Sign in Subscribe
Nuclear proliferation

US Strikes on Iran: A Troubling Precedent?

Strategic Insights

— 2 min read

The recent US strikes on Iran's nuclear facilities have been justified by President Donald Trump and Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth as a necessary measure to neutralize the "nuclear threat" posed by Iran. However, according to Professor of International Law Donald Rothwell from the Australian National University, this justification is not legitimate under international law. Rothwell argues that the US has not provided sufficient evidence to justify the strikes, which could set a troubling precedent for other states to launch anticipatory or preemptive strikes against nations they perceive as a threat.

Key Takeaways:

  • The US strikes on Iran's nuclear facilities are not justified under international law, as there is no UN Security Council authorization for the use of force against Iran to maintain international peace and security.
  • The US claims of self-defense are also dubious, as there is no evidence of recent Iranian attacks on the US.
  • The concept of anticipatory or preemptive self-defense is controversial and has never been clearly endorsed by the UN Security Council or the International Court of Justice.
  • The language used by the White House does not make reference to Iran possessing nuclear weapons, and there is no evidence of Iranian intent to use nuclear weapons.
  • Israel's claim of an imminent attack from Iran is also dubious and contentious on the facts, and its collective self-defense claim is only valid under international law if the original Israeli right to self-defense is legitimate.
  • The US strikes on Iran set a worrying precedent for other states to launch anticipatory or preemptive strikes against nations they perceive as a threat.
  • Australia's Foreign Minister Penny Wong should condemn the US strikes, as they are not justified under international law.
  • The Albanese government should discuss the legality of the US strikes and hold all states accountable for egregious breaches of international law.

Statistics:

  • The US has launched two strikes on Iran's nuclear facilities: on June 22 and doubtless previously, in Sunday's bombardment.
  • The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has stated that Iran does not yet have nuclear weapons capability.
  • Iran has a long track record of aggressive rhetoric against Israel and the US, but the critical question is whether this equates to an intent to strike.
  • No evidence of recent Iranian attacks on the US has been provided by the US.
  • The IAEA has the authority and capability to make judgments about a nation's nuclear program and has stated that Iran's current program does not pose an imminent threat.
  • The UN Security Council has not authorized the use of force against Iran to maintain international peace and security.

Sources:

  • The Conversation (Au and NZ) -- By Donald Rothwell, Professor of International Law, Australian National University.
  • United Nations Charter.
  • International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).
  • BBC.
  • The Conversation (Au and NZ) -- Why the US strikes on Iran are illegal and can set a troubling precedent.

Read more