1.1 Introduction International law (IL) are a set of rules and principles that govern the relations and interactions between cou...
1.1 Introduction
International law (IL) are a set of rules and principles that govern the relations and interactions between countries and other international actors. They aim at promoting peace, security, justice and cooperation across nations. Treaties and Conventions are all parts of IL. They are formal agreements between states that are legally binding. International Human Rights Law (IHRL), International Humanitarian Law (IHL), international Criminal Law (ICL), International Maritime Law (IML) and International Trade Law (ITL) are all branches of IL.
International Court of Justice (ICJ) established for settling disputes between states and International Criminal Court (ICC) created to prosecutes individuals for serious crimes like genocide and war crimes are parts of the main institutions for the enforcement of IL. United Nations (UN) is the key role player in promoting and facilitating international law and cooperation.
Treaties and Conventions are parts of the main legal instruments used in IL. They are formal agreements between states or international organizations that are governed by international law. They serve as binding legal instruments that regulate the rights and obligations of the parties involved.
A treaty is a legally binding agreement between two or more sovereign states or international organizations. What should be understood is that treaty is a voluntary agreement in written form which is internationally recognized and governed by the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (1969).
Conventions are also formal agreements or protocols that establish standards or norms, often adopted under the auspices of international organizations like the United Nations. Unlike treaty, convention is usually broader in scope. It is often aimed at establishing international standards. It can be legally binding (as treaties) or non-binding (as declarations). Geneva Conventions (regarding humanitarian treatment in war) and Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations are typical examples.
On 13 June 2025, while Iranian diplomats were preparing themselves for the next round of indirect negotiations with the United States, proving Iran’s adherence to the United Nations Charter with regard to international peace and security, the Zionist regime waged a full-fledged war invading the sovereignty of the Islamic Republic of Iran (IRI). On 22 June 2025, the US joined the Israel by attacking the IRI. The aggressive attacks resulted in killing a large number of innocent women and children that are legally protected by international law. International organisations and many leaders of international community kept mute as if as all crimes perpetrated in these attacks are now legitimate under the law. The aim of this paper is to legally analyse the US / Israel attacks on Islamic Republic of Iran (IRI) within the scope of International Laws. The paper also explores some challenges and prospects posed by these attacks in international law.
1.2 Israel Attack on Iran
It was in the early morning of Friday 13 June 2025, the Israeli regime launched an armed attack by air and missiles against the territorial boundaries of the IRI. The capital of Tehran and several other cities were aggressively under-attacked by the Zionist regime of Israel. The continued for 12 days till 24 June 2025. In these attacks, residential areas and ordinary people, including men and women, children, scientists of the country, and a number of military commanders were attacked in their private homes and alongside their wives and children. Thus, several civilians of which inter alia include children, women and other non-combatants were martyred and hundreds were injured. Further, civilian facilities, residential homes, public places, and the country's vital infrastructures, such as industrial centers, drinking water pipes of civilians, pharmaceutical production, the Iranian Broadcasting Corporation, hospitals, ambulances and even peaceful nuclear facilities, were targeted and destroyed in these blatant aggressive attacks.
Under international law, attacks on residential areas, killing innocent women and children, attack on hospitals and ambulances, attack on reporter of Iran’s broadcasting agency, attack on urban infrastructures like drinking water pipes of civilians are illegal flagrant violations of international laws. They are not subject to attack during an arm conflict. Thus, the attacks were barbaric and clear violation of article 51 of the first annexed protocol of Geneva Convention. The killing of media reporters and attack on media organisation perpetrated by Israel Government is serious violation of Geneva Convention. Moreover, according to articles 57 and 59 of the first protocol attacking defenseless civilians, in any way, is strictly prohibited.
Communication devices such as mobile phones and pagers were invented to make people's lives easier and more comfortable. However, the Israeli regime has been using such equipment to attack innocent civilians. The regime has been recently planning and carrying out armed attacks on the Internet. Therefore, for self-protection and survival humans must avoid all communication devices and equipment. They should protect themselves by not knowing each other via this equipment. This is an inhuman action. It is a clear manifestation of crime against humanity.
