Adil Ahmad Haque writes:

Israel’s use of force against Iran was and remains plainly unlawful and a manifest violation of the United Nations Charter. The Charter prohibits the use of force except with the authorization of the UN Security Council or in the exercise of the right of self-defense “if an armed attack occurs.” No armed attack by Iran against Israel was occurring on June 12, or was about to occur, or was bound to occur unless prevented by the immediate use of force. There was no ongoing armed attack, incipient armed attack, imminent armed attack, or impending armed attack. The law is more than well-settled. When Israel attacked Iraq’s nuclear facility in 1981, the United Nations Security Council unanimously adopted a resolution that “[s]trongly condemn[ed] the military attack by Israel in clear violation of the Charter of the United Nations” and “[c]all[ed] upon Israel to refrain in the future from any such acts.”

The UN Security Council did not authorize Israel’s use of force against Iran. At an emergency meeting, several Council members declared it illegal. Other members called for de-escalation and a return to diplomacy, logically implying that Israel’s use of force is not necessary to prevent an armed attack by Iran. As the International Atomic Energy Agency found, Iran’s failures to co-operate fully with the Agency “gives rise to questions that are within the competence of the United Nations Security Council, as the organ bearing the main responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security.” Iran’s failures do not legally justify the unilateral use of armed force. The patent illegality of Israel’s use of force was promptly but patiently explained in an earlier essay by Marko Milanovic.

On June 17, Israel sent a letter to the United Nations Security Council informing the Council of its ongoing military operation. The letter does not expressly invoke Israel’s right of self-defense under international law or mention article 51 of the UN Charter (which recognizes that right). Nevertheless, the letter says various things that sound like international law. Israel claims to be “acting to defend its security and very existence” against “Iran’s ongoing aggression.” It refers to an “existential and imminent threat from Iran’s nuclear weapon and ballistic missile program” as well as the “imminent threat” of “Iranian missile and proxy attacks.” It describes its military operation as “a last resort” taken in “the last window of opportunity to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons … after diplomacy proved ineffective.” It also says that Iran is “substantially involved” in “persistent and unlawful attacks” by Hezbollah, the Houthis, Hamas, and “others.”

While Israel’s letter sounds like international law, it is not international law. [Continue reading…]