We live in the most advanced era in human history; an era in which humanity has reached the Moon, created artificial intelligence, and cured diseases once considered fatal. And yet, at the same time, we continue to witness wars, genocides, repression, mass executions, and the displacement of millions of people. How is it possible for such scientific progress to coexist with such moral regression?
This is a question that should trouble anyone who looks closely at the state of the contemporary world.
There is no doubt that humanity has made extraordinary strides in medicine, technology, science, and communication. But this material progress does not seem to have been matched by an equal moral progress. The history of the last hundred years shows this with painful clarity: two world wars, the Holocaust, genocides, civil wars, ethnic cleansing, terrorism, dictatorships, and political persecution have followed one another without interruption.
Animal Violence and Human Violence: A Difference in Kind
It is often said that humans are “just another animal.” Biologically, this is true — but in terms of behavior, the differences run deep. In nature, violence is generally a tool for survival: a predator kills to eat, not to accumulate power or territory.
In human societies, by contrast, violence is too often transformed into a tool of power, ideology, domination, and economic interest. It is precisely this difference that places human beings before a moral responsibility no other living species faces: the capacity to choose, rather than simply react to instinct, makes human violence fundamentally a political and moral act — not a biological one.
The Case of Iran
One example of how fragile respect for human life remains comes from Iran. According to data published by Iran Human Rights Documentation Center (IHRDC NGO) and other international organizations monitoring the death penalty, more than 1,400 executions were recorded in the country in the first six months of 2026 alone. Among the victims are young people, political dissidents, and individuals sentenced after trials that numerous international observers consider to have lacked even minimal guarantees of fairness. During the country’s major popular protests, several human rights organizations also documented excessive use of force by the authorities, thousands of arrests, and summary trials. These are figures that should command far greater attention from the international community.
The Role — and the Limits — of International Institutions
Faced with tragedies of this scale, it is impossible not to ask what role international institutions, beginning with the United Nations, are actually playing. Founded in 1945, at the end of a conflict that killed roughly 60 million people, the UN was created with the declared aim of preventing new wars, promoting dialogue between states, and protecting human rights, as set out in its founding Charter.
In practice, however, even some of the powers that led its founding have, over the decades, been involved in wars, controversial military interventions, or decisions strongly contested by the international community. This raises a fundamental question: is international law genuinely applied equally, or does its enforcement depend, far too often, on the balance of power between states?
A structural weakness lies in the UN Security Council: of its fifteen members, five — the United States, Russia, China, France, and the United Kingdom — hold veto power, allowing any one of them to block a resolution even when the majority of other members support it. Many scholars and diplomats regard this mechanism as one of the main obstacles to effective UN action in international crises.
The International Criminal Court, established to prosecute genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, and the crime of aggression, faces similarly structural limits: it has no police force of its own and depends on state cooperation to enforce its rulings; moreover, some countries have not joined the Rome Statute or dispute the Court’s jurisdiction. For years, legal scholars and NGOs have argued that international law is applied more effectively against weaker states, while enforcement becomes far harder when major powers or their allies are involved.
In recent years, the humanitarian situation in the Gaza Strip has fueled intense international debate: several UN bodies, humanitarian organizations, and experts have spoken of the risk or presence of acts amounting to genocide, while Israel firmly rejects these accusations, asserting its right to self-defense against Hamas — a matter still pending before the International Court of Justice. Regardless of the legal disagreements over how precisely to characterize these events, what remains beyond dispute is the sheer scale of civilian suffering, and the urgency of protecting the lives of the people caught up in it.
The Role of Culture and Art
Another point of debate concerns the public role of artists. Some believe that those who work in music or entertainment should focus solely on their craft, without commenting on social or political matters. History, however, suggests otherwise: art, literature, and music have often played a decisive role in defending peace, freedom, and human dignity. Silence in the face of injustice has never, on its own, made the world a better place.
Conclusion
No international institution can truly function without the political will of the states that compose it. Treaties, conventions, and resolutions remain empty words if governments choose not to honor them. As long as economic, military, and geopolitical interests continue to take precedence over the protection of human dignity, building a fairer international order will remain difficult.
Perhaps the greatest crisis of our time is not a shortage of technology, wealth, or power, but a shortage of moral will. Today’s world needs, more than ever, people and states willing to place human dignity above borders, ideologies, and political interests. Only then will it be possible to say that scientific progress has, at last, been matched by moral progress.
Shayan Moradi and Taher Djafarizad
Neda Day and Union of Iranian Activists
