US EditionThe US attack on an Iranian warship did not violate international law, experts say
At least 87 Iranians died and 32 were rescued after a US submarine struck the IRIS Dena, deemed a lawful military target by international law experts.
- Recently, the U.S. submarine torpedoed the Dena, an Iranian warship near Sri Lanka, killing eighty-seven and rescuing 32 sailors.
- Because it could threaten U.S. forces, the IRIS Dena was targeted as it could fire at American military assets, part of a U.S.-Israeli military operation whose legality is disputed under the UN Charter.
- U.S. officials say they alerted Sri Lanka and the Defense Department Law of War Manual notes cramped submarine quarters may require alerting others to find survivors, with Sri Lanka's navy recovering survivors and life rafts amid oil patches.
- Senior legal scholars argue that the attack appears lawful, but more information is needed to evaluate rescue measures, as experts like Eugene R. Fidell and Rachel VanLandingham state the full account is pending.
- Investigators warn it may take a long time to clarify rescue efforts, with Australia confirming on Friday that three Australians aboard the submarine involved in AUKUS trilateral training.
37 Articles
37 Articles
Associated Press News
The US attack on an Iranian warship did not violate international law, experts say
Legal experts say a U.S. submarine’s deadly attack on an Iranian warship does not appear to have violated international or American military law.
The US and Israeli attacks on Iran, and Iran's subsequent counterattacks, all fall outside international law, Prime Minister Jetten said today. At the same time, he expressed understanding that the US and Israel wanted to "intervene" in Iran's nuclear and missile programs. Jetten pointed out that the Iranian regime is "brutal and violent" and that international law has failed to protect the Iranian population for decades. He also pointed out tha…
Donald Trump has repeatedly stressed that, thanks to the US attacks, the Iranian people would be freed. This argument was also used to justify earlier military actions, but from the point of view of international law, it is too short.
Coverage Details
Bias Distribution
- 41% of the sources are Center
Factuality
To view factuality data please Upgrade to Premium
