Current Affairs Topics Archive
International Relations Economics Polity & Governance Environment & Ecology Science & Technology Internal Security Geography Social Issues Art & Culture Modern History

​Imperial war: on the war against Iran

March 01, 2026 6 min read International Relations GS2 (International Relations International Law Institutions)
On This Page ▼

What Happened

  • The United States and Israel launched joint military strikes on Iran ("Operation Epic Fury") on February 28, 2026, killing Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and multiple senior Iranian military and intelligence officials.
  • The strikes targeted Iran's nuclear facilities (Natanz, Fordow), military command infrastructure, and a leadership compound — marking the first direct large-scale US military attack on Iranian soil.
  • Iran retaliated with ballistic missile and drone strikes on Israel and Gulf Arab states, expanding the conflict regionally.
  • The UN Security Council convened emergency sessions but was unable to adopt resolutions due to the veto power exercised by the US and potentially other permanent members.
  • Multiple governments and international legal scholars raised questions about the legal basis of the strikes under the UN Charter, particularly Articles 2(4) and 51.
  • The strikes — targeting a sitting head of state and government in his compound — raised questions under international humanitarian law regarding the distinction between combatants and protected persons.

Static Topic Bridges

UN Charter Framework: Prohibition on Use of Force and Exceptions

The United Nations Charter (1945) establishes the foundational legal architecture governing the use of force in international relations. It reflects the post-World War II consensus that unilateral wars of aggression must be outlawed.

  • Article 2(4): "All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations." The ICJ has described this as "the cornerstone of the United Nations Charter."
  • Article 51: "Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defence if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations, until the Security Council has taken the necessary measures." Self-defence is one of only two lawful exceptions to Article 2(4) — the other being UNSC-authorised force under Chapter VII.
  • Chapter VII (Articles 39-51): Empowers the Security Council to determine threats to peace, breaches of peace, or acts of aggression, and authorise collective military force.
  • Article 51 conditions: Self-defence must be: (a) in response to an "armed attack," (b) necessary, and (c) proportionate to the attack.
  • Customary international law also recognises "anticipatory self-defence" (preemptive action against an imminent attack) and "preventive war" (against non-imminent threats) — though the latter is highly contested and widely regarded as unlawful.
  • The US-Israel legal justification for Operation Epic Fury: reportedly invoked self-defence under Article 51 (based on Iran's nuclear programme as an imminent threat and prior Iranian proxy attacks). Critics argue this stretches self-defence beyond recognition.

Connection to this news: The legal controversy over Operation Epic Fury is a direct UPSC test of Article 2(4) vs. Article 51 — and the limits of the self-defence exception in contemporary international law.

UN Security Council: Structure, Veto Power, and Paralysis

The UN Security Council (UNSC) has primary responsibility for international peace and security under the UN Charter. Its decisions (resolutions) are binding on all UN member states — making it uniquely powerful among international institutions.

  • Composition: 5 permanent members (P5) — USA, UK, France, Russia, China — each with veto power; plus 10 non-permanent members elected by the General Assembly for 2-year terms.
  • Veto power: Any P5 member can block a resolution, regardless of the majority. A single veto defeats a resolution.
  • UNSC paralysis in West Asia: The US has vetoed multiple UNSC resolutions on the Israel-Palestine conflict (14+ vetoes since 1972). Russia and China have vetoed resolutions on Syria. This P5 dynamic consistently prevents collective action when major powers are directly involved.
  • "Uniting for Peace" Resolution (UNGA Resolution 377, 1950): When the Security Council is deadlocked due to veto, the UN General Assembly (UNGA) can meet in emergency special session and recommend collective measures. The UNGA has no binding authority (recommendations only), but carries significant political weight.
  • India and UNSC reform: India is the leading advocate for UNSC expansion — seeking a permanent seat and advocating for more representative governance (G4 group: India, Japan, Germany, Brazil). India's argument: the current P5 structure reflects 1945 power realities, not 2026 realities.

Connection to this news: The UNSC's inability to pass resolutions on Operation Epic Fury — blocked by US veto — exemplifies the systemic paralysis that India and other emerging powers cite when advocating for UNSC reform.

Doctrine of State Sovereignty and Non-Intervention

State sovereignty is the foundational principle of the post-Westphalian international order (1648). It holds that every state has supreme authority within its territory and is equal to all other states under international law. This is codified in Article 2(1) of the UN Charter: "The Organisation is based on the principle of the sovereign equality of all its Members."

  • The principle of non-intervention: Article 2(7) of the UN Charter prohibits the UN from intervening in matters "essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of any state." By extension, states are prohibited from interfering in each other's internal affairs.
  • Exceptions to sovereignty: Customary international law (and subsequent UN practice) has recognised exceptions — most notably the "Responsibility to Protect" (R2P) doctrine (2005 World Summit) which holds that sovereignty is conditional: states that fail to protect their populations from genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing, or crimes against humanity may be subject to international intervention.
  • R2P is distinct from "humanitarian intervention" (used to justify NATO's Kosovo intervention in 1999); R2P requires UNSC authorisation for the most coercive measures.
  • "Targeted killing" of a foreign head of state: International law does not grant a general right to assassinate foreign leaders. The prohibition on murder of heads of state is a long-standing norm rooted in diplomatic immunity, customary law, and the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations (1961, Article 29 — inviolability of diplomatic agents, extended by analogy to heads of state).
  • The US has argued that killing enemy combatants — including heads of state who command armed forces — is lawful under the laws of armed conflict if they are a military objective.

Connection to this news: The killing of Iran's Supreme Leader Khamenei — the head of state and Supreme Commander of its armed forces — tests the limits of targeted killing doctrine, sovereignty, and the laws of armed conflict at once.

Key Facts & Data

  • UN Charter: Adopted June 26, 1945, San Francisco; in force October 24, 1945; 193 member states (current).
  • Article 2(4): Prohibition on use of force — described by ICJ as the "cornerstone of the UN Charter."
  • Article 51: Right of self-defence — individual or collective; subject to UNSC oversight.
  • UNSC: 5 permanent members (P5) with veto; 10 non-permanent members (2-year terms); resolutions require 9 of 15 votes + no P5 veto.
  • US vetoes on Israel-related UNSC resolutions: 14+ since 1972.
  • "Uniting for Peace" Resolution (UNGA Resolution 377, 1950): Allows UNGA emergency sessions when UNSC is deadlocked; no binding authority.
  • R2P (Responsibility to Protect): Adopted at 2005 UN World Summit; 3 pillars: state responsibility to protect, international assistance, UNSC-authorised intervention as last resort.
  • Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations (1961): Governs diplomatic immunity; Article 29 — inviolability of diplomatic agents (extrapolated to heads of state by custom).
  • Operation Epic Fury: B-2 stealth bombers, joint US-Israeli operation; targets included Natanz enrichment facility, Fordow underground site, and leadership compounds.
  • India's UNSC reform position: Demands permanent seat and broader representation; part of G4 (India, Japan, Germany, Brazil) group advocating reform.