The Strait of Hormuz and the legitimate defense of Iran from the point of view of international law.
Mohsen Beharond, former legal and international deputy of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and retired diplomat.
In this comment, referring to the United Nations Charter, Beharond sees military attacks against Iran as an example of violating the prohibition on the use of force and emphasizes Iran's inherent right to legitimate defense. Referring to the inefficiency of the Security Council in containing the conflict, he claims that Iran can use available legitimate means to protect its territorial integrity, sovereignty and political independence; Provided that the requirements of international law, including necessity and proportionality, will be observed.
The central question of the text is whether restricting traffic or blocking the Strait of Hormuz can be justified as part of legitimate defense. The author believes that this question cannot be answered without examining the nature and dimensions of the conflict. From his point of view, when military attacks are accompanied by a naval blockade, economic pressure and threats to the country's survival, the legal assessment of Iran's actions in the Strait of Hormuz should also be done according to the entirety of these conditions, and not just by relying on the rules of one branch of international law.
Another part of the note is dedicated to turning sanctions and the global financial network into a tool of war. Behrund claims that the American control over the dollar and the banking system made it possible to exert extensive pressure on Iran's economy and its livelihood, and the economic pressure coordinated with the military operation should be included in the overall analysis of the conflict. However, the text recognizes that the military response to civilian actions falls into different areas of international law, and the justification of any response, including the actions related to the Strait of Hormuz, requires a careful assessment of the necessity of the conflict, proportionality and the actual conditions of the conflict.
Read the full text of the comment here: