Latest news with #Article51
Saudi Gazette
13 hours ago
- Politics
- Saudi Gazette
US joining Israeli strikes would cause hell, says Iranian minister
LONDON — The US joining Israeli strikes would cause "hell for the whole region", Iran's deputy foreign minister has told the BBC. Saeed Khatibzadeh said this is "not America's war" and if US President Donald Trump does get involved, he will always be remembered as "a president who entered a war he doesn't belong in". He said US involvement would turn the conflict into a "quagmire", continue aggression and delay an end to the "brutal atrocities". His comments came after the Soroka hospital in southern Israel was hit during an Iranian missile attack. Iranian state media reported that the strike targeted a military site next to the hospital, and not the facility itself. Israel's Ministry of Health said 71 people were injured during the attack on the Soroka Medical Center. Meanwhile, Israel's military said it had targeted Iran's nuclear sites including the "inactive" Arak heavy water reactor and Natanz has not given an update on casualties in Iran from Israeli latest attacks come at a critical time. On Thursday, the White House said Trump would decide whether or not the US gets directly involved in the conflict within the next two to the BBC, Khatibzadeh insisted that "of course, diplomacy is the first option", but said but while bombardment continues "we cannot start any negotiation".He repeatedly called Iran's attacks on Israel "self defence under Article 51 of the UN Charter" and said "we were in the middle of diplomacy" when in a major escalation of the conflict on 13 June, Israel launched attacks on Iranian nuclear sites, killing several top generals and nuclear deputy foreign minister called the conflict "unprovoked" and "unnecessary".Responding to Trump's repeated comments that the conflict could have been avoided if Iran had accepted a nuclear deal, Khatibzadeh said they were negotiating until Israel "sabotaged" discussions by launching attacks Iran."We were planning to have the sixth round of nuclear talks in Muscat, and we were actually on the verge of reaching an agreement," he said."President Trump knows better than anybody else that we were on the verge of reaching an agreement."He also criticized Trump's "confusing and contradictory" social media posts and interviews, which he said indicated "that Americans have been aware and have participated" in the special envoy Steve Witkoff and Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi have reportedly spoken on the phone several times since Friday, in a bid to find a diplomatic end to the crisis, Reuters to three diplomats who spoke to the news agency and asked not to be identified due to the sensitivity of the matter, Araqchi said Tehran would not return to negotiations unless Israel stopped the has alleged Iran has recently "taken steps to weaponise" its enriched uranium stockpile, which can be used for power plants or nuclear bombs. Iran has always claimed that its nuclear program is entirely Friday, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) — the UN's nuclear watchdog - said Iran had amassed enough uranium enriched up to 60% purity - a short technical step away from weapons grade, or 90% — to potentially make nuclear bombs."This is nonsense," Khatibzadeh said in response. "You cannot start a war based on speculation or intention."If we wanted to have a nuclear bomb, we would have had it way before."Iran has never developed any program for nuclear weaponization of peaceful nuclear activities. Bottom line."IAEA chief Rafael Grossi said that nuclear facilities "must never be attacked, regardless of the context or circumstances, as it could harm both people and the environment".Khatibzadeh also discussed potential diplomatic channels after a G7 summit in said: "What we are hearing from Europeans is that they would like to get back to diplomacy at a ministerial level"."They are going to have a meeting in Geneva and we are very much happy that finally they have to come and talk at the table about the issues at hand." — BBC
The Hindu
2 days ago
- Politics
- The Hindu
The legality of Israeli actions under international law
While many nations may demur from taking a clear position on the legality of Israel's unparalleled military strikes against Iran for a multitude of reasons, an inescapable question confronting the global community is whether these strikes are legal under international law. It is axiomatic to state that Article 2(4) of the UN Charter prohibits the use of force in international relations, allowing narrow exceptions such as self-defence under Article 51, which permits a state to use force 'if an armed attack occurs', adhering to necessity and proportionality. According to international lawyer Marko Milanovic, the legality of a country's use of force hinges on the legal conception of self-defence. If self-defence is limited to repelling armed attacks, Israel's current use of force is illegal, as there was no armed attack from Iran or non-state actors whose actions were attributable to Iran. Consequently, as per this interpretation, Israel's use of force is illegal and would amount to aggression, which is a war crime under international law. Pre-emptive self-defence What about the contention that Israel's military actions against Israel can be justified under pre-emptive self-defence, i.e., the right of the states to use force against an 'armed attack' that is yet to occur? The argument is that Iran is close to acquiring the capability to develop nuclear weapons, and once it receives the said capability, it will destroy Israel, as its leaders have vowed. Indeed, Israel justifies its war against Iran by claiming that its actions are pre-emptive self-defence against Iran's nuclear programme. Pre-emptive self-defence in international law is contentious because arguing for the use of force against an anticipated armed attack contradicts Article 51. On