appConfigEntityId

bodyType

customContents

entityId

entityUuid

isVideo

articlePageQuery

article

articleSchemaContent

content

hooksArticlePageAdvertisementConfigArticle

hooksArticlePageFloatingButtonConfigArticle

appConfig

filter

json

liveArticle

Tian Shichen

The smoke rising from Iran on Saturday signalled more than just a localised escalation in the Middle East. Coming on the heels of the United States’ military invasion of Venezuela earlier this year, the joint US-Israeli strikes on Iran represent a watershed moment for the 21st century.
We are witnessing the systematic dismantling of the post-1945 legal order, replaced by the unvarnished “law of the jungle” where strategic interests supersede legality, and the UN Charter is treated as a relic of a more optimistic age.
The foundational architecture of modern international law rests upon Article 2(4) of the UN Charter, which strictly prohibits the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state. The exceptions are intentionally narrow: authorisation by the UN Security Council or a clear case of self-defence under Article 51.
In the current strikes against Iran, neither criterion has been met. There was no Security Council resolution authorising “Operation Epic Fury”. Furthermore, the claim of self-defence fails the most basic legal scrutiny. Under the long-standing “Caroline test”, the necessity of self-defence must be “instant, overwhelming [and] leaving no choice of means, and no moment for deliberation”.
Iran had not launched an armed attack against the US or Israel. Instead, Washington and Tel Aviv have relied on a doctrine of “pre-emptive war” – striking a sovereign state to eliminate a perceived potential future capability. By stretching the definition of imminent threats to include hypothetical ones, the US has normalised aggression. If the mere pursuit of a technology or a shift in regional power becomes a justifiable trigger for bombardment, then the prohibition on force has been hollowed out from within.
To understand why the US is pursuing this path of “jungle law” despite clear domestic war-weariness, one must look at the structural capture of US foreign policy. Public opinion polls consistently show that the American people are exhausted by the “forever wars” of the last two decades. Yet the political machinery in Washington operates in a vacuum, insulated from the public will.


The influence of high-net-worth ideological donors and the immense gravity of the Israel lobby have created a bipartisan “lockstep” on Iran. In the US Congress, US President Donald Trump’s rhetoric on Tehran receives standing ovations from both sides of the aisle. This is not a sign of democratic consensus, but of a specialised interest capture that has made military confrontation feel “unavoidable”. When the military-industrial complex and specialised lobbying groups own the legislative and executive narrative, international law becomes an inconvenient speed bump rather than a binding constraint.
The championing of the law of the jungle carries three catastrophic consequences for the global community.
First, it triggers the tu quoque (or “you also”) argument. By setting a precedent where a superpower can unilaterally decide which states are “legitimate” and which can be bombed without a UN mandate, the US provides a legal shield for other regional powers. If Washington can strike based on “preventive” logic, what is to stop other nations from using the same rationale to settle territorial disputes or eliminate rivals in Eastern Europe, the South China Sea or South Asia?




Second, it devastates the moral authority of the West. For years, Washington has criticised other nations for violating the “rules-based international order”. However, the law is not a menu from which one can pick and choose. When the US violates the sovereignty of nations like Venezuela and Iran, it sends a clear message to the Global South: the “rules” are only for the weak; the “law” is only for the enemies of the West.
Third, we are entering an era of radical strategic uncertainty. By removing guard rails designed to reduce the risk of miscalculation between states with nuclear programmes, we invite a world of chaos where pre-emptive strikes become the default security posture. This is a recipe for a global conflagration that no one – not even the victors of the jungle – can truly control.

Perhaps the most disappointing aspect of this crisis is the largely cautious response from Europe. The United Kingdom, France and Germany have offered only tepid calls for restraint. By stopping short of an explicit condemnation of the US violation of international law, they have chosen transatlantic unity over legal principle.
By playing a complicit role, Europe is helping to dismantle the very multilateral system that has ensured its own security for 80 years. If Europe seeks to be a legitimate third pole in a multipolar world, it must find the courage to hold its allies to the same standards it demands of its adversaries. Silence in the face of aggression is, in itself, a form of endorsement.
The strikes on Iran are a symptom of a deeper malaise: the belief that power creates its own legality. But history is a harsh teacher. Once the prohibition on the use of force is normalised as optional, it is nearly impossible to reconstruct.
The international community can continue down this path, where the “rules-based order” is nothing more than a euphemism for the interests of the powerful, leading us towards a fragmented and violent world. Or, we can demand a return to the strict letter of the UN Charter, where sovereignty is sacred and force is truly a last resort. If we choose the jungle, we should not be surprised when we eventually find ourselves among the hunted.


