The US/Israeli Bombing of Iran: A Case Study in Contempt for International Law

By Jacqueline Cabasso and John Burroughs

Oakland, California – March 4, 2026 – President Donald Trump’s authorization of “Operation Epic Fury,” alongside Israel, represents a profound disregard for international law and a dangerous escalation of tensions in the Middle East. The actions, which included bombing key government sites in Iran and resulted in a death toll exceeding 700, including Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei and senior officials, have drawn condemnation from the United Nations and sparked retaliatory strikes across the region.

Violation of International Law

The United States/Israeli bombing of Iran constitutes a clear violation of fundamental principles of international law, specifically Article 2(4) of the UN Charter. This article prohibits the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state. There is no credible claim of self-defense against an imminent attack justifying the use of force, nor does regime change constitute a legitimate justification under international law.

UN Response and Concerns

UN Secretary-General António Guterres described the United States’ bombing in Iran as a “dangerous escalation,” emphasizing that “there is no military solution.” He warned that the actions represent a direct threat to international peace and security. BBC News reports that the Trump administration has warned Iran that “harder hits” are still to reach, while Tehran has retaliated with attacks on US and allied targets.

Erosion of the International Legal Framework

This action is part of a broader trend of eroding the legal framework governing the use of force, a process that has been underway for decades. Previous instances include the U.S. Invasion of Iraq in 2003, the invasion of Afghanistan in 2001, the Russian annexation of Crimea in 2014, and the full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022. AP News details how President Trump gave the order to launch the operation, termed “Epic Fury,” after expressing dissatisfaction with ongoing nuclear talks with Iran.

Iran’s Nuclear Program and Regional Context

Prior to the bombing, Iran’s nuclear program did not present an immediate threat justifying a claim of self-defense. While Iran possessed uranium enrichment capabilities, it had not demonstrably decided to acquire nuclear weapons. The United States unilaterally withdrew from the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), an international agreement that effectively restrained Iran’s nuclear program. Discussions surrounding Iran’s nuclear program often overlook Israel’s own robust nuclear arsenal.

The Path Forward: Condemnation and a New World Order

The invasion of Iran should be unequivocally condemned as unlawful aggression, and the fundamental principles of the UN Charter must be defended. The world is witnessing a resurgence of authoritarian nationalism, necessitating a realistic assessment of the challenges and innovative approaches to advocacy and politics for a more just, democratic, and peaceful world.

Key Takeaways

• The US/Israeli bombing of Iran violates international law, specifically the UN Charter’s prohibition against the use of force.
• The action represents a dangerous escalation of tensions in an already volatile region.
• This event is part of a broader trend of eroding the international legal framework governing the use of force.
• The US withdrawal from the JCPOA contributed to the current crisis.
• Addressing the issue of nuclear proliferation requires a global approach, including the pursuit of nuclear disarmament.

Jacqueline Cabasso is the Executive Director of Western States Legal Foundation in Oakland, California; John Burroughs is a member of the organization’s Board of Directors.

Inter Press Service © 2026 – All Rights Reserved.