to 2009, when the now-deposed autocrat, Omar al-Bashir, kicked out 13 non-government aid groups after the International Criminal Court issued a warrant for his arrest on war-crimes charges.

A spokesperson for the UN’s emergency-response arm, the Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA), said aid organizations “face serious challenges” in reaching people who need help in Sudan. These include the volatile security situation, roadblocks, looting and “various restrictions on the movement of humanitarian supplies and personnel imposed by the parties to the conflict,” said Eri Kaneko, the OCHA spokesperson.

The World Food Program said it has assisted 4.9 million people so far this year across Sudan. That amounts to just one in five of the 25 million people who are enduring severe hunger. The organization didn’t say how many times these people received aid, or how much each person got.

The army’s main foe, the RSF, is also using food as a weapon, Reuters reporting has shown. The two sides, formerly allies, went to war 17 months ago for control of the country. The RSF has looted aid hubs and blocked relief agencies from accessing areas at risk of famine, including displaced persons camps in Darfur and areas of South Kordofan. The group has also conducted an ethnic cleansing campaign against the Masalit people in Darfur, driving hundreds of thousands from their homes and creating the conditions for famine.

BREAKING THE IMPASSE

Some at the UN are calling on Washington and its allies to do more to break the impasse. Among them is Justin Brady, the Sudan head of OCHA. He says the main donor countries – primarily the United States, the United Kingdom and European Union nations – need to engage directly with the Sudanese government on the ground in Port Sudan. After the army seized power in 2021, the US cut off economic aid to Sudan. Western funding for food aid to the hungry is channeled mainly through the UN.

“It’s the donor governments that have the leverage,” Brady said. “We are left on our own” in dealing with the Sudanese authorities.

The Sudanese military and the RSF are to blame for the country’s food crisis, according to Tom Perriello, the US special envoy to Sudan. “This famine was not created by a natural disaster or drought,” he told Reuters. “It was created by men – the same men who can choose to end this war and ensure unhindered access to every corner of Sudan.”

Sudan’s army-backed government and the RSF didn’t respond to questions for this story. The two warring parties have blamed each other for hold-ups in the delivery of aid. Army chief General Abdel Fattah al-Burhan and RSF leader Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo both said this week they were committed to facilitating the flow of aid.

Another impediment may come from inside the World Food Program itself. The WFP has been rocked by alleged corruption within its Sudan operation, which some humanitarian officials and diplomats worry may have affected aid flows. Reuters revealed in late August that the WFP is investigating two of its top officials in Sudan over allegations of fraud and concealing information from donors about the army’s role in blocking aid.

The disarray in Sudan comes as the global famine-fighting system faces one of its greatest tests in years. The IPC estimates that 168 million people in 42 nations are enduring a food crisis or worse, meaning they live in areas where acute malnutrition ranges from 10% to more than 30% of the populace. Like Sudan, many of the worst hunger zones are also conflict zones – including Myanmar, Afghanistan, South Sudan, Haiti, Nigeria and Gaza. War makes it all the harder for the international community to intervene.

'HUNGER KILLED HER'

Before the war, South Kordofan had some two million people. The need for outside help has intensified as some 700,000 displaced people have poured into camps and towns in SPLM-N areas since the war erupted.

Food stocks in the state were already low before the war. A poor harvest in 2023 was compounded by a locust plague that devoured crops. The war and the resulting refugee influx made things far worse.

In the communities Reuters visited, hunger and disease are everywhere. In one camp in the county of Um Durain, home to some 50,000 people, children have been dying of malnutrition and diarrhea for the past year, said community leader Abdel-Aziz Osman.

Nutrition workers at a treatment center in the camp are seeing 50 cases a month of children and mothers suffering malnutrition. Before the war, medics were treating five to 10 cases of malnutrition a month in the entire county.

In the camp in Boram, toddlers with bloated stomachs and rail-thin arms stood outside huts made of sticks, plastic and clothes – vulnerable to rain, snakes and scorpions.

Raous Fleg, the woman who makes the leafy mush, arrived in the camp from Kadugli, the capital of South Kordofan, in December with her mother and six of her children. She left three of her children behind with her husband, a soldier in the Sudanese army. They made the treacherous journey on foot over a pass in the Nuba Mountains, an area that’s home to a mix of ethnic groups.

Fleg is a member of the Nuba people, who form the main support base of the SPLM-N. Growing up in the Kadugli area, Fleg says, she endured repeated aerial bombardments by government forces.

