"This is not lawful self-defence against an armed attack by Iran, and the UN Security Council has not authorised it. Preventive disarmament, counterterrorism and regime change constitute the international crime of aggression. All responsible governments should condemn this lawlessness from two countries who excel in shredding the international legal order."
"There are grounds to believe that the attacks against Iran amount to a crime of aggression. This was an act of use of force that was unjustified. International law is a set of treaties, conventions and universally accepted rules that govern relations between countries."
"All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations."
International law experts argue that joint US-Israeli military strikes against Iran constitute a violation of the UN Charter's prohibition on aggression. The strikes, which killed Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei and hundreds of civilians, lack authorization from the UN Security Council and were not preceded by an Iranian attack on either nation. Legal scholars characterize the action as unjustified use of force, noting that preventive disarmament, counterterrorism, and regime change do not constitute valid self-defense under international law. The Trump administration did not seek Congressional approval and justified the action based on perceived threats from Iran's missile and nuclear programs, but international law explicitly prohibits unprovoked military action against other states.
Read at www.aljazeera.com
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]