Latest news with #UNSC
The Hindu
7 hours ago
- Politics
- The Hindu
What is the legality of U.S. strikes on Iran?
The story so far: On June 22, U.S. President Donald Trump launched military strikes on Iran, joining its ally Israel in efforts to derail Iran's nuclear programme, which both countries claim is approaching weapons production. Iran retaliated the following day with missile attacks on Al-Udeid Air Base in Qatar, the forward headquarters of U.S. Central Command. After nearly two weeks of escalating hostilities, Iran and Israel agreed to a ceasefire on June 24. What is a lawful exercise of self-defence? The UN Charter, under Article 2(4), prohibits the use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, except in narrowly defined circumstances — a claim of self-defence under Article 51 or with the UN Security Council's (UNSC) authorisation. The restrictive interpretation, grounded in the text of Article 51, permits self-defence only in response to an armed attack that is already under way. A more permissive interpretation allows for self-defence in response to an armed attack that is imminent. This broader interpretation, often referred to as anticipatory self-defence, has been endorsed in several UN-affiliated reports. Notably, the 2004 report of the Secretary-General's High-Level Panel on Threats, Challenges and Change affirmed that 'a threatened State, according to long-established international law, can take military action as long as the threatened attack is imminent, no other means would deflect it, and the action is proportionate'. These criteria are derived from the famous Caroline case, which established that the use of force is lawful only when the need for self-defence is 'instant, overwhelming, leaving no choice of means, and no moment for deliberation'. Over time, many states have argued that the Caroline standard is too rigid to address contemporary security threats. This has led to attempts to reinterpret and expand the notion of imminence, giving rise to the controversial doctrine of pre-emptive self-defence. Under this doctrine, a state may use force not only in response to an attack that is imminent but also during what is perceived as the 'last window of opportunity' to neutralise a threat posed by an adversary with both the intent and capability to strike. The U.S. has been a leading proponent of this doctrine, invoking it to justify the 2003 invasion of Iraq. 'Pre-emptive self-defence lacks the requisite state practice and opinio juris to qualify as customary international law. States are generally reluctant to endorse its legality, as the absence of an imminent threat renders the doctrine highly susceptible to misuse,' Prabhash Ranjan, Professor at Jindal Global Law School, told The Hindu. Did Iran pose an 'imminent' threat? The U.S. has not submitted an Article 51 notification to the UNSC declaring its strikes on Iran as self-defence. However, U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth described them as a precision operation to neutralise 'threats to national interest' and an act of 'collective self-defence' of U.S. forces and its ally, Israel. Tehran has maintained that its nuclear programme is for civilian purposes and remains under the supervision of the International Atomic Energy Agency. However, on June 12, the UN nuclear watchdog passed a resolution accusing Iran of violating its non-proliferation obligations, while noting that inspectors have been unable to confirm whether the programme is 'exclusively peaceful'. In March, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard initially told Congress that while Iran had stockpiled materials, it was not actively building a nuclear weapon. However, she later warned that Iran could do so 'within weeks,' after President Trump claimed Iran could develop one 'within months.' Dr. Ranjan noted that the criteria for determining an 'imminent threat' remain highly contested, as the International Court of Justice (ICJ) has never ruled on the legality of anticipatory self-defence or pre-emptive strikes. 'For the U.S. to credibly invoke pre-emptive self-defence, it must present clear evidence of both Iran's intent and capability to strike in the near future. This is a difficult threshold to meet, given that Iran does not yet possess a nuclear weapon,' he said. He added that ongoing U.S.-Iran negotiations indicate that diplomatic means were still available. What about collective self-defence? Under Article 51 of the Charter, Israel can call on the assistance of its allies to exercise collective self-defence against an attack. 'Israel's strikes on Iran, framed as pre-emptive action against perceived nuclear threats, are legally suspect. This, in turn, casts doubt on the legitimacy of any claim to collective self-defence,' Dr. Ranjan said. Israel has also sought to justify its military offensive as part of an 'ongoing armed conflict,' citing a history of attacks by groups like Hamas and the Houthis, which it claims act as Iranian proxies. However, to legally sustain this argument, Israel must meet the 'effective control' test set by the ICJ in Nicaragua versus U.S. (1986). This is a high threshold to meet since it requires proof that Iran exercises 'overall control' over these groups beyond merely funding or arming them. What are the implications? Allowing states to invoke pre-emptive self-defence would effectively grant powerful nations the licence to unilaterally use force based on mere conjecture. This would further weaken the already fragile rules-based international order. It is, therefore, crucial to resist expanding legal definitions of what constitutes an imminent threat, particularly when punitive action by the UNSC against permanent members like the U.S. remains unlikely due to their veto power.