In the early 2000s, when she was a teenager, fighter jets dropped barrel bombs on her home. Seven members of her family died, including her father and two siblings. She recalls being buried beneath the rubble and getting pulled out alive. Her mother also survived.

“The blood flowed like this,” she said, holding a plastic bottle filled with water and pouring it onto the ground.

Thirteen years later, her in-laws and two more siblings were killed in another air strike by government forces. A third sibling died in hospital after losing two limbs in the attack. Again, she and her mother survived.

After they arrived in Boram county, Fleg’s mother felt weak. There was nothing to eat, so Fleg gave her some water with seeds to drink. But it gave her diarrhea. Doctors at a nearby clinic said her mother was suffering from dehydration and hunger, said Fleg.

On the evening of Jan. 5, Fleg felt her mother’s chest to check if she was still breathing. She wasn’t. After she’d survived years of air strikes, “hunger killed her,” said Fleg.



Iran’s Guards Seize Wartime Power, Blunting Supreme Leader’s Role

Iran's Interior Minister Ahmad Vahidi briefs the media on elections in Tehran, Iran, March 4, 2024. (AP)
Iran's Interior Minister Ahmad Vahidi briefs the media on elections in Tehran, Iran, March 4, 2024. (AP)
TT

Iran’s Guards Seize Wartime Power, Blunting Supreme Leader’s Role

Iran's Interior Minister Ahmad Vahidi briefs the media on elections in Tehran, Iran, March 4, 2024. (AP)
Iran's Interior Minister Ahmad Vahidi briefs the media on elections in Tehran, Iran, March 4, 2024. (AP)

Two months into a war with the US and Israel, Iran no longer has a single, undisputed clerical arbiter at the pinnacle of power — an abrupt break with the past that may be hardening Tehran’s stance as it weighs renewed talks with Washington.

Since its creation in 1979, the Islamic Republic has revolved around a supreme leader with final authority on all key matters of state. But the killing of Ali Khamenei on the first day of the war, and the elevation of his wounded son, Mojtaba, have ushered in a different order dominated by commanders of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) and marked by the absence of a decisive, authoritative referee.

Mojtaba Khamenei remains at the apex of the system, but three people familiar with internal deliberations say his role is largely to legitimize decisions made by his generals rather than issue directives himself.

Wartime pressure has concentrated power into a narrower, harder-line inner circle rooted in the Supreme National Security Council (SNSC), the Supreme Leader’s office and the IRGC, which now dominates both military strategy and key political decisions, Iranian officials and analysts say.

"The Iranians are painfully slow in their response," said a senior Pakistani government official briefed on peace talks between Iran and the United States that Islamabad has been mediating. "There is apparently no one decision-making command structure. At times, it takes them 2 to 3 days to respond."

Analysts said the obstacle to a deal is not internal infighting in Tehran, but the gap between what Washington is prepared to offer ‌and what Iran’s hardline ‌Guards were willing to accept.

The diplomatic face of Iran at the talks with the US has been Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi, more ‌recently joined ⁠by parliament speaker Mohammed ⁠Baqer Qalibaf -- a former Guards commander, Tehran mayor and presidential candidate -- who has emerged during the war as a key conduit between Iran’s political, security and clerical elites.

On the ground, however, the central interlocutor has been IRGC commander Ahmad Vahidi, according to a Pakistani and two Iranian sources who identified him weeks ago as Iran's pivotal figure, including on the night a ceasefire was announced.

Mojtaba, who was severely injured in the opening Israeli and US strike that killed his father and other relatives and left him disfigured with serious leg wounds, has not appeared publicly and communicates through IRGC aides or limited audio links because of security constraints, two people close to his inner circle said.

There was no immediate reply from the Iranian foreign ministry to a request for comment on the issues raised in this article. Iranian officials have previously denied any divisions over negotiations with the United States.

People ride motorcycles near a billboard featuring an image of Iran's new Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei, amid a ceasefire between US and Iran, in Tehran, Iran, April 20, 2026. Majid Asgaripour/WANA (West Asia News Agency) via Reuters

REAL POWER WIELDED BY WARTIME LEADERSHIP, INSIDERS SAY

Iran submitted a new proposal to Washington on Monday, which according to senior Iranian sources envisions staged talks, with the nuclear issue ⁠to be set aside at the start until the war ends and disputes over Gulf shipping are resolved. Washington insists the nuclear issue ‌must be addressed from the outset.

"Neither side wants to negotiate," said Alan Eyre, an Iran expert and former US diplomat, adding ‌that both believed time would weaken the other -- Iran through leverage over Hormuz and Washington through economic pressure and a blockade.