the other hand, international lawyers such as Rosalyn Higgins argue that requiring a state to wait for an armed attack to occur before it can defend itself would be impractical. Notwithstanding the disputable nature of pre-emptive self-defence, for the sake of argument, let us assume that such a right exists. The question, then, is how to define it, keeping in mind that an overtly broad articulation of such a right would violate not only the letter but also the spirit of the UN Charter. Arguably, a country has a right to pre-emptive self-defence if an armed attack has not occurred but is imminent. A better phrase for this is anticipatory self-defence. Support for this proposition is often drawn from the famous Caroline incident of 1837. This incident involved a pre-emptive strike by British forces in Canada against the American ship, Caroline. This ship was used by Americans who empathised with the rebels fighting British rule in Canada to ferry arms to the rebels. Over the years, this incident led to the emergence of what is known as the Caroline doctrine for the use of force. As in this doctrine, a state claiming pre-emptive self-defence would have to show that the necessity of self-defence was 'instant', 'overwhelming', 'leaving no choice of means, and no moment of deliberation'. Further, the force used should be proportionate. In simpler terms, a valid use of force as part of pre-emptive (or anticipatory) self-defence would require an armed attack that is imminent. Meaning of imminence However, there is no consensus on the meaning of 'imminent'. As Milanovic argues, the first meaning of 'imminent' is a restrictive one that has a temporal dimension. In other words, an 'imminent' attack means one that is temporally proximate, i.e., about to happen. The second meaning is expansive, where an attack may occur at some point in the future. Allowing a state to use pre-emptive self-defence, relying on the expansive meaning of imminent, would imply giving a licence to powerful states to act unilaterally merely based on conjecture. It would be an open invitation to armed aggression, which would surely defeat the very objective of forbidding the use of force under the UN Charter. Moreover, this broad meaning would also not be consistent with the Caroline doctrine, which amply limits the use of pre-emptive self-defence through qualifiers such as 'instant', 'overwhelming', and 'leaving no room for deliberation'. In short, there is abundant support for a narrower interpretation of 'imminent'. Applying this legal understanding to Israel's use of force, it is clear that for Israel to make a credible case for pre-emptive self-defence, it must demonstrate that an attack from Iran was imminent, meaning an attack was about to occur. The argument that Israel acted in pre-emptive self-defence because Iran is closer to acquiring nuclear weapons, which could pose an existential threat to Israel, relies on a broader interpretation of 'imminent', which is not supported by international law. It is the primary framework Cynics might argue that this debate is futile in a world where there is scant respect for international law. After all, international law has failed abjectly to stop wars despite the adoption of the UN Charter eight decades ago. However, international law remains the primary framework for determining the legitimacy of state conduct. It is the only means by which state power can be held accountable internationally. Thus, it is essential to invoke and marshal international law in the teeth of its gravest violations by regimes that believe they can act with impunity. Prabhash Ranjan is Professor and Vice Dean (Research) at the Jindal Global Law School. The views expressed are personal
India Today
7 days ago
- Politics
- India Today
Iran calls emergency UN meet as Israel threatens to continue offensive
The UN Security Council will hold an emergency meeting later today, after a request by Iran amid its ongoing conflict with Israel. Israel launched a barrage of strikes on multiple sites in Iran, including its nuclear facilities, and later said it intercepted over 100 drones launched from Iran. According to Iran's Nournews, 78 people were killed, and 329 people were killed in Israeli strikes on residential areas in just nuclear sites, Israel said it struck missile factories and killed a swathe of military commanders in Iran. The leader of Iran's paramilitary Revolutionary Guard, General Hossein Salami, was confirmed dead, according to Iranian state as Iran said it reserves the right to defend itself under Article 51 of the UN Charter, Israel has said it will continue its onslaught until all threats from Iran are are top developments in the Iran-Israel conflict: Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has said that the United States knew about the strikes in Tehran "ahead of time". He also warned "several waves of Iranian attacks" are expected, reported news agency AFP. advertisement US President Donald Trump has said that Israel's attacks on Iran are 'great for the market'. In an interview with the Wall Street Journal, the President described the Israeli operation as 'a very successful attack, to put it mildly.' Donald Trump earlier said that Iran should make a deal, warning all hardliners are dead now "and it will only get worse". He said that the US makes the most lethal weapons in the world and several of them are with Israel. He later told NBC that Iranian representatives were calling him to suggest they still want a deal. Citing Article 51 of the UN Charter that covers the right of states to self-defence against armed attack, Iran urged an emergency UNSC meeting, a request supported by Russia and China, news agency AFP reported. However, Israel's UN envoy has said that the country would continue to act until all "threats in Iran" are eliminated. The council will meet later today. The fresh conflict between the two countries has also led to flight diversions and cancellations as airlines quit the airspace over Israel, Iran, Iraq and Jordan after Israeli strikes. The US has warned of missiles, drones or rockets flying over Iraq in a security warning that said Iraq has suspended air traffic at all airports and closed its airspace. According to Iran's Nournews, 78 people were killed, and 329 people were killed in Israeli strikes on residential areas in Tehran. Iran has promised a harsh response to the overnight onslaught. advertisementA United Nations conference co-hosted by France and Saudi Arabia has been postponed amid the Israel-Iran conflict, news agency Reuters reported. The conference was aimed at forging a roadmap towards a two-state solution between Israel and the Palestinians. Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu spoke to Prime Minister Narendra Modi over a phone call, briefing him on the conflict. Netanyahu spoke to several other world leaders in a diplomatic push to gain support amid the conflict. India earlier said it is "deeply concerned" over the recent developments between Iran and Israel and was "closely monitoring" the evolving situation. The government urged both countries to avoid any escalatory steps. Must Watch
See - Sada Elbalad
13-06-2025
- Business
- See - Sada Elbalad
Pakistan Condemns Israeli Strikes on Iran
Israa Farhan Pakistan has issued a firm condemnation of Israel's recent military strikes against the Islamic Republic of Iran, labelling them as unjustified, illegitimate, and a blatant breach of international law and the United Nations Charter. In an official statement, Pakistan denounced the Israeli aggression as a direct violation of Iran's sovereignty and territorial integrity, underscoring that such actions contradict the core principles of the UN Charter. Citing Article 51, Pakistan affirmed Iran's inherent right to self-defense under international law. Islamabad expressed full solidarity with the Iranian people, warning that the escalation poses a serious threat to regional peace and global stability. The statement described the strikes as grave provocations that endanger the broader Middle East and demand urgent international intervention. 'I condemn, in the strongest possible terms, today's unprovoked attack on Iran by Israel,' Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif stated on X. 'I convey my deepest sympathies to the Iranian people on the loss of lives in this attack. This grave and highly irresponsible act is deeply alarming and risks further de-stabilising an already volatile region.' Pakistan also called on international bodies to hold the aggressor accountable, urging a collective effort to restore calm and uphold the rule of law. read more Gold prices rise, 21 Karat at EGP 3685 NATO's Role in Israeli-Palestinian Conflict US Expresses 'Strong Opposition' to New Turkish Military Operation in Syria Shoukry Meets Director-General of FAO Lavrov: confrontation bet. nuclear powers must be avoided News Iran Summons French Ambassador over Foreign Minister Remarks News Aboul Gheit Condemns Israeli Escalation in West Bank News Greek PM: Athens Plays Key Role in Improving Energy Security in Region News One Person Injured in Explosion at Ukrainian Embassy in Madrid News China Launches Largest Ever Aircraft Carrier Sports Former Al Zamalek Player Ibrahim Shika Passes away after Long Battle with Cancer Lifestyle Get to Know 2025 Eid Al Adha Prayer Times in Egypt Business Fear & Greed Index Plummets to Lowest Level Ever Recorded amid Global Trade War Arts & Culture Zahi Hawass: Claims of Columns Beneath the Pyramid of Khafre Are Lies News Flights suspended at Port Sudan Airport after Drone Attacks Videos & Features Video: Trending Lifestyle TikToker Valeria Márquez Shot Dead during Live Stream News Shell Unveils Cost-Cutting, LNG Growth Plan Technology 50-Year Soviet Spacecraft 'Kosmos 482' Crashes into Indian Ocean News 3 Killed in Shooting Attack in Thailand
Shafaq News
13-06-2025
- Politics
- Shafaq News
Iran's MoFa vows retaliation after 'Criminal' Israeli strikes on nuclear sites
Shafaq News/ Iran's Foreign Ministry denounced, on Friday, Israel's large-scale airstrikes as a 'criminal and unforgivable' violation of its sovereignty. In a statement, the ministry accused Israel of breaching international law, citing Article 2(4) of the UN Charter, and invoked Article 51 to assert its right to self-defense. 'The Armed Forces of the Islamic Republic of Iran will not hesitate to defend Iran's sovereignty with full strength and in the manner they deem appropriate.' Tehran also blamed the United States, claiming Israel could not have launched the operation without US coordination and backing. 'The US government, as the primary patron of this regime, will also bear responsibility for the dangerous repercussions of the Zionist regime's [Israel's] reckless actions,' it warned. MFA Statement on the Zionist Regime's Military Aggression Against IranIn the Name of God, the Most Gracious, the Most MercifulNoble People of Iran,Fellow Iranians,Our beloved homeland, Iran, has been unjustly attacked by a criminal and evil morning, the… — Foreign Ministry, Islamic Republic of Iran 🇮🇷 (@IRIMFA_EN) June 13, 2025 Iran called on the UN Security Council, the Secretary-General, Islamic countries, regional governments, and the Non-Aligned Movement to condemn what it described as a threat to global stability. The statement came after Israel launched Operation Rising Lion, a coordinated assault on Iranian nuclear and military sites. The strikes, confirmed by both Israeli and Iranian authorities, targeted key facilities, including the Natanz enrichment plant and the Ahmadi Roshan complex in Isfahan. Tehran confirmed damage but denied any radioactive leaks. Iran responded early Friday by launching over 800 drones toward Israeli airspace. An Israeli military spokesperson confirmed the attack, noting air defense systems were fully activated and international partners were assisting in tracking and intercepting the drones.
