In a new three-part series, Ramesh Thakur examines the dimensions of the Iran war. In part one, he analyses the legal issues surrounding the sinking of the Iranian warship Dena.

In the early morning of 4 March, the IRIS Dena, a frigate of the Iranian Navy, was sunk 35km off the coast of Sri Lanka by a torpedo fired by the nuclear-powered submarine USS Charlotte with a loss of over 100 lives.

Article 2(4) of the UN Charter obligates all states to ‘refrain… from the threat or use of force’. US justifications have ranged across multiple objectives including an imminent attack, regime change, degrading Iran’s military capability and terminating its nuclear program.

The claim that Iran has been in a continuous state of war against Israel and the US for 47 years since the Islamic revolution in 1979 seems more than a bit of a stretch, especially when we add in the long history of hostile acts directed by Israel and the US at Iran. Even Tulsi Gabbard, the US director of national intelligence, refused to say the threat was imminent, deflecting the question during a congressional hearing to say that only the president could make that determination. None of the other justifications withstands critical scrutiny.

Two further features of this war are beyond extraordinary. One, Israel has been picking off top Iranian political, military and intelligence leaders for decapitation one by one. Two, on 5 March Trump even claimed the right to decide who should be Iran’s replacement leader after the assassination of Ayatollah Ali Khamanei.

Even if the war is held to be lawful, hostile actions are still subject to the laws of armed conflict. Dena is the first vessel to be sunk by a US naval vessel since World War II and only the second to be sunk by a nuclear submarine after the General Belgrano was torpedoed by the Royal Navy’s HMS........

© Pearls and Irritations