For now, neither side can afford to bend, Eyre said: Iran’s IRGC is wary of ‌appearing weak to Washington, while President Donald Trump faces midterm election pressure and little room for flexibility without political cost.

"For either, flexibility would be seen as weakness," Eyre said.

That caution reflects not ‌just the pressures of the moment, but the way power is now exercised inside Iran.

While Mojtaba is formally Iran's ultimate authority, he is a figure of assent rather than command, insiders say, endorsing outcomes forged through institutional consensus, rather than imposing authority. Real power, they say, has moved to a unified wartime leadership centered on the SNSC.

"Important deals probably pass through him," Iranian analyst Arash Azizi said, "but I can’t see him overruling the National Security Council. How could he go against those running the war effort?"

Hardline figures such as former nuclear negotiator Saeed Jalili and a cluster of radical MPs have raised their profile using forceful rhetoric during the war, but ‌they lack the institutional clout to derail decisions or shape outcomes.

Mojtaba owes his elevation to the Guards, who sidelined pragmatists and backed him as a reliable guardian of their hardline agenda. Already strengthened by war, the Guards’ growing dominance signals a more aggressive foreign policy ⁠and tighter domestic repression, sources familiar with the country's inner ⁠policy-making circles told Reuters.

Driven by revolutionary sectarian ideology and a security-first worldview, the Guards see their mission as preserving the regime at home while projecting deterrence abroad.

That outlook, often shared with hardliners across the judiciary and the clerical establishment, prioritizes rigid centralized control and resistance to Western pressure, particularly on nuclear policy and Iran’s regional reach.

POWER SHIFTS FROM CLERICS TO SECURITY SECTOR, ANALYSTS SAY

In practice, the Guards' ideology shapes strategy and decision-making rests firmly in their hands. With the country at war and Ali Khamenei gone, no actor inside the system has the power or scope to resist them, even if they wished to, the people close to internal discussions said.

The choice facing Iran’s leadership is no longer between moderate and hardline policy, but between hardline and even harder line. A small faction may argue for pushing further still, two Iranian sources close to power circles said, but even that impulse has so far been kept in check by the Guards.

The shift marks a decisive reordering of power from clerical primacy to security dominance. "We’ve gone from divine power to hard power," said Aaron David Miller, a former US negotiator. "From the influence of the clerics to the influence of the Revolutionary Guard Corps. This is how Iran is being governed."

While differences of opinion exist, decision-making has consolidated around security institutions, with Mojtaba acting as a central convening figure rather than a lone decider, added Alex Vatanka, senior fellow at the Middle East Institute. Despite sustained military and economic pressure from the United States and Israel, Iran has shown no signs of fracture or capitulation nearly nine weeks into the war.

Nor, as Miller noted, is there evidence of fundamental rifts within the system or meaningful opposition on the streets.

That cohesion suggests that command now sits with the Guards and security services, which appear to be driving the war rather than merely executing it. A strategic consensus has emerged — avoid a return to full-scale war, preserve leverage, especially over the Strait of Hormuz, and emerge from the conflict politically, economically and militarily stronger, Miller said.


Netanyahu’s Rivals Are Joining Forces. Would They Shift Israel’s Security Policy?

Former Israeli Prime minister Naftali Bennett and Israeli opposition leader Yair Lapid gesture as they announce their political union ahead of this year's general election, the new party will be called "Together", in Herzliya, Israel April 26, 2026. (Reuters)
Former Israeli Prime minister Naftali Bennett and Israeli opposition leader Yair Lapid gesture as they announce their political union ahead of this year's general election, the new party will be called "Together", in Herzliya, Israel April 26, 2026. (Reuters)
TT

Netanyahu’s Rivals Are Joining Forces. Would They Shift Israel’s Security Policy?

Former Israeli Prime minister Naftali Bennett and Israeli opposition leader Yair Lapid gesture as they announce their political union ahead of this year's general election, the new party will be called "Together", in Herzliya, Israel April 26, 2026. (Reuters)
Former Israeli Prime minister Naftali Bennett and Israeli opposition leader Yair Lapid gesture as they announce their political union ahead of this year's general election, the new party will be called "Together", in Herzliya, Israel April 26, 2026. (Reuters)

Two of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's top rivals announced they would join forces in ‌an upcoming election to oust his coalition government, with a focus mainly on domestic issues such as military conscription for the ultra-Orthodox.

But on issues like Iran, Gaza and Lebanon, the joint party led by right-wing Naftali Bennett and centrist Yair Lapid is expected to pursue a security posture similar to that of Netanyahu - who heads the most right-wing government in Israel's history - meaning Israel's foreign policy would remain largely unchanged.

