MELBOURNE, March 3 (Xinhua) -- Australian experts on international law have described recent strikes on Iran by the United States and Israel as violations of international law, warning that such actions could undermine the post-World War II international order.
Ben Saul, professor of international law at the University of Sydney and the United Nations special rapporteur on the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism, said the strikes were "illegal armed attacks" that "amount to the international crime of aggression."
"This is one of the clearest violations of the most fundamental rule of the post-World War II order since 1945, which is not to aggressively attack other countries," Saul said during an interview with the Australian Broadcasting Company on Tuesday.
"The UN Charter bans the use of force against other countries unless you've been attacked, or you're about to be attacked," Saul said, adding that Iran "is not attacking anybody." He noted that Iran had not made a decision to build a nuclear weapon, let alone threaten to use one.
"We live in a world where lots of countries have adversaries with powerful weapons. It doesn't mean it gives you any justification for preemptively attacking other countries," he said.
The Law Society Journal (LSJ) published an article on Monday, saying that the joint strikes on Iran by the United States and Israel represent "a further erosion of the international legal order."
"Under international law, these attacks are neither preemptive nor lawful," it says.
Forcible regime change violates the foundational principles of state sovereignty and non-intervention under the UN Charter, said the article.
Emily Crawford, a professor of international law at the University of Sydney, told Australia's Special Broadcasting Service (SBS) on Sunday that the actions by the United States and Israel were "not even close" to being compliant with international law.
"Every colleague I've been speaking to, every bit of research that I've been seeing says that there was no evidence to suggest that Iran was going to strike the U.S. in any way such that it would justify the U.S. striking them," she said.
Saul urged countries that support a rules-based international order to speak out against what he described as lawless conduct, saying international law provides "a framework for balancing national security interests and ensuring global security and the protection of human rights." ■