Attack on Iran normalises global descent into the ‘law of the jungle’

South China Morning PostEN 2 min read 100% complete by Tian ShichenMarch 2, 2026 at 01:30 PM

AI Summary

medium article 2 min

The article argues that recent US-Israeli strikes on Iran, following a US military action in Venezuela, signal a dangerous shift away from international law and towards a "law of the jungle" in global affairs. It claims these actions violate Article 2(4) of the UN Charter, which prohibits the use of force against sovereign states without UN Security Council authorization or a clear case of self-defense. The author asserts that the strikes against Iran do not meet these criteria, as Iran did not launch an armed attack. The US and Israel are accused of relying on a doctrine of "pre-emptive war," normalizing aggression by striking a sovereign state based on perceived future capabilities. The article suggests that US foreign policy is driven by factors detached from public opinion, despite American weariness of prolonged wars.

Key Entities & Roles

Key Player Opposition Context

Tel Aviv 30% Operation Epic Fury 30% Washington, D.C. 40% Donald Trump ×240% Venezuela 40% UN Charter ×250% United Nations (UN) ×360% Israel ×370% United States ×680% Iran ×690%

Keywords

law of the jungle 90% international law 90% un charter 80% use of force 80% pre-emptive war 70% self-defence 60% armed attack 60% us foreign policy 60% iran 50% aggression 40%