The Foreign Minister said: "The repetition of recent statements by US officials shows that Washington no longer considers itself bound by valid political standards and international law, and is effectively returning to the law of the jungle with a hegemonic approach."
According to Ashura News, quoted by Mehr News Agency, Abbas Araqchi stated at the international conference on “International Law Under Attack”: “I am very pleased that I have the opportunity to attend and exchange views today.”
He continued: “Today we are facing a truth that can no longer be ignored: international law is under attack.”
The Foreign Minister added: “The foundation of international law has been subjected to the most unprecedented attacks. The recognized normative structure after the United Nations has fallen into chaos.”
The details of the Foreign Minister’s remarks are as follows:
In the name of God, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful
Esteemed experts and thinkers,
Ladies and gentlemen!
I welcome all of you to Tehran and the Center for Political and International Studies of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Islamic Republic of Iran. I am very pleased that I have the opportunity to attend and exchange views today at this conference on the very important topic of international law under attack.
International Law Under Attack; America Seeks to Build a Force-Based Order
Honored Guests,
On the 80th anniversary of the founding of the United Nations, while it was expected that we would witness more than ever adherence to the principles and foundations of international law as universal virtues and the preservation of the achievements of the international community in this area, we are unfortunately witnessing a full-scale attack on these principles by revisionist powers.
Today, we are faced with a truth that can no longer be ignored or ignored: international law is under attack. The world is facing very deep challenges, worrying trends, and unprecedented strategic changes at various levels.
The solid foundations of international law have been subjected to the most unprecedented attacks by powers that were expected to be its guardians as the permanent claimants to the architecture of the post-World War II international order. Even the well-known normative structure since the establishment of the United Nations has been subjected to widespread chaos to the point where, instead of “war and violence” being the exception and “peace and coexistence” being the rule, violence and war have become a new norm in international relations, and the use of military means has become a rule to advance the foreign policy goals of some countries.
The current situation is the fruit and result of the anti-international law trends that have unfortunately been pursued in recent years by the United States and some of its allied states in favor of the West-centric order and with the slogan “rules-based international order” instead of “law-based international order.”
The rules-based order has been interpreted and interpreted in practice based on the intentions, goals, programs, and fleeting and seasonal interests of Western countries, and mainly against international law, and has been placed in the most selective way possible as a tool at the disposal of the intoxicating hegemony of the United States and the West.
Unfortunately, the countless warnings and warnings of leading international figures and various countries, including the global South, for the necessity of returning to international law based on universality, equality, and the rejection of force and discrimination have not been heeded, to the point that today there is even less talk about the rule-based order, and in practice we are witnessing efforts to build a “force-based international order” by the United States and some of its allies.
From alleged peace to naked hegemony; Criticism of the new White House doctrine
Dear professors and researchers!
The President of the United States came to the White House with the doctrine of “peace through strength.” It did not take long for it to become clear that this doctrine was, in essence, a code of conduct and a cover for a new framework of action: “hegemony through force,” and that is, naked force.
What American officials are saying so often and without any disguise today leaves no room for interpretation of this fact. The President of the United States is clearly saying that the United States no longer wants to act on the basis of valid political considerations and within the framework of international law, but simply wants to “win.” This is the manifesto of a hegemonic America, and in effect a return to the law of the jungle.
In this manifesto, the Secretary of Defense becomes the Secretary of War, and nuclear weapons testing is once again on the agenda. The president, who calls himself the president of peace, arbitrarily and without any reason or justification attacks wherever he wants, orders the evacuation of cities, demands unconditional surrender, and violates and tears up all international laws, even the commitments of the presidents before him.
This process of naked and reckless use of force and continuous attack on the foundations of international law, if not the law of the jungle, then what is it? From any angle you look at it, this process definitely cannot and should not continue.
The latest published statistics indicate that the world military budget is approaching an unprecedented figure of 3 trillion dollars, which shows the highest growth in the past few decades. In 2024 alone, an average of more than 7 percent of government budgets will be allocated to militarism, and estimates for 2025 are at least 10 percent. This increase includes all geographical regions of the world, which will not lead to one more result: more war, violence, and widespread tension. The reason is clear, there is no law in the jungle that America has created, and you have to be strong to defend yourself.
As a result of this excessive militarism, today we are witnessing widespread geopolitical ruptures, increasing competition between great powers, the development of missiles and nuclear arsenals and offensive weapons, the weaponization of peaceful technologies such as conventional telecommunications equipment, cross-border conflicts between medium-sized regional powers, multi-layered chaos in the international and regional order, the decline in economic, cultural and even military convergences between countries, and most importantly, the marginalization of diplomacy. The truth is that when the Israeli regime attacked Iran on June 13, at the behest and direction of the US President, the first bombs were fired at the Iran-US negotiating table, negotiations that had been held for five rounds and the sixth round was scheduled for two days later, on June 15. Diplomacy was the first victim of the 12-day war.
The dangerous anti-peace trend in the region; Israel has attacked 7 countries in two years
Dear audience!
The West Asian region, as one of the most international regions in the world, is the main victim of this tragic situation and its developments have been directly affected by the aforementioned trends. In fact, the developments in this region, especially during the past two years, are a complete mirror of these dangerous trends that are anti-peace and anti-international law.
