Iran strikes: ‘Diplomatic resolution farther away than ever’

Professor Rosa Freedman, international law expert, assesses the routes to a resolution in the Iran - US/Israel conflict. 

For interview, contact the University of Reading Press Office on 0118 378 5757 or pressoffice@reading.ac.uk. 

Professor Rosa Freedman, Professor of Law, Conflict and Global Development at the University of Reading, said: “The strikes by Israel and the USA can be seen as part of the ongoing hostilities since 7th October, and therefore not requiring United Nations Security Council authorisation. If there is credible evidence that Iran has been continuing its nuclear weapons programme then self-defence or necessity could also be used to justify the actions on Saturday morning. 

“The UK has distanced itself from those actions by stating that its involvement is limited to defending its allies. This also sends a strong message to Iran that UK bases are not legitimate targets given that Iran is now targeting American military bases in sovereign states across the region.

“Whether any of this matters is another thing entirely. The discourse within the United Nations about international law does not mean that the Security Council can or will take any action given that America holds, and will use, its veto power for any resolution tabled. The countries from the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation that may previously have supported Iran at United Nations bodies are less likely to do so now that the regime has bombed Gulf states over the past 24 hours. Saudi Arabia has even announced that it has approved an attack on Iran and other GCC countries are likely to follow.

“A route for diplomatic resolution seems farther away than ever before. Whether or not this war can be justified under international law will not prevent it continuing until either the regime is toppled in Iran, or the Americans decide that the cost of continuing is too high.”