Risk of unrest in Asia as Iran war, El Nino threaten food supplies

Saudis turn to Western, regional allies as missile defences run low

Who is Abdul Malik al-Houthi, the elusive Yemeni commander behind Red Sea-Saudi blitz?

China affirms support for Iran, but warns against Yemen spillover

US-Israel war on Iran

Attack on Iran normalises global descent into the ‘law of the jungle’

Illustration: Craig Stephens

Iranians mourn the death of Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei in Valiasr Square in Tehran, Iran, on March 1. Photo: EPA

US-Israeli strike on Iran signals new phase of global escalation

People watch as smoke rises on the skyline after an explosion in Tehran, Iran, on February 28. Photo: AP

An Israeli navy submarine cruises near the Panama-flagged bulk carrier Kaan Deval in the Mediterranean Sea in the bay of Haifa off the northern Israeli coastal city, on February 28. The US and Israel launched strikes against Iran on February 28. Photo: AFP

Iran attack a ‘wake-up call’ for China on electronic warfare and intelligence

An image taken from Israeli military footage shows what it says are large-scale strikes on “the headquarters of the Iranian terror regime” in Tehran on March 1. Photo: Handout

Iran conflict puts India’s cherished Middle East neutrality to the test

Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu (right) shakes hands with his Indian counterpart Narendra Modi during a press conference on February 26. Photo: EPA

An Israeli air defence system intercepts a ballistic missile barrage over Tel Aviv launched from Iran on Sunday. Photo: Sopa Images/Zuma Press Wire/dpa

In US strikes on Iran, North Korea sees nuclear vindication

Smoke rises over Tehran following missile strikes on Sunday. The US and Israel launched strikes against Iran on Saturday, killing the country’s supreme leader and top military leaders. Photo: AFP

North Korean leader Kim Jong-un delivers a speech on Sunday. Photo: KCNA/KNS/AFP

A projectile is launched during a long-range strategic cruise missile launching drill at an unknown location in North Korea on December 28. Photo: KCNA/Reuters

North Korea’s leader Kim Jong-un shakes hands with US President Donald Trump during their final meeting in June 2019. Photo: AFP

Iran ‘internationalises battlefield’ as retaliatory missiles put Gulf in firing line

Smoke rises from a burning building hit by an Iranian drone strike in Seef district, Manama, Bahrain, on Saturday. Photo: Reuters

Smoke and flames rise from Dubai’s landmark The Palm archipelago, as Iran carried out retaliatory strikes in the Gulf following US and Israeli attacks on Saturday. Photo: Various sources/AFP

Opinion

World Opinion

Asia Opinion

News

World

Middle East

By waging war under the logic of pre-emptive defence, the US and Israel are hollowing out the foundations of international law


By waging war under the logic of pre-emptive defence, the US and Israel are hollowing out the foundations of international law.


Iran

US-Iran tensions

United States

United Nations

United Nations Security Council (UNSC)

Israel

US Congress

Donald Trump

US military

Israel Defence Forces (IDF)

Venezuela

US-Venezuela conflict

War and conflict

Expresses the views, ideas and conclusions of the author. (Eg. Enough of Crazy Rich Asians, think of crazy poor Hongkongers.)


Attack on Iran normalises global descent into the ‘law of the jungle’

.css-1c6uqr6{color:inherit;font-weight:inherit;font-size:inherit;font-family:inherit;line-height:inherit;overflow-wrap:break-word;}By waging war under the logic of pre-emptive defence, the US and Israel are hollowing out the foundations of international law

By waging war under the logic of pre-emptive defence, the US and Israel are hollowing out the foundations of international law