International

‘My wife died giving birth after Trump cut funding to our clinic’

Published

11 months ago

September 15, 2025

‘My wife died giving birth after Trump cut funding to our clinic’

When Shahnaz went into labour, her husband Abdul called a taxi to take them to the only medical facility accessible to them.

“She was in a lot pain,” he says.

A 20-minute drive away, the clinic was in Shesh Pol village in Afghanistan’s north-eastern Badakhshan province. It was where their two older children were born.

Abdul sat next to Shahnaz comforting her as they drove over gravel tracks to reach help.

“But when we reached the clinic, we saw that it was closed. I didn’t know it had shut down,” he said, his face crumpling with agony.

Warning: Readers may find some details in this article distressing.

The clinic in Shesh Pol is one of more than 400 medical facilities that closed down in Afghanistan, one of the world’s poorest countries, after the Trump administration cut nearly all US aid to the country earlier this year, in a drastic and abrupt move following the dismantling of the US Agency for International Development (USAID).

A single-storey structure with four small rooms, white paint peeling off its walls, the Shesh Pol clinic has USAID posters tacked up everywhere with information and guidance for pregnant women and new mothers.

It doesn’t look like much but in Badakhshan’s mountainous, unforgiving terrain, where a lack of access has been a major reason for historically high maternal mortality rates, the clinic was a critical lifeline, part of a wider programme implemented during the tenure of the US-backed government in the country, to reduce maternal and newborn deaths.

It had a trained midwife who assisted around 25-30 deliveries every month. It had a stock of medicines and injections, and it also provided basic healthcare services.

READ ALSO:

Other medical facilities are simply too far from Abdul’s village, and it was not without risk for Shahnaz to travel on bumpy roads. Abdul also didn’t have money to pay for a longer journey – renting the taxi cost 1,000 Afghani ($14.65; £12.70), roughly a quarter of his monthly income as a labourer. So they decided to return home.

“But the baby was coming and we had to stop by the side of the road,” Abdul said.

Shahnaz delivered their baby girl in the car. Shortly after, she died, bleeding profusely. A few hours later, before she could be named, their baby also died.

“I wept and screamed. My wife and child could’ve been saved if the clinic was open,” said Abdul. “We had a hard life, but we were living it together. I was always happy when I was with her.”

He doesn’t even have a photo of Shahnaz to hold on to.

There’s no certainty the mother and baby would’ve survived if they’d been treated at the clinic, but without it, they didn’t stand a chance, underlining the undeniable impact of US aid cuts in Afghanistan.

For decades, America has been the largest donor to Afghanistan, and in 2024, US funds made up a staggering 43% of all aid coming into the country.

The Trump administration has justified withdrawing it, saying there were “credible and longstanding concerns that funding was benefiting terrorist groups, including… the Taliban”, who govern the country. The US government further added that they had reports stating that at least $11m were “being siphoned or enriching the Taliban”.

The report that the US State Department referenced was made by the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction (SIGAR). It said that $10.9m of US taxpayer money had been paid to the Taliban-controlled government by partners of USAID in “taxes, fees, duties, or utilities”.

READ ALSO:

The Taliban government denies that aid money was going into their hands.

“This allegation is not true. The aid is given to the UN, and through them to NGOs in provinces. They identify who needs the aid, and they distribute it themselves. The government is not involved,” said Suhail Shaheen, the head of the Taliban’s political office in Doha.

The Taliban government’s policies, especially its restrictions on women, the harshest in the world, have meant that after four years in power, it is still not recognised by most of the world. It’s also a key reason donors have been increasingly walking away from the country.

The US insists no one has died because of aid cuts. Shahnaz and her baby’s deaths are not recorded anywhere. Neither are countless others.

The BBC has documented at least half a dozen first-hand, devastating accounts in areas where USAID-supported clinics have shut down.

Right next to Shahnaz’s grave, villagers who had gathered around us pointed to two other graves. They told us both were of women who died in childbirth in the past four months – Daulat Begi and Javhar. Their babies survived.

Not far from the graveyard, we met Khan Mohammad whose wife, 36-year-old Gul Jan, died in childbirth five months ago. Their baby boy Safiullah died three days later.