It is no secret to anyone how the Tel Aviv regime, as the agent and appendage of the United States in the West Asian region, pursues its limitless and dangerous geopolitical ambitions by attacking the most obvious foundations of international law. Relying on a blank check signed by Washington and some European countries, and emboldened by billions of dollars in weapons and military equipment from NATO and the West, and the immunity they have created for it in international forums, this regime has committed and continues to commit the most heinous crimes against humanity, massacres, murders, genocide and ethnic cleansing.
Over the past two years, this regime has invaded seven countries, occupied new areas in other countries, including Lebanon and Syria, in addition to Palestine, and shamelessly talks about rewriting the order of the West Asian region and "Greater Israel." Today, it has become an established fact that no country is safe from the Israeli regime's desire for military and security dominance in the West Asian region.
America’s admission of directing the Israeli attack and attempting to stop diplomacy
Ladies and gentlemen!
With the same logic and within the framework of its geopolitical illusions and desires, the Israeli regime, under the full command and guidance of the United States, as its president recently admitted, at midnight on June 13, just two days before the sixth round of nuclear talks in Muscat, assassinated diplomacy and the possibility of reaching an agreement through peaceful means.
The Zionist regime’s aggression on Iranian soil, the martyrdom of a number of civilians, the assassination of commanders in their homes, and the targeting of peaceful nuclear facilities were not only a violation of the most obvious principles of international law and the repeated clauses of the United Nations Charter, but also a full-scale attack on the safeguards and non-proliferation system.
On the 80th anniversary of the Hiroshima and Nagasaki catastrophe, the United States committed another crime with aggressive, rebellious, and deeply irresponsible attacks on peaceful nuclear sites under the supervision of the IAEA on Iranian soil, and once again became the number one threat to global peace and security.
Based on the right to legitimately defend its territory and people against an illegitimate aggression, the Islamic Republic of Iran not only stopped the aggressors, but also showed by the severe blows it dealt to the aggressor that although the Iranian nation is a peace-loving nation, in the face of war it will stand to the end and make the aggressor regret it.
Everyone saw how, within nine days, the message of “unconditional surrender” changed to a call for an “unconditional ceasefire,” and the initial illusions about the Iranian nation and regime were dispelled.
The Islamic Republic of Iran, as a founding member of the United Nations, has always acted in full compliance with international law. Iran’s nuclear program is fundamentally based on our recognized rights under Article 4 of the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). The development of nuclear technology for peaceful purposes, including enrichment, is an inalienable right of the Iranian people; a right from which we have never deviated. Iran has been fully subject to the most comprehensive verification regime of the Agency for many years and has adhered to all technical obligations.
After the 2015 nuclear deal, the Islamic Republic of Iran has fully adhered to its obligations under the JCPOA and Security Council Resolution 2231, as confirmed by 15 consecutive IAEA reports. It was the United States that unilaterally and without reason withdrew from the agreement, not Iran. If the United States had adhered to its obligations under the JCPOA, we would be in a completely different situation today.
Iran’s response to the Israeli and US aggression was carried out precisely on the basis of Article 51 of the UN Charter, which is the “inherent right of self-defense.” Our defensive operations were designed in accordance with the principles of necessity, proportionality, and distinction between military and civilian targets.
Iran, even at the height of the threat and aggression, observed the norms of international humanitarian law. Unlike the Israeli regime, which massacres hundreds of civilians on the slightest pretext, none of Iran’s actions were directed at residential areas or civilians. The Islamic Republic of Iran has proven that in all crises and conflicts, it follows the path of law; while the aggressors have violated the UN Charter, the non-proliferation regime, the principles of fairness, and even the peremptory rules of international law in front of the eyes of the world.
The world is at a crossroads between law or domination; we must defend international law against lawlessness
Ladies and gentlemen!
International law, although under cowardly attacks, is still alive, of course, on the condition that we all defend it. The challenges I mentioned earlier, of course, also contain great opportunities, including global and regional awareness of the current grave situation, and a consolidated global will for inclusiveness, avoidance of militarism, and cooperation based on collective interests.
We must all return to an approach that is based on a return to the valuable human achievements in legalism, the prohibition of force and aggression, and the advancement of the nature of the United Nations Charter. If the dangerous trend of lawlessness, extra-legal behavior, and the use of naked force is not stopped today, we may all witness more bitter experiences in the future.
The world and the region are today at a crossroads of choosing between two discourses: the discourse of domination, hegemony, and superiority, the use of force and securitization, militarism, war, and violence, and in short, the law of the jungle, on the one hand; And a global discourse based on universal law and international law, egalitarianism based on convergence, dialogue and peace in a collective framework on the other hand. The Islamic Republic of Iran believes in the first way and is ready to play its role in the path of returning the global order to a law-based global order and in cooperation with the global South and responsible governments.
In the peripheral region, Iran seeks a strong region based on common understanding, brotherhood and peace. We need an inclusive approach based on the use of all the capacities of the region. The Islamic Republic of Iran considers the security of the countries of the region as its own security and wants “lasting trust” to be the basis and axis of the new space in this region. We all must play our positive role in this region and establish a new doctrine for security, peace, prosperity and convergence.
While thanking my colleagues at the study center, I hope that today’s conference will help develop the theoretical and practical foundations of this discourse.
Thank you for your attention.
Post a comment