Iran says US pushing force over global legal norms
Araghchi said the June 13 strike, carried out by Israel under US direction, targeted civilians and peaceful nuclear sites, violating the UN Charter.
Tehran was the centre of intense diplomatic conversations on Sunday, November 16, as Iranian Foreign Minister Seyed Abbas Araghchi delivered a forceful critique of the United States and its allies, accusing them of steadily dismantling the foundations of international law. Speaking at the opening of the high-level conference International Law Under Assault, Aggression, and Self-Defence at the Institute for Political and International Studies (IPIS), Araghchi warned that the world was drifting toward what he described as a dangerous “force-based international order”—a system driven not by rules, consensus, or legality, but by coercion, power politics, and military pressure.
Addressing an audience of diplomats, academics, jurists, and foreign policy experts gathered from across Asia, Africa, Europe, and Latin America, the Iranian foreign minister painted a stark picture of what he saw as the unraveling of the global legal system painstakingly built after the Second World War. According to him, the framework created to ensure peace, protect sovereignty, and prevent unilateral aggression is now under “unprecedented and dangerous strain.”
Araghchi argued that Western governments, particularly the United States, had abandoned the long-standing foundations of international law in favour of a politicised “rules-based order”—a term often used by Washington and its allies to frame global governance. But in Araghchi’s view, this phrase masks a system in which powerful nations selectively interpret rules, bending or rewriting them when necessary to advance their own geopolitical agendas.
He claimed that Washington has taken this shift “to its extreme,” promoting a world order focused on domination rather than cooperation or multilateral decision-making. Rising global military expenditure, intensifying geopolitical rivalries, and repeated breaches of state sovereignty, he said, were evidence of how far the international community had drifted from the universal legal norms that once served as a stabilising force.
A central part of Araghchi’s speech focused on the June 13 Israeli strike on Iranian territory—an incident that has escalated tensions across the region. He reiterated Iran’s long-standing position that the strike, which he said was carried out “under US direction,” targeted both civilian areas and peaceful nuclear facilities. This, he stressed, was not merely a military attack but a direct and blatant violation of the UN Charter, international humanitarian law, and global non-proliferation agreements.
Araghchi insisted that Iran’s response to the attack was lawful and measured. “Our actions were taken under Article 51 of the UN Charter,” he said, referring to the article that allows states to defend themselves when under armed attack. He maintained that Iran’s retaliation adhered strictly to legal principles including necessity, proportionality, and distinction—three cornerstones of lawful self-defence and responsible military conduct.
While much of his speech was critical and at times accusatory, Araghchi also offered a message of cautious optimism. Despite the fractures he described, he argued that the international legal system is not beyond saving. “The system remains workable,” he said, “but only if states are willing to collectively defend it.” He called for renewed commitment to genuine multilateralism—an approach rooted in equal respect for all nations, regardless of power. According to him, the only way to restore global stability is through dialogue, cooperation, and a shared refusal to allow military or economic might to overshadow legal obligations.
Araghchi emphasised that the world today faces challenges that cannot be resolved through unilateral action or selective adherence to legal norms. From conflicts in the Middle East to tensions in Eastern Europe, from competition in the Indo-Pacific to global economic fragmentation, he argued that the era of power-based politics has created instability that threatens not only security but the very institutions designed to protect it.
The International Law Under Assault conference itself served as a platform to examine these concerns in depth. Delegates from various regions exchanged perspectives on how international law is being tested by an increasingly militarised global environment. Discussions ranged from the legality of emerging forms of warfare to the erosion of sovereignty in the digital age, and from the politicisation of international institutions to the growing disregard for norms governing the use of force.
Participants noted that geopolitical tensions—whether between major powers or regional rivals—are placing unprecedented strain on treaties, conventions, and global regulatory bodies. Several speakers argued that the increasing use of sanctions, covert operations, unilateral military actions, and cyberattacks has contributed to a climate in which legal boundaries are routinely stretched or overlooked.
Yet, amid these concerns, the conference also highlighted pathways for restoring faith in the international system. Scholars proposed strengthening regional mechanisms for conflict resolution, improving the transparency of global institutions, and reinforcing the role of the International Court of Justice and the UN Security Council. Others urged states to recommit to disarmament agreements and rebuild trust through confidence-building measures and diplomatic engagement.
As the one-day event drew to a close, the overarching message was clear: the world stands at a crossroads. The legal order that emerged in the aftermath of global war is facing some of its gravest tests, but its survival depends not on force, rhetoric, or unilateral action, but on the collective determination of states to uphold, protect, and strengthen it.
For Iran, Araghchi’s speech signalled both a warning and a plea—a warning about the consequences of sidelining international law, and a plea for a renewed global commitment to fairness, restraint, and cooperation. In a world already marked by conflict and fragmentation, he called on nations to remember that legality and justice are not merely abstract principles but essential foundations for global peace.