As the world reacts to the entry of the US into Israel’s attack on Iran, Greg Barns says the actions betray the rules based order.

Here’s what’s missing from the Australian mainstream discourse on the Israeli and now United States bombing of Iran. That it is a clear breach of international law. A betrayal of the so-called rules-based order - a term and sentiment that Australian politicians and columnists like the Nine newspapers’ Peter Hartcher and The Australian’s Greg Sheridan, along with Washington toadies like Defence Minister Richard Marles love to throw around.

Greg Barns

Bombing Iran a clear breach of international law

But apparently the rules based order and respect for international law only applies to those nations who are not allies. China, Russia, and Iran must all be chided for apparently thumbing their noses at the rules-based order and international law, but Israel and its backer, the United States are off the hook.

No mention of Israel’s clearly unlawful attacks over the past week on Iranian targets, including civilians and civilian infrastructure by the Australian government yet. Statements from the Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and ministers urge ‘restraint’ but all are too frightened to call out Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s latest actions of wanton destruction. With his partner in crime US President Donald Trump now joining in.

So why are Israel’s actions in Iran unlawful?

The starting point is Article 2(4) of the 1945 UN Charter. It states;

Prohibition of Force: Members must refrain from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the UN’s purposes.

The other pertinent article is Article 51 that preserves the right to self defence;

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 measures necessary to maintain international peace and security.

Not only is Israel acting in defiance of Article 2(4) but it also has no basis for recourse to Article 51, despite Foreign Minister Penny Wong and Mr. Marles claiming that it is within its rights to do so.

It is not. As Professor Ben Saul from the University of Sydney wrote last week; “Iran is obviously not attacking Israel with nuclear weapons. It is also not about to attack Israel, given that it has not built a single nuclear weapon, let alone indicated a specific threat to use one.”

This view is consistent with that expressed last week by Reading University’s international law scholar Marko Milanovic ; “unless Israel is able to provide substantially more compelling evidence than is currently publicly available, it cannot reasonably be argued that Iran would imminently attack Israel, or that using force was the only option to stop that attack. Israel is therefore using force against Iran unlawfully, in violation of Article 2(4) of the [UN] Charter. It is committing aggression.”

What is said about Iran can be applied to the United States which is equally culpable for the illegal actions undertaken by Israel.

The neo-cons and liberal internationalists, to justify their war crimes in Iraq in the first decade of this century, invented the idea of anticipatory self-defence. It is intellectually untenable because it means any nation can decide another might be a threat and therefore invade it. But it’s a concept being trotted out again by the usual suspects to justify Israel’s conduct.

As former United Nations official and human rights lawyer Craig Mokhiber rightly says, while “Israel, the quintessential rogue regime, wrapped in the armour of U.S.-guaranteed impunity, cares little about legality” the anticipatory defence idea has appeal.

That Israel’s killings of Iranian government officials, scientists and civilians are clear cases of murder, and its bombing of infrastructure, including nuclear facilities are also clearly unlawful, should have the Australian government and the mainstream media unreservedly condemning this rogue state.

But to think that principled foreign policy and an unwavering commitment to international law and the so called rules based order would be the order of the day among the political, policy and media establishment in this nation is clearly a step too far when the subject is Israel.

The hypocrisy of Australia on the rule of law internationally is blatant. Mr. Marles fulminates regularly about China having ‘no respect’ for international maritime law. In an astonishingly sycophantic interview Mr. Marles did last year with the defence establishment Centre for International and Strategic Studies in Washington (Peter Hartcher was in the room, surprise surprise!) the Defence Minister said that “what’s at stake here…is the rules-based order.”

If Mr. Marles and his colleagues in the Albanese government are so concerned about threats to the very existence of the rules based order why isn’t taking uncompromising action against Israel a necessity?

The reason is that, as noted above, every Australian government irrespective of colour allows itself to be the captive of the Zionist lobby. And there is also the fact that these days it is willing to turn a blind eye to the genocide that is happening in Gaza because it needs to prop up the disastrous AUKUS deal with Washington.

Australia is prepared to aid and abet the actions, through a combination of relative inaction in relation to Gaza and its sanctioning of Israel’s illegal actions in Iran.

So when you hear senior government ministers and media commentators utter the phrase rules-based order and proclaim to be a model citizen when it comes to international law, no that it is a delusion and a lie.

https://johnmenadue.com/post/2025/06/bombing-iran-a-clear-breach-of-international-law/

YOURDEMOCRACY.NET RECORDS HISTORY AS IT SHOULD BE — NOT AS THE WESTERN MEDIA WRONGLY REPORTS IT.

         Gus Leonisky

         POLITICAL CARTOONIST SINCE 1951.

SEE ALSO: https://yourdemocracy.net/drupal/node/11276