The new party, called "BeYachad" meaning "together" in Hebrew, has not released a formal policy platform. But below is what is known about their positions on regional conflicts, based on recent public comments.

IRAN

Bennett, 54, and Lapid, 62, have staunchly backed Netanyahu's decision to jointly attack Iran with the US, reflecting broad public support in Israel for the war.

At the start of Israel's aerial bombardment in Iran, Lapid told Reuters in an interview that it was a "just war against evil."

Both Bennett and Lapid have since criticized Netanyahu, 76, for what they describe as a failure to achieve Israel's main objectives in the war, including toppling Iran's clerical government.

However, neither man has called for a resumption in fighting since Israeli and US attacks and Iranian missile ‌fire was halted by ‌an April 8 ceasefire.

A source close to their new party described Bennett and Lapid as "hawkish" ‌and "tough on ⁠Iran."

They are also "pragmatic ⁠and understand the need for diplomatic agreements and the work that happens after the military use of force to achieve strategic goals," said the source, who spoke on condition of anonymity to describe their party's priorities.

LEBANON

Bennett and Lapid have also both staunchly supported Israeli military operations in Lebanon while questioning an April 17 ceasefire that has failed to halt fighting between the Israeli military and Iran-backed Hezbollah.

Shortly before Israel's military invaded southern Lebanon in March, Lapid said that Israel must take whatever steps were necessary to protect Israelis.

After the ceasefire with Hezbollah was announced in April, Lapid said the only solution was the permanent removal of the threat to northern Israel.

Bennett sharply criticized the ceasefire, saying in an April 17 Facebook ⁠post: "One can already count backwards towards the next round. Hezbollah began this morning to rebuild southern Lebanon ‌and is becoming stronger with missiles ahead of the next round."

GAZA

On the war in ‌Gaza, where Israel has continued to carry out deadly strikes despite a ceasefire last October, both Bennett and Lapid have criticized Netanyahu for not ‌fully destroying the Hamas group after the October 7, 2023 attack on Israel that it led.

In January, Lapid said Netanyahu's government ‌had achieved the "worst possible outcome" in Gaza, saying that Hamas still has tens of thousands of armed fighters. Hamas retained control of a sliver of territory on Gaza's coast under the ceasefire.

In a Facebook post this month, Bennett said Netanyahu's policies -- including allowing some aid into the enclave after restricting all humanitarian supplies for three months in 2025 -- had helped Hamas regain control.

"This is with the help of hundreds of aid trucks that Netanyahu's government brings ‌them every day," Bennett wrote.

Netanyahu has cast Israel's devastating military assault that destroyed much of Gaza and killed more than 72,000 Palestinians as a success. He has held out the ⁠possibility of resuming a full-scale war if ⁠Hamas fails to disarm under a US-backed process, something the group has thus far rejected.

PALESTINIAN STATEHOOD

With public opinion polling showing that most Israelis oppose the formation of an independent Palestinian state in the occupied West Bank, Gaza and East Jerusalem, a Bennett-Lapid government would be unlikely to bring a major policy shift on the Palestinians.

Netanyahu opposes the establishment of a Palestinian state, and his government has accelerated settlement building plans in the West Bank, in what ministers in his government say is part of a bid to destroy any future for Palestinian independence.

In 2022, Lapid, who like many in Israel's political center and left are not outright opposed to Palestinian sovereignty, said that a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict was the right thing to do.

When asked by US broadcaster ABC during a 2024 interview why he opposes a two-state solution, Bennett said he believed it would lead to violence against Israelis.

"What we've learned over the past 30 years is that every time we gave the Palestinians a piece of land, instead of building it into a beautiful Singapore they turned it into a terror state and began killing Israelis," Bennett said.

On the West Bank, Netanyahu, Bennett and Lapid have all spoken forcefully against settler violence toward Palestinians. Such attacks have escalated under Netanyahu, who critics accuse of allowing settlers free rein to burn Palestinian villages and harm villagers. Netanyahu's office denies this.


As Some Hijabs Come Off in Iran, Restrictions Still in Place

Iranian women walk along a busy street in Tehran on April 25, 2026. (AFP)
Iranian women walk along a busy street in Tehran on April 25, 2026. (AFP)
TT

As Some Hijabs Come Off in Iran, Restrictions Still in Place

Iranian women walk along a busy street in Tehran on April 25, 2026. (AFP)
Iranian women walk along a busy street in Tehran on April 25, 2026. (AFP)

Images of bareheaded women sipping coffee in cafes in Tehran, in apparent defiance of the country's strict dress rule, have stirred interest outside Iran -- but for Elnaz, 32, it is no breakthrough.