Time of India
2 days ago
- Politics
- Time of India
China On Alert? Jaishankar Heads to US for Quad Talks With Marco Rubio
/ Jun 27, 2025, 11:14AM IST External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar is set to attend a pivotal Quad Foreign Ministers' Meeting in Washington, hosted by US Secretary of State Marco Rubio. This gathering, featuring Australia's Penny Wong and Japan's Iwaya Takeshi, comes just weeks after the Pahalgam terror attack and ahead of India's upcoming Quad Summit, where PM Modi will host President Trump, PM Albanese, and PM Ishiba. The meeting underscores renewed focus on Indo-Pacific security amid a temporary lull in Middle East conflicts. Before heading to DC, Jaishankar will inaugurate a UN exhibition on 'The Human Cost of Terrorism', an event set just before Pakistan assumes UNSC presidency. As the Quad looks to strengthen its stance on maritime security, infrastructure, and regional peace, all eyes are on China's next move. Is a post-Ukraine strategic pivot unfolding? Watch this deep dive into diplomacy, deterrence, and India's rising global role.#sjaishankar #marcorubio #quad #quad2025 #india #unitedstates #china #quadmeeting2025 #jaishankarinusa #indopacific #moditrump2025 #chinaquadwatch #pahalgamattack #unterrorismexhibit #toi #toibharat #bharat #breakingnews #indianews
Mint
2 days ago
- Politics
- Mint
Macron warns of ‘worst-case scenario' if Iran quits nuclear non-proliferation treaty, says US strikes had real impact
As conflicting reports emerge over the alleged 'obliteration' of Iran's nuclear sites during the strikes by the United States over the weekend, Donald Trump has found support in France's Emmanuel Macron as the French President said the bombing were 'genuinely effective'. Emmanuel Macron also warned of a 'worst-case scenario' if Tehran now exits the global non-proliferation treaty. After an EU summit in Brussels, Macron said, 'The worst would be that the consequence of this is Iran's exit from the Non-Proliferation Treaty and therefore, ultimately, a drift and a collective weakening.' He added that the aim was 'that there should be no resumption' of nuclear buildup by Iran after the US strikes. The French President also said that he would be speaking to five members of the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) in a bid to maintain the treaty – that is meant to limit the spread of nuclear weapons. Those talks already kicked off with a call with President Donald Trump on Thursday, June 26, in which Macron said he informed his US counterparts of contacts Paris had with Tehran in 'the last few days and hours'. 'Our hope is that there will be a real convergence of views,' Emmanuel Macron said. Iran joined the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) in 1970, committing to declare its nuclear materials to the International Atomic Energy Agency. But it has recently begun preparing the grounds for a possible withdrawal from the treaty, accusing the agency of acting as a "partner" in Israel's 'war of aggression'. Last weekend, American B-2 bombers hit two Iranian nuclear sites with massive GBU-57 bunker-buster bombs, while a guided missile submarine struck a third site with Tomahawk cruise missiles. While Donald Trump has his administration has maintained that the military action was 'success', resulting in the 'obliteration' of the nuclear facilities, a leaked preliminary intel report has suggested otherwise. A leaked preliminary US intelligence report on assessment of Donald Trump's strikes on Iran's nuclear facilities has concluded that the bombing did not destroy the nuclear program but only set it back by a few months – contrary to the claims made by the President. It further claims that despite the strikes and with little damage Iran's nuclear sites have sustained, Tehran could restart its nuclear program within months. The report also revealed that Iran relocated a significant portion of its highly enriched uranium – used to make a nuclear weapon – ahead of the strikes, transferring them to other secret nuclear sites.
