چکیده مقاله
This article critically examines the legality of the 2025 Iran Israel war under both the twin paradigms of “jus ad bellum” and “jus in bello” The challenge is to decide whether Israel's 'Operation Rising Lion' and then intervention by America in 'Operation Midnight Hammer' were lawful By doctrinal analysis and citing key scholarly understandings, the article challenges the legitimacy of the strikes and argues that they do not meet the stringent standards of self defense under Article 51 of the UN Charter The findings are that Israel's justification based on anticipatory self defense or the so called 'ongoing armed conflict' framework is not adequately anchored in extant international principles of law Furthermore, civilian objects and individuals, such as nuclear scientists and media facilities, targeted constitutes international humanitarian law breaches The result is a pattern of behavior that amounts to aggression and war crimes under the Rome Statute The article concludes that this war indicates a growing crisis in international legal norm enforcement in the use of force and conduct in war, with the demand for more stringent legal accountability and reaffirmation of the original principles of the UN Charter The methodology employed is descriptive analytical, drawing on official sources and legal instruments
کلیدواژهها
نویسندگان
Setayesh Amiri
Master student of International Law in Tehran University
شیوه ارجاع
Amiri, Setayesh,1404,The Iran-Israel War: Navigating the Legal Labyrinth of 'Jus ad Bellum' and 'Jus in Bello',21st International Conference on Legal and Judicial Studies
ارائهشده در
مجموعه مقالات بیست و یکمین کنفرانس بین المللی مطالعات حقوقی و قضایی24 مرداد 1404