“When she became pregnant, she would go to the clinic for check-ups. But midway through her pregnancy it shut down. During the delivery she had a lot of pain and blood loss,” Khan Mohammad said. “My children are sad all the time. No one can give them the love of a mother. I miss her every day. We had a sweet and loving life together.”

A roughly five-hour drive from Shesh Pol, in Cawgani, another village where a USAID-backed clinic closed down, Ahmad Khan, the grief-stricken father of Maidamo showed us the room in their mud and clay home where she died giving birth to baby Karima.

“If the clinic had been open, she might have survived. And even if she had died, we would not have had regrets knowing the medics tried their best. Now we’re left with regret and pain. America did this to us,” he said, tears rolling down his face.

In another home a few lanes away, Bahisa tells us how terrifying it was to give birth at home. Her three other children were born in the Cawgani clinic.

“I was so scared. In the clinic, we had a midwife, medicines and injections. At home I had nothing, no painkillers. It was unbearable pain. I felt like life was leaving my body. I became numb,” she said.

READ ALSO:

Her baby girl, named Fakiha, died three days after she was born.

The closure of clinics in villages has resulted in a surge of patients at the maternity ward of the main regional hospital in the provincial capital Faizabad.

Getting to it, through Badakhshan’s treacherous landscape is risky. We were shown a horrifying photo of a newborn baby, who was delivered on the way to Faizabad, and whose neck snapped before he got to the hospital.

We had visited the hospital back in 2022, and while it was stretched then, the scenes we saw this time were unprecedented.

In each bed, there were three women. Imagine having gone into labour, or just having gone through a miscarriage, and not even having a bed to yourself to lie in.

It’s what Zuhra Shewan, who suffered a miscarriage, had to endure.

“I was bleeding severely and didn’t even have a place to sit. It was really hard. By the time a bed is free, a woman could die bleeding,” she said.

Dr Shafiq Hamdard, the director of the hospital, said: “We have 120 beds in the hospital. Now we’ve admitted 300 to 305.”

While the patient load is swelling, the hospital, too, has faced sharp cuts in its funding.

“Three years ago our annual budget was $80,000. Now we have $25,000,” Dr Hamdard said.

By August this year, there had been as many maternal deaths recorded as there were for the whole of last year. Which means that at this rate, maternal mortality could increase by as much as 50% over last year.

Newborn deaths have already increased by roughly a third in the past four months, compared with the start of the year.

Razia Hanifi, the hospital’s head midwife, says she’s exhausted. “I have been working for the past 20 years. This year is the toughest, because of the overcrowding, the shortage of resources and the shortage of trained staff,” she said.

But no reinforcements are coming because of the Taliban government’s restrictions on women. Three years ago, all higher education, including medical education was banned for women. Less than a year ago, in December 2024, training for midwives and female nurses was also banned.

At a discreet location, we met two female students who were midway through the training when it was closed. They didn’t want to be identified for fear of reprisal.

Anya (name changed) said they both were in graduate courses at university when the Taliban took over. When those were closed in December 2022, they began midwife and nursing training, as it was the only path left to getting an education and a job.

“When that was also banned, I became depressed. I was crying day and night, and I wasn’t able to eat. It’s a painful situation,” she said.

Karishma (named changed) said: “There is already a shortage of midwives and nurses in Afghanistan. Without more being trained, women will be forced to give birth at home which will put them at risk.”

We asked the Taliban government’s Suhail Shaheen how they can justify bans which effectively curb access to health for half the population.

“It is our internal issue. These are our issues, how to handle them, how to consider them, how to take decisions, this is something internal. That is up to the leadership. Based on the needs of the society, they will take a decision,” he said.

With their access to medical services severely restricted, by wave after wave of crushing blows, for Afghanistan’s women, their right to health, and life itself, is at grave risk.

Additional reporting, photography and video: Aakriti Thapar, Mahfouz Zubaide, Sanjay Ganguly

Top image shows Abdul with his daughter and son in Shesh Pol.

‘My wife died giving birth after Trump cut funding to our clinic’

BBC

Related Topics:clinic Funding giving birth Trump

Up Next

Charlie Kirk suspect Tyler in romantic relationship with transgender – Utah governor

Don't Miss

Saudi-France diplomatic initiative moves Palestine closer to statehood

International

Hamas Accepts US-Backed Disarmament Plan as Trump Unveils Gaza Peace Roadmap

Published

9 hours ago

July 31, 2026

Trends Admin

Hamas Accepts US-Backed Disarmament Plan as Trump Unveils Gaza Peace Roadmap

A landmark agreement could reshape the future of Gaza, but Israel’s official response remains pending as key details hang in the balance.

In a significant diplomatic breakthrough, the Palestinian group Hamas has formally accepted a United States-backed proposal aimed at ending the 10-month-long war in the Gaza Strip. The agreement, unveiled by U.S. President Donald Trump, outlines a phased roadmap that includes the group’s complete disarmament and a gradual withdrawal of Israeli troops from the territory. The announcement, made on Friday, marks one of the most substantial developments since the October ceasefire. However, the deal remains conditional, and Israel has not yet issued an official response, leaving the international community in a state of cautious optimism.

Under the proposed framework, Hamas has agreed to surrender its weapons to the National Committee for the Administration of Gaza (NCAG) , a Palestinian governing body established under the Trump-administration-led Board of Peace initiative. The disarmament process is designed to be phased and verifiable, beginning with an initial phase where Hamas police forces are expected to hand over light weapons to the NCAG within the first two weeks. This would be followed by a second, more extensive phase lasting between 200 and 350 days, during which the full decommissioning of heavy weapons, tunnels, depots, and weapons production facilities would take place under strict international oversight. The roadmap follows a “zero trust” model, meaning each phase of disarmament must be independently verified before the next step of Israeli military withdrawal can proceed. Echoing this cautious approach, Nickolay Mladenov, the Board of Peace’s High Representative for Gaza, emphasized that “withdrawal must move in lockstep with decommissioning,” underscoring the need for synchronized and carefully monitored implementation.

For Hamas, the decision represents a difficult but necessary concession aimed at alleviating the suffering of Palestinian civilians. Ghazi Hamad, a member of the group’s negotiating team, described the move as a sacrifice made for the sake of the people in Gaza, to save them from continued killing and displacement. He further clarified that Israel will not intervene in the disarmament process, which will be solely managed by the NCAG. However, a senior Hamas official stressed that full implementation of the agreement depends on Israel fulfilling its prior commitments under the initial ceasefire, which include ending all military attacks, withdrawing forces to October 2025 positions, and significantly increasing humanitarian aid deliveries into the besieged territory.

READ ALSO:

As of this report, Israel’s government has not formally responded to the proposal, and its position remains a critical unknown. An Israeli political source indicated that the current framework does not “satisfactorily” address Israel’s core demand for the complete demilitarisation of the Gaza Strip. The source also reiterated that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s recent meeting with President Trump in Washington did not include discussions on the Gaza conflict, casting doubt on the level of Israeli engagement with the plan. Another major sticking point is the so-called “Yellow Line” buffer zone, with an Israeli official insisting there would be no withdrawal from this area before Hamas is fully disarmed. Despite these reservations, the U.S. has expressed confidence that Israel will ultimately adhere to the 20-point plan, with one official noting that President Trump would be “very, very disappointed” if it did not.

The agreement was brokered by a coalition of international mediators, including Egypt, Qatar, and Turkey, who have been engaged in months of difficult negotiations. Egypt’s state-linked Al-Qahera News reported that Cairo is expected to host another meeting to advance discussions on the second phase of the truce, signaling continued diplomatic momentum. A diplomatic source familiar with the negotiations emphasized the roadmap’s commitment to unity and order, stating that “there will be no exceptions for certain weapons or certain people,” and that the goal is to establish “one authority, one law, one weapon.” The roadmap also includes a verification mechanism designed to monitor compliance by both parties, ensuring accountability and transparency throughout the entire process.

Despite the diplomatic progress, hostilities have persisted on the ground, underscoring the fragility of the current situation. Gaza’s health authorities reported that Israeli airstrikes on Thursday killed at least four people, including two children, even as negotiations advanced. The humanitarian situation in Gaza remains dire, with widespread displacement, acute food insecurity, and a collapsing healthcare system that has left thousands without access to basic medical care. The success of the agreement hinges not only on political will from all parties but also on tangible, on-the-ground improvements in the daily lives of Palestinian civilians, many of whom have been displaced multiple times since the conflict began.

