Full Story US strikes Iran: the breakdown of the rules-based order
9 snips
Jun 23, 2025 Professor Ben Saul, Challis Chair of International Law at the University of Sydney, examines the recent US strikes on Iran's nuclear sites and their implications for international law. He argues these actions signify a troubling breakdown of global norms. The discussion delves into the legal ramifications, advocating for diplomatic solutions over military intervention. Saul also critiques the reliability of alliances, particularly in the context of Australian intelligence sharing, and warns against the risks of returning to a lawless international order that endangers civilians.
AI Snips
Chapters
Transcript
Episode notes
US Strikes Breach International Law
- The US strike on Iranian nuclear facilities is unlawful under international law as it lacks a provable imminent armed attack justification.
- This event marks a dangerous precedent by endorsing preventive unilateral military actions internationally.
Limits on Use of Force Explained
- International law permits force only in response to ongoing or imminent armed attacks, not preventive strikes.
- Allowing preventive self-defense claims risks abuse and undermines peaceful dispute resolution frameworks.
Western Support Breaks Global Consensus
- Western support for US and Israeli strikes on Iran diverges from broad international rejection of preventive military actions.
- Previous preemptive strikes and doctrines like the Bush Doctrine were widely condemned and abandoned for legal and diplomatic reasons.