Iran apologists and the assault on international law

Dr. Binoy Kampmark writes that while bombs were falling on Tehran, Iranian apologists in Western capitals embellished regime change with the language of peace and security.

ONE MORE ATTACK, ONE MORE violation United Nations Charter It occurred on February 28, 2026. Serious violation of international law.

A violation, as usual, celebrated as ethical, necessary and, in principle, magnanimous by the powerful who dictate such terms. It’s not dirty, dangerous or destabilizing. It seems that they do not follow the same pattern as before: interventions in Iraq, Libya. No, God, another intervention organized by the United States and Britain in 1953 to overthrow the regime of the same country.

Yes, this was Iran, bombed for the second time in less than a year, its hierarchy targeted again more thoroughly. supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali KhameneiHe was killed along with his advisor Ali Shamkhaniand the armed forces, intelligence services and some senior officials Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps.

This time, a joint operation between Israel and the USA took place. two different forms. (These distinctions seem to have escaped careless press hacks.) The Israeli side of the bargain is Operation Lion’s Roar; American, Operation Epic Rage. Both are equally mendacious in their justifications; the first focused on neutralizing Iran’s nuclear program and ballistic missile capabilities; the second focused more broadly on crippling Iran’s influence in funding proxy forces and encouraging conditions for regime change.

For Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, aim was ending “The threat of the Ayatollah regime in Iran”. tyrants of the clergy “They are making plans to rebuild nuclear and missile capabilities.” and place them “They’re underground, where we can’t reach them. If we don’t stop them now, they’ll be untouchable.”.

February 28 expression From the President of the USA Donald Trump Published on Real Social justified the pre-emptive strike with some spectacular nonsense.

According to Trump:

“[Tehran] “They have sought to rebuild their nuclear program and continue to develop long-range missiles that can now threaten our very good friends and allies in Europe, our troops stationed abroad, and soon reach the American homeland.”

Their ballistic missile industries would be destroyed, their navies destroyed, their armed proxies maimed. Members of the Revolutionary Guard will be given full immunity to lay down their weapons; Iranian citizens should rise up and seize the reins of power when given the opportunity.

What could we expect from countries so eager to instill the virtues of international law in others through these unlawful acts? Answer: not much. Netanyahu and Trump’s lying nonsense was not of interest to Australia. Albanian government fast in his support and turning a blind eye to violations of international law.

Not interested in whether Iran has nuclear capability or poses an imminent threat, Canberra simply said:

“…recognized that Iran’s nuclear program was a threat to global peace and security. The international community was clear that the Iranian regime would never be allowed to develop nuclear weapons.”

The statement insincerely referred to the UN Security Council re-imposing sanctions on Tehran for non-compliance with sanctions. Joint Comprehensive Action Plan Without mentioning that Trump sabotaged this in the first place under Israeli pressure.

Albanian in question:

“We support the United States taking action to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons and to prevent Iran from continuing to threaten international peace and security.”

If a slave poltroon could be expected to write a memo of approval for the brutalization of international law and the undermining of the UN order, this was it.

canadian government Mark Carney It was pretty much in the same line.

Prime Minister Carney and the Foreign Minister Anita Anand stated:

‘Canada supports the United States in acting to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons and to prevent the Iranian regime from further threatening international peace and security.’

This endorsement of illegal aggression Lloyd Axworthyformer foreign minister, call him “Abandonment of a long-standing element of our foreign policy.”. former Canadian diplomat Sabine Nölke Moreover noted that you weren’t there “Logical connection to why we are now supporting a prima facie illegal act of war of aggression.”. There was no need to attack Iran; it’s just a “election war”.

France, Germany and the United Kingdom, joint statementHe repeated his scolding line that Iran is the main threat with its nuclear and ballistic missile program, subversive activities and human rights violations. The only attacks condemned were those of Iran, not the preemptive strikes by Israel and the United States, in which the three countries played no role. ‘Indiscriminate military attacks’.

The European Union was also talking nonsense and never condemned US-Israeli actions as a violation of international law at its March 1 meeting. expressionInstead, he focuses on his laudable sanctions policy against Iran, Tehran’s dismal human rights record, and ‘Iran’s ballistic missile and nuclear programs and its support for armed groups in the Middle East’.

The EU has repeatedly called on Iran to end the agreement. ‘It must end the nuclear program, stop the ballistic missile program, refrain from destabilizing activities in the region and Europe, and end the horrific violence and oppression against its own people.’.

The illegal pre-emptive strike against Iran was entirely his fault. In a stunning disregard for the obvious, Tehran has been accused of being the aggressor by responding to attacks on it with attacks on US bases and facilities in other countries. Again, ‘Maximum restraint, protection of civilians and full respect for international law, including the principles of the United Nations Charter and international humanitarian law’ This call was made despite the fact that there is no international humanitarian law to comply with or a Charter to protect.

The EU statement continued as follows:

‘Iran’s attacks and violations of the sovereignty of many countries in the region are unforgivable. Iran must refrain from indiscriminate military attacks.’

Clearly, violation UN Charter It was entirely excusable from the perspective of Israel and the United States. Ultimately, the goal was to ensure that Iran never acquired nuclear weapons. The EU will assist diplomatically in this regard, ignoring that diplomatic talks were ongoing between Washington and Tehran when the attacks took place.

President of the European Commission, Ursula von der LeyenRather than condemning the attacks as having the potential to disrupt regional security, requested A. ‘Reliable transit in Iran’.

Kaja KallasEU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, He looked like he was celebrating Murder of Ali Khamenei ‘A defining moment in Iranian history’. As uncertainty manifests itself, ‘There is now a clear path to a different Iran, one whose people may have more freedom to shape’.

Both officials are clearly uneducated about the disasters of change being imposed on Iran and other countries in the Middle East, where the wishes of the people are irrelevant to foreign interveners.

Frightened and diminished, most European states refused to mention the illegality of Israeli-US action. In every sense, it was Iran’s actions that were to be blamed. Leaving aside the inconvenient fact that Israel is an undeclared nuclear power that evades international regulations and scrutiny of its program, Iran has been told, with arrogant hypocrisy, that it will never obtain nuclear weapons.

Czech Prime Minister, Andrej Babišfor example, preferred ignoring history by looking only for Iran’s nuclear program ‘uncontrollable’. This is with it ‘Supporting terrorism is a danger for us and for all of Europe’.

Estonian Minister of Foreign Affairs, Margus Tsahknain line with the narrow-minded pathologies of his country and the other Baltic states, thought Ayatollah’s murder ‘A significant defeat for Iran’s ally Russia’.

The only EU leader who showed understanding and awareness of the emerging conflict was the Spanish Prime Minister. Pedro SánchezWHO rejected “Unilateral action by the United States and Israel” that contributes to a “more uncertain and hostile international order”.

While the Prime Minister also rejected the actions of Tehran and the Iranian Revolutionary Guards, he made the following complaints: