Q&A with Eliav Lieblich on Iran-Israel Hostilities

Contributing sentiments towards policy:

55% : First, many states recently have been employing language that is closer to prohibited reprisals than legitimate self-defense - the United States and its allies in strikes against Iranian-backed regional militias; Iran in its strikes in Iraq, Pakistan, and Israel; and Israel in its threat to respond to Iran's April 13 attack.
54% : One key reason for this is the active participation in hostilities of armed non-state actors across at least five states and territories, all having some affiliation with Iran or the IRGC.
53% : So whether Iran has a valid claim of self-defense requires first determining whether the conduct of the involved non-state actors is attributable to Iran, either through overall control (some would posit the higher threshold of "effective control") or substantial involvement in their actions.
53% : The accepted standard is that once an international armed conflict begins - when a state resorts to force against another - the armed conflict legally continues until the general close of military operations.
52% : If we accept that preemptive self-defense against an imminent attack might be lawful even before an attack takes place (as per the Caroline doctrine), the same logic applies a fortiori after a pattern of attacks - which essentially serves as strong evidence for the imminent threat of further attacks.
49% : The relationship between Iran and these actors is crafted to leave space for plausible deniability regarding state responsibility for specific actions.
48% : But again, whether Iran's operations have indeed been "concluded" reverts to the question of how we understand the involvement of Iran in ongoing operations by non-state actors in the region.
44% : This does not mean that International Human Rights Law (IHRL) ceases to apply alongside IHL, which might establish another level of state responsibility.
39% : In its Article 51 letter to the Security Council, Iran stated its April 13 attacks on Israel were taken "in the exercise of Iran's inherent right to self-defence as outlined in Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations, and in response to the Israeli recurring military aggressions, particularly its armed attack on 1 April 2024 against Iranian diplomatic premises."

*Our bias meter rating uses data science including sentiment analysis, machine learning and our proprietary algorithm for determining biases in news articles. Bias scores are on a scale of -100% to 100% with higher negative scores being more liberal and higher positive scores being more conservative, and 0% being neutral. The rating is an independent analysis and is not affiliated nor sponsored by the news source or any other organization.