India Gazette
3 days ago
- Politics
- India Gazette
At UNSC India rejects Pakistan's
New York [US], June 26 (ANI): India has called out in strong terms Pakistan's 'politically motivated remarks' and attempts to pursue a 'nefarious agenda' at the United Nations Security Council (UNSC). 'We reject this attempt by Pakistan to deflect attention from the atrocities committed against children in their country, as highlighted in the Secretary General's report, as well as their rampant cross border terrorism,' India's Permanent Representative to the UN, Ambassador Parvathaneni Harish said. The Indian envoy in a strong rebuttal during the UNSC's open debate on Children and Armed Conflict (CAC), called out Pakistan for misusing the platform and violating the Council's agenda. India has accused Pakistan of attempting to deflect attention from its own human rights violations and state-sponsored cross-border terrorism and casting unwarranted aspersions over UN processes and also smearing India at various discussions to pursue their nefarious agenda. The Indian emvoy recalled the terror attacks in Pahalgam in which 26 people were killed by Pakistani or Pakistani trained terrorists. 'The world has not forgotten the savage targeted attacks by Pakistani and Pakistani-trained terrorists killing 26 tourists in India in Pahalgam, Jammu and Kashmir on the 22 April 2025' Indian envoy Harish said. The Security Council had issued a Press Statement on 25 April 2025 which underlined the need to hold perpetrators, organizers, financiers and sponsors of this reprehensible act accountable and bring them to justice, he said. The Indian envoy also reaffirming India's zero-tolerance stance against terrorism and pointed to the May 7 retaliatory strikes under Operation Sindoor. 'India had undertaken non-escalatory, proportionate and focused attacks that targeted nine terrorist infrastructure sites on the 7 May 2025 in response through Operation Sindoor,' Harish said. 'The terrorists killed in these attacks were given state funerals by Pakistan. And yet, they try to preach to others,' he said. The Indian envoy also noted the recent Secretary General's report on CAAC provides details of serious violations against children in armed conflict in Pakistan. 'Secretary General has expressed concern at the rise in such grave violations reported including attacks against schools, particularly girls' schools, against health workers, and about the incidents in the border areas with Afghanistan where a series of killing and maiming of Afghan children was directly attributed to cross border shelling and air strikes by Pakistani armed forces,' Harish noted. 'Our world is witnessing an alarming escalation in conflicts and terrorist attacks; and children are their most unfortunate casualties. As per UNSG's report, grave violations against children have surged 25 percent, while sexual violence has risen 35 percent in 2024 --a sobering indictment that demands immediate and decisive action. Therefore, today's discussion is both urgent and necessary....' 'Creating an enabling environment for holistic development of children is fundamental for child protection. Their safety, nutrition and education should be prioritized at national and household levels. Children in conflict and post-conflict situations, however require specialized attention and psycho-social support for their successful reintegration into society. Thus, sustained efforts by the State are required to build these essential ecosystems.' The Indian envoy further condemned the deliberate shelling of Pakistani army of India's border villages in May 2025, killing and injuring a number of civilians. 'To preach at this body after such behaviour is grossly hypocritical,' he said. The Indian envoy highlighted that 'the entire union territory of Jammu & Kashmir has been, is and will always be an integral and inalienable part of India irrespective of the frequent and incessant spate of lies and falsehoods by Pakistan.' (ANI)
NDTV
3 days ago
- Politics
- NDTV
At UN Security Council, India Exposes Pak For Terrorism, Child Rights Abuses
United Nations: India has strongly rejected what it described as Pakistan's "nefarious agenda" at the United Nations Security Council (UNSC), accusing Islamabad of attempting to deflect attention from its own human rights violations and state-sponsored cross-border terrorism. India's Permanent Representative to the UN, Ambassador Parvathaneni Harish, issued a sharp rebuttal during the UNSC's open debate on Children and Armed Conflict (CAC), calling out Pakistan for misusing the platform and violating the Council's agenda. "Pakistan is casting unwarranted aspersions over UN processes and also smearing India at various discussions to pursue its nefarious agenda. We reject this attempt by Pakistan to deflect attention from the atrocities committed against children in their country, as highlighted in the Secretary-General's report, as well as their rampant cross-border terrorism," said Mr Harish. The Indian envoy labelled Pakistan as "one of the grave violators of the CAC agenda," citing not only the systemic abuse of children within Pakistan's borders but also the impact of its military operations in Afghanistan's border areas, where children have suffered casualties due to cross-border shelling and air strikes by Pakistani forces. He referred to the April 22 terror attack in Pahalgam, Jammu and Kashmir, in which 26 Indian tourists were killed by Pakistani or Pakistan-trained terrorists. "The world has not forgotten the savage targeted attacks by Pakistani and Pakistani-trained terrorists," the Ambassador said, noting the Security Council's April 25 press statement that had underscored the "need to hold perpetrators, organisers, financiers, and sponsors of this reprehensible act accountable and bring them to justice." Reaffirming India's zero-tolerance stance against terrorism, Ambassador Harish pointed to the May 7 retaliatory strikes under Operation Sindoor. "India undertook non-escalatory, proportionate, and focused attacks that targeted nine terrorist infrastructure sites," he said, adding that those killed in the strikes were given state funerals in Pakistan, highlighting the state's continued patronage of terrorism. He also referenced the Secretary-General's recent CAC report, which detailed grave violations against children in Pakistan, including attacks on girls' schools and health workers. "The Secretary-General has expressed concern at the rise in such grave violations reported, including attacks against schools, particularly girls' schools, against health workers, and about the incidents in the border areas with Afghanistan, where a series of killing and maiming of Afghan children was directly attributed to cross-border shelling and air strikes by Pakistani armed forces," Mr Harish noted. He further condemned the Pakistani army's shelling of Indian border villages in May 2025, which resulted in civilian deaths and injuries. "To preach at this body after such behaviour is grossly hypocritical," he said. Concluding his remarks, the Indian envoy reiterated India's firm stance on Jammu and Kashmir, stating, "The entire union territory of Jammu and Kashmir has been, is, and will always be an integral and inalienable part of India, irrespective of the frequent, incessant spate of lies and falsehoods by Pakistan."
