‘Israel violated international law with its bombing of the Iranian consulate in Syria’

United Nations reporters made this statement on Tuesday Israel violated international law with him April 1 bombing of the Iranian consulate in the Syrian capital Damascus, killing seven members of the Revolutionary Guard. This attack prompted Tehran to respond on Saturday with one drone and missile attack against Israeli territory.

“All countries are prohibited from arbitrarily depriving people of the right to life during military operations abroad, including operations against terrorism,” he said, before emphasizing that “killings on foreign soil are arbitrary if they are not authorized by international law.”

For example, they have argued that Israel does not appear to have carried out an attack in self-defense because it has provided no evidence that Iran carried out an ‘armed attack’, and they have emphasized that Israeli authorities have provided no legal justification for the attack. bombings or report thereto to the United Nations Security Council, as required by the Article 51 of the UN Charter.

“Therefore, Israel’s attack violated the law’s prohibition on the use of armed force against another state Article 2(4) of the Charter” they explained, while emphasizing that “illegal force was used not only against the Iranian forces, but also against Syrian territory.”

In this sense, they recalled that “the Israeli attack was partially launched of the Golan Heightswhich is an illegally annexed Syrian territory” and have emphasized that those involved in the attack could also have committed crimes under an international treaty against terrorism dating back to 1971.

“It is a crime to forcibly attack a diplomat’s official buildings or private accommodations where doing so is likely to endanger him. Iran, Israel and Syria are part of this treaty and have criminal jurisdiction over these types of crimes,” they stated.

On the other hand, they have stated that Iran’s response also constitutes a prohibited use of force under international law and have argued that while the April 1 bombing was serious enough to be classified as an “armed attack,” Tehran had no right to do this. self-defense on April 13 since then the attack was over.

For example, he has stated that self-defense is only legal if necessary stop a running attack and have added that “the response with force, punishment or deterrence is illegal”, while adding that, in the same way, the original right to self-defense after the April 13 attacks has already ended after they were repulsed.

“These attacks in response violate state sovereignty and represent a serious escalation of the conflict in a region already on a razor’s edge,” they warned.