The focus now shifts from negotiation to implementation, with the Board of Peace confirming in a post on X (formerly Twitter) that the NCAG will “soon begin a phased transition toward full authority.” Key milestones to watch include Israel’s official response to the proposal, which could shape the entire trajectory of the deal; the actual start of the weapons handover process; the deployment of an International Stabilization Force to work alongside a new Palestinian police force; and meaningful progress on humanitarian aid and reconstruction efforts that could help stabilize the region. Each of these steps carries significant weight and will be closely monitored by the international community.

This agreement represents a rare moment of compromise in a conflict marked by decades of violence and deep-seated mistrust. However, the path forward is fraught with challenges, and the “zero trust” approach reflects the profound suspicions that persist on both sides. Any misstep, whether a delay in weapons handover or a disagreement over troop withdrawal, could unravel the entire framework and plunge the region back into conflict. For now, the world watches and waits, with hopes pinned on a process that remains as fragile as it is historic. As Mladenov aptly put it, “What happens next matters even more. Implementation and verification have to be real.”

Hamas Accepts US-Backed Disarmament Plan as Trump Unveils Gaza Peace Roadmap

International

At least 43 migrants die as 49,000 cross into Spain’s Ceuta enclave

Published

10 hours ago

July 31, 2026

Trends Admin

At least 43 migrants die as 49,000 cross into Spain’s Ceuta enclave

At least 43 migrants have died during a massive and chaotic attempt to enter Spain’s North African enclave of Ceuta from neighbouring Morocco, as tens of thousands of people crossed the border by land and sea.

Spanish authorities estimated that about 49,000 migrants entered Ceuta within 24 hours, creating an unprecedented pressure on the enclave’s security agencies, emergency services and reception facilities. The scale of the influx was significant for a territory with a population of about 80,000 people. (reuters.com)

Many of those attempting to reach Ceuta reportedly entered through coastal routes, with some swimming around border barriers from the Moroccan side. Others moved towards land crossings and border fences separating the Spanish territory from Morocco.

The large movement included men, women, children and families, according to reports from the area.

Authorities said several people died during the dangerous crossings, while emergency teams carried out rescue and recovery operations along the coastline.

The reported death toll has increased from the initial figure of 18 as authorities continued to assess the situation and recover bodies. The number may be subject to further updates as rescue and identification operations continue. (The Guardian)

READ ALSO:

Spanish and Moroccan authorities moved to contain the situation by reinforcing security around the border and coordinating efforts to prevent additional large-scale crossings.

Spain deployed additional security personnel to support the Civil Guard, while military units and armoured vehicles were positioned in areas around the border.

The Spanish government said it had regained control of the situation, with many of those who crossed into Ceuta returning to Morocco as authorities worked to restore normal movement around the enclave. (reuters.com)

Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez described the mass crossing as a serious challenge and called for coordinated action to protect the border while addressing the humanitarian consequences of the crisis.

The development has also drawn attention from European leaders, with concerns raised over border security, migration management and the safety of people attempting dangerous crossings. (The Guardian)

The cause of the sudden surge remains unclear.

Authorities are expected to examine whether misinformation, organised migration networks, economic pressures or other factors contributed to the unusually large movement towards Ceuta.

The crisis comes after Ceuta experienced increased migration pressure in the weeks leading up to the mass crossing. Spanish authorities had earlier reported a rise in the number of people attempting to enter the enclave by swimming from Morocco. (El País)

Ceuta and the nearby Spanish enclave of Melilla are located on the northern coast of Africa and share land borders with Morocco.

The two territories are among the main routes used by migrants seeking to enter Spain and, by extension, the European Union.

Migration attempts through the area have frequently resulted in deaths and injuries because of strong currents, difficult sea conditions, border barriers and overcrowding during large movements.

The latest incident has renewed calls for stronger cooperation between Spain and Morocco, improved border management and safer measures to protect people undertaking dangerous migration journeys.

Humanitarian groups have also stressed the need to ensure that people in vulnerable situations, including children and families, receive emergency assistance and access to appropriate protection.