1.3 US Attack on Iran
After the Zionist attack on 13 June 2025, IRI has rights to self-defense under International law. The battle between Israel and IRI continued for 10 days when the US suddenly joined the war by openly backing the Israel and launching an attack codenamed Operation Midnight Hammer. It was on 22 June 2025 that the United States Air Force and Navy launched another aggressive attack on a move to assist the Israel. The US president Donald Trump announced that the United States Forces struck three Iranian nuclear sites. The Fordow Uranium Enrichment Plant, the Natanz Nuclear Facility, and the Isfahan Nuclear Technology Center were targeted with fourteen GBU-57A/B MOP (Massive Ordnance Penetrator) 30,000-pound (14,000 kg) "bunker buster" bombs carried by Northrop B-2 Spirit stealth bombers, and with Tomahawk missiles fired from a submarine. An Iranian foreign minister Mr Araghchi, described the action taken by the United States of America as a permanent member of the United Nations Security Council as a gross violation of UN Charter, international law and the NPT. The event was extremely dangerous, lawless and criminal behavior. This was the US first offensive action in the Iran–Israel war. Many Americans opposed the constitutionality of the Trump’s action. Internationally, some leaders expressed concern over escalation of the war and therefore condemned the strikes. Iran responded by attacking a U.S. base in Qatar. The next day Trump announced a ceasefire between Iran and Israel, ending the conflict.
1.4 Violation of International Law
The US and Israel attacks on IRI are clear example of a gross violation of the United Nations Charter, including the violation of the principle of state sovereignty as provided in Article 2, paragraph 1 and 4 of the Charter. The article provides that all Members shall refrain from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any other State. In other words, all the member states are bound to avoid threatening and using force against the sovereignty and political independence of other countries. Use of military force is fundamentally prohibited in the order governing the Charter, except in exceptional cases of self-defense. This is provided under article 51 of the Charter and must be only in the event of an armed attack or with the authorization of the Security Council or another for from domination and the lifting of occupation. This is the General Assembly Resolution 1514.
It is clear that the aggression committed by US and Israel cannot be justified under any existing legal framework. On the contrary, there is no doubt that these actions are aggressive. This military attack is a violation of the territorial integrity and independence of a member state of the United Nations and a clear example of an act of aggression, as defined in UN General Assembly Resolution 3314. Furthermore, this is regarded as a crime of aggression under article 8 of the Statute of the International Criminal Court. In addition, lack of distinction between military and civilian targets also violates fundamental principles of international humanitarian law which inter alia include the principles of distinction, proportionality and precaution. Consequently, these fall within the ambit of war crimes and crimes against humanity.
Article 2 paragraph 4 of the UN Charter is clear on prohibition of threatening or using force against the sovereignty and political independence of other countries. Without any legitimate justification Israel and US attacked the IRI. Thus, the attacks were in violation of the provision of this clause as well as Resolution 2625 of the UN General Assembly because the attacks were all carried out without a permission from the UN Security Council as provided under Chapter 7 of the UN Charter.
It should be noted that in the absence of reliable legal evidences against any member state, Resolution 3314 of the UN General Assembly (1974) provides that using military force against the sovereignty of another country is considered military invasion. In international law, this is termed as “Jus Conges”.
Moreover, based on article 8 of the constitution of International Criminal Court, this move on the part of the Zionist regime is considered one of the main international crimes making the Zionist authorities and military commanders punishable.
The claim of making preemptive or legitimate defense provided under article 51 of the Charter by the US and Zionist regimes is quite baseless and non-justifiable. This is because IRI had not launched any direct military attack on Israel. As a matter of fact, there was no threat on the part of IRI that was engaged in indirect negotiations with the United States, to justify a preemptive defense on the part of the Zionist regime. According to the verdict of the International Court of Justice in the case of Nicaraguan issue (ICJ Report, 1986, Para 176) the mere claim of upcoming threat or even possible attack in the absence of reliable and undeniable evidence cannot be regarded as legitimate defense. Consequently, it is even the IRI that has the rights to defend its territory and its citizens as provided in article 51 of the UN Charter. It has right for legitimate defense, either individually or in the form of alliance with aligned countries.