"It is not at all a sign of any change in the government in my opinion. Because no achievement has been made regarding women's rights," said Elnaz, a painter in Tehran, who like other women in the capital and elsewhere contacted by AFP in Paris asked that her full name not be published.

"Under the surface, in reality, no real change has taken place in people's freedom, especially when it comes to women's basic rights," she said.

Wearing the headscarf in public has been mandatory for women since shortly after the revolution of 1979 in what was long seen as an ideological pillar of the clerical leadership.

But enforcement of the rule appears to have slackened, at least in parts of Tehran and other cities.

The trend began following the 2022-2023 protests sparked by the death in custody of Mahsa Amini, who had been arrested in Tehran for allegedly ignoring the dress code.

It continued through the June 2025 war with Israel, January protests sparked by the cost of living and now the war against the US and Israel that is on hold with a ceasefire.

There is little sign of the dreaded white patrol vans of the so-called morality police that used to lurk in squares and on street corners to haul in women deemed to have violated the rules.

But the picture remains mixed and the situation evolving, with wearing hijab still a matter of choice for some women. It is not uncommon even in more liberal areas of Tehran to see women with and without the headscarf walking together.

- Years ago 'only a dream' -

In some areas the change has been startling, with scenes of women casually strolling without a headscarf that would have been unthinkable half a decade ago.

"I'm happy for all of them, because until just three years ago this was only a dream," said Zahra, 57, a housewife from Isfahan in central Iran.

"My youth has passed and I didn't get to have this experience; now I don't wear it anymore, but I wish I could have experienced these days when I was young."

But women can still be summoned by authorities for not wearing hijab, and cafes shut down for failing to enforce the rule, while often women must wear the garment to enter banks, educational establishments and official buildings.

Moreover, the rights of women are still restricted and they live under a system that arrested tens of thousands of people following the January protests and thousands more, including women, in the current war, according to rights groups.

"Beautiful photos of cafes and girls are being shared everywhere, but as cafe owners, we've been paying a lot for that," said Negin, 34, who owns a cafe in Tehran.

"We've been treated very harshly over these years, continuing until this day. We've been shut down multiple times, fined and had to pay bribes... What makes me even angrier is when they call this 'freedom' and they say women are being freer," she added.

- 'More widespread' -

Amnesty International said this month that "widespread resistance" to the obligatory hijab "forced authorities to retreat from the violent mass arrests and assaults of previous years".

"However, authorities continued to use existing laws and regulations to enforce compulsory veiling in workplaces, universities and other public sector institutions, leaving women and girls who resisted facing harassment, assault, arbitrary arrest, fines and expulsion from employment and education," it added.

One noticeable change has been state television broadcasting images of Iranian women not wearing hijab -- but only so long as they back the regime and denounce Iran's enemies in what critics see as a cynical ploy.

"More women are putting their fear aside each day and trying out what it's like to go out without hijab, and it's gradually becoming more widespread," said Shahrzad, 39, a Tehran housewife.

"But I don't see any change in the government system. It's the same as before, aside from those videos of girls going in front of state news cameras without hijab and saying 'my leader, my leader, I will sacrifice myself for him'."

- 'Don't see any significant change' -

The situation is far from uniform across Iran.

Mahsa, a 32-year-old student, said rules and observance are tighter in the major eastern city of Mashhad.

"Before the 12-day war (against Israel in June), in Mashhad they wouldn't let us in anywhere without hijab," she said.

"Now they do let people in, but unfortunately, we haven't had the same level of change that people in Tehran have seen over the past three years."

Farnaz, 41 from Isfahan, which is generally seen as one of Iran's more conservative big cities, said she had been summoned to appear in court over hijab observance later this month.

"In Isfahan, for the past few days they've started sealing cafes again over hijab issues. They didn't even wait for the situation with the war to be clarified.

"Here, you're dealing both with the government and with people. Like before in some neighborhoods, religious people sometimes warn you and harass you. It's not just about the morality police."

"I don't see any significant change," she added.

Maryam, 35, also from Isfahan, said women without hijab would not be served in some banks and shopworkers have to wear it.

"If you are involved in social or economic activity, you are expected to observe hijab."

Zahra, the housewife from Isfahan, said "we paid a very high price to get here", after the crackdown on the Mahsa Amini protests killed hundreds of people according to rights groups.

"Right now, they (the authorities) are just distracted by the war. But after that, who knows what they will do about it," she said.