Authorities are expected to provide further updates on the number of deaths, injuries, missing persons and people who remain in Ceuta as emergency and border-control operations continue.

At least 43 migrants die as 49,000 cross into Spain’s Ceuta enclave

International

Houthis Launch Missile at Saudi Arabia as Regional Tensions Escalate Amid US-Iran Strikes

Published

6 days ago

July 25, 2026

Trends Admin

Houthis Launch Missile at Saudi Arabia as Regional Tensions Escalate Amid US-Iran Strikes

Iran-backed Houthi rebels have claimed responsibility for a missile attack targeting Saudi Arabia, hours after Saudi forces carried out air strikes against Houthi-linked positions in western Yemen, marking a significant escalation in cross-border hostilities amid broader regional tensions in the Middle East. According to the group’s Ansarollah media outlet on Telegram, the missile attack early Saturday triggered fires in the Saudi city of Jizan, with Saudi authorities reportedly issuing emergency alerts across the province following the incident, sending residents scrambling for safety as air raid sirens sounded through the night. The attack followed Friday’s Saudi air raids on Houthi targets in the Yemeni port city of Hodeida and the nearby Kamaran Island, which the Houthis had vowed to retaliate against, demonstrating the rapid cycle of escalation that has come to characterise the conflict. The exchange of fire underscores the fragility of the ceasefire that had previously reduced hostilities but failed to produce a lasting political settlement, leaving both sides poised for further confrontation.

The latest exchange of hostilities came as the broader Middle East experienced its first night in two weeks without reported air strikes by either the United States or Iran, raising hopes of a potential de-escalation after weeks of intense military confrontation that had pushed the region to the brink of all-out war. The US military refrained from announcing fresh attacks on Iran after carrying out 13 consecutive nights of strikes, during which it hit dozens of Iranian military targets including coastal surveillance and air defence sites, military logistics infrastructure, and maritime capabilities, inflicting significant damage on Tehran’s military assets across the region. During the same period, Iran launched drone attacks against US military installations and bases across the region, and largely halted traffic through the Strait of Hormuz after the re-escalation of attacks, crippling one of the world’s most vital maritime chokepoints and disrupting global oil supplies. Tehran has signalled it could prod its Houthi allies in Yemen to close the Bab al-Mandeb strait at the mouth of the Red Sea if Washington attacks Iran’s infrastructure, according to sources cited by Reuters, further complicating the security landscape in the region and threatening to expand the conflict into a wider maritime confrontation.

READ ALSO:

Meanwhile, an Omani delegation arrived in Tehran for discussions on the security of the Strait of Hormuz, according to Iran’s state-run IRNA news agency, signalling ongoing diplomatic efforts to address the crisis even as military tensions escalate on multiple fronts. Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi held telephone talks with Oman’s Foreign Minister Badr al-Busaidi to discuss recent regional developments and the security of commercial shipping in the Strait of Hormuz and the Persian Gulf, exploring potential avenues for de-escalation through backchannel diplomacy. Oman, which oversees the southern coastline of the strategic waterway, has historically served as a mediator between Iran and Western nations, and its involvement suggests a potential opening for dialogue amid the escalating tensions, offering a glimmer of hope that a diplomatic solution might still be possible.

Speaking at the White House on Friday, US President Donald Trump said diplomatic engagement with Iran was ongoing while warning that military action remained an option, striking a dual-track approach to the crisis that reflected the complexity of the situation facing his administration. “We are talking to them. I think they’re being serious. I think … they are being by far the most serious that we’ve seen them, but that doesn’t mean we get there,” he said, expressing cautious optimism about the prospects for a negotiated settlement while acknowledging the significant hurdles that remain. Responding to questions about his strategy for ending the conflict, Trump outlined two possible paths forward: “There’s a military exit where we just keep going just the way we are, and we can even make it a heavier dose, and it’s knocking out everything they have. Or there’s a smarter strategy that you make a deal,” he said, adding emphatically: “We’re locked and loaded. We’re ready to go.” The president’s remarks reflect the delicate balance Washington is attempting to strike between applying military pressure and pursuing diplomatic resolution, with both options remaining firmly on the table.