Besides, the attacks were also breach of Chicago Convention (1944) on International Aviation that was the first annexed protocol to the Geneva Convention of 1949. Furthermore, in attacking IRI, the Zionist regime has violated the three criteria for legitimate defense mentioned in article 51 of the UN Charter, i.e. urgency, proportionality, and necessity. In accordance with the provision of article the attacks are clear examples of illegal invasion.
Attack on civil residential areas and civilian people in which many innocent women and children have been martyred is considered a war crime and punishable under article 8 of the Rome Status. Assassination of military officials in a planned attack - outside the battlefield and under the conditions in which no active was going on is an example of terrorist attacks or Extrajudicial Killings.
The issue of nuclear energy program for peaceful purposes is governed by International Law and principles of Non-Proliferation (of Nuclear Weapons) Treaty (NPT). According to article 4 of the NPT all member states of which IRI is included have the undeniable right for using nuclear technology for peaceful purposes. Paragraph 1 of article 4 of the Treaty allows all member states to use nuclear energy for peaceful purposes. Additionally, paragraph 2 of article 1 of NPT obliges the states with nuclear technology to cooperate with other states for transferring this technology to them (for peaceful purposes). Having access to nuclear energy for peaceful purposes is one of the undeniable rights of NPT member states. Paragraph 1 of article 4 of this treaty clearly specifies that all member states have, indiscriminately, the right to research, production, development, and using nuclear energy for peaceful purposes. This treaty does not make any distinction among the various sections of the fuel cycle for using the nuclear energy for peaceful purposes. Thus, the right to use nuclear energy for peaceful purposes encompasses all the stages of fuel cycle including uranium enrichment.
As one of the active members of NPT, Iran has always emphasized on peaceful use of nuclear energy and has carried out all its nuclear activities under the supervision of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and the numerous reports prepared by this agency approved that the uranium enrichment activities of Iran are devoid of any diversion towards weaponry plans are entirely within the framework of non-military objectives (electricity, medicine, and research). Nevertheless, some government, especially the United States have always tried to deprive Iran of this legal right. And in spite of adherence to NPT and repeated inspection by the Agency Iran has been subjected to harshest of sanctions.
1.5 Conclusion
Based on article 51 of the UN Charter and International law, the Islamic Republic of Iran, has the right to resort to legitimate defense and protect its sovereignty against any invasion by the Zionist regime.
The deadly silence of International community made IRI, as far as international law concerns, to exercise its right to powerfully respond to both Israel and US for self-defense. IRI has the right to legitimate defense in protecting its sovereignty against the Zionist invasion of the country and national security.
The invasion of Iran by the Zionist regime served as a test for the efficiency of international organization and communities as well as their sincerity and adherence to the principles of truth, justice, and unbiased stand against injustice and double standard in on a matter that could jeopardise the region and the entire international community into state conflict, insecurity and instability.
The war initiated by the Zionist regime was not merely an ideological war or a war solely against IRI, rather it was a war by apartheid against human civilization.
Instead of criticizing IRI for exercising its right for legitimate defense and inviting it to patience, the International organisation and the international communities should (based on the framework of UN Charter and numerous other documents such as the International Responsibility of States of 2001 and the one issued by the International Court of Justice in 2024 about the occupied Palestine) condemn the Zionist heinous act of genocidal crime in Gaza and Palestine and other places in the region.
Nuclear energy program for peaceful purposes is a legitimate right for not only Islamic Republic of Iran but also for all member states as provided by the NPT. Consequently, any effort by US or Israel or any other country to deprive IRI its right is a clear violation of International Law and principles of NPT.
To sum up, the attacks carried out by the US and Israel against Islamic Republic of Iran was a clear violation of International law. Thus, it is the international community, the UN Security Council, and the International Atomic Energy Agency must condemn and take all legal and necessary actions to stop them from further illegitimate move and aggression against the IRI.
No comments