Elsewhere, the US military disclosed that it disabled a tanker in the Gulf of Oman on Friday after the vessel allegedly attempted to evade Washington’s blockade on Iranian ports, intensifying the maritime dimension of the conflict and underscoring the growing risks to commercial shipping in the region. Navy Captain Tim Hawkins, spokesman for US Central Command, told AFP that the crew repeatedly ignored warnings after attempting to run the blockade at least four times prior, demonstrating a pattern of defiance that ultimately led to the military response. “US forces on scene disabled the ship after firing into its engine room,” Hawkins said. “The ship is no longer transiting to Iran,” he confirmed, indicating that the vessel had been rendered inoperable and turned back from its intended destination. The ship became the second commercial vessel disabled by US forces since the blockade was reinstated earlier this month, with the US military also forcing 12 other vessels to change course, signalling a determined effort to enforce economic pressure on Tehran through maritime interdiction operations. The incident highlights the escalating confrontation at sea, where Washington is seeking to enforce strict economic pressure on Tehran through maritime interdiction operations, raising the stakes in an already volatile region.

READ ALSO:

Growing concerns over threats to commercial shipping in the Red Sea linked to Houthi activities had pushed crude oil prices above $100 per barrel earlier in the week, marking their highest level since May and raising fears of global economic disruption as energy markets reacted nervously to the escalating tensions. However, prices retreated on Friday, with Brent crude futures falling by more than $4 to just above $96 per barrel, as markets reacted to the successful transit of two Chinese-chartered supertankers through the Bab el-Mandeb Strait, alleviating some of the immediate supply concerns that had driven prices higher. The volatility in oil markets underscores the fragility of global energy supply chains amid the ongoing conflict, with traders remaining on edge as they monitor developments in the region closely.

Following the reported missile exchange, Ansarollah media condemned Saudi operations in Yemen, accusing Riyadh of targeting civilian facilities and vowing further retaliation in a statement that signalled the conflict was far from over. “The Saudi enemy’s targeting of civilian facilities in Hodeida and Kamaran island constitutes a dangerous escalation,” the group said, adding: “We affirm that these recent crimes will not go unanswered,” indicating that further attacks against Saudi targets could be expected in the coming days. Saudi officials had not issued an immediate response to the Houthi claims at the time of this report, leaving the situation on the ground unclear and the international community anxiously awaiting further developments.

The United States and the United Kingdom are expected to host a conference in London next week focused on security in the Strait of Hormuz, according to sources cited by Reuters, as Western nations seek to coordinate a response to the growing maritime threat and build an international coalition to protect commercial shipping in the region. The meeting is expected to be attended by US Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Dan Caine, underscoring the high-level attention being devoted to the crisis and the urgency with which Western powers are treating the situation. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is also scheduled to meet President Trump at the White House on Tuesday as diplomatic efforts continue amid persistent regional tensions, with the Israeli leader expected to discuss coordination on Iran policy and regional security arrangements.

Analysts suggest the proposed London conference reflects US efforts to secure international backing for its position, as Washington finds itself at a disadvantage in the ongoing confrontation with Tehran, having failed to rally broad international support for its maximum pressure campaign. However, European nations have expressed concerns about being drawn into direct conflict, with some insisting that any successful maritime security arrangement requires the cessation of hostilities between the US and Iran, a condition that remains elusive given the current trajectory of the conflict. The reluctance of key European allies to fully commit to Washington’s approach highlights the diplomatic challenges facing the United States as it seeks to build a coalition to address the maritime security crisis.

The renewed hostilities come despite a 14-point Memorandum of Understanding signed by the United States and Iran in June, which sought to halt military operations, reopen the Strait of Hormuz and pave the way for ending the conflict within 60 days, representing a brief window of hope for a peaceful resolution. The agreement later collapsed after renewed Iranian attacks on shipping in the strait and subsequent US military strikes, leaving both sides back at square one and raising questions about the prospects for a durable resolution to the crisis as trust between the parties evaporated. As of the time of this report, the situation remains highly volatile, with all parties maintaining their military postures while diplomatic channels continue to operate in the background, offering no clear path forward. The international community watches with bated breath as the Middle East teeters on the edge of a wider conflagration that could have profound implications for global security and energy markets, with the coming days likely to determine whether the region can step back from the brink or plunge deeper into conflict.