- 2 hours ago
Interview with International Law Expert Ivonne Tellez about US-Israel attack on Iran. teleSUR
Category
🗞
NewsTranscript
00:00I receive Yvonne Tellez. She is an international law expert. Welcome, Yvonne.
00:06Thank you very much for the invitation.
00:08So, Iran and the U.S. were in the middle of negotiations before this attack happened.
00:15So, Donald Trump also said that he was leaving a space for dialogue.
00:20How this attack contradicts this rhetoric of Donald Trump?
00:26Okay, well, what we have seen during Trump's administration is a constant contradiction between what he says, what he announces
00:37and what he does.
00:39So, I think this doesn't come as a surprise because he's always trying to backlash what he announces publicly.
00:49But I think the most serious issue here is how this attack among negotiations brings and cooperates to bring an
01:05atmosphere of complete distrust, mistrust between the negotiating parties.
01:13And as my fellow colleague was saying before, the risk of a regional conflict escalates, comes as an imminent threat
01:28to the world peace and stability.
01:32And I think the most serious thing is how the international law and how international diplomacy and international governance comes
01:44and is just left aside.
01:47Because what this shows here is that only the power of arms, I mean, the hard, hard power is the
01:56only one taken into account.
01:58So, this is another form that Trump administration has to continue destabilizing and dismounting all of the international governance system
02:12and all the IR system that we have built, the world built 80 years ago.
02:19So, I think it converts like a shadow conflict and ongoing tension into interstate hostilities and into a regional and
02:31into a conflict triangle between all the countries involved in this case.
02:36Because in this case, for example, the Gulf states are not going to just stay quiet or stay still because
02:45they are, in a way, forced into hard choices.
02:49I mean, or either tighter security alignment with Washington, for example, or try to work for these collation channels with
02:58Tehran.
02:58So, this is only going to affect and change this regional bargain power because, in this case, base access becomes
03:08a strategic liability, just not only an asset in this case.
03:14Is the primary goal of this joint operation the total dismantle of Iran's nuclear power, as stated by Donald Trump,
03:23or is it really the resources, the oil resources of Iran?
03:29I think that we have to be very clear here because it's not just a thing of justice or trying
03:37to dismount military weapons or, as you were saying, so Iranian use of other probable dangerous weapons.
03:49What we are seeing right now is a reconfiguration of the global order, and that means the access of this
04:00rich, for example, we're talking about the weird soils, the mineral, and, of course, oil as well, and the gas,
04:11and all these resources that are critic for this transition,
04:16energy transition, and for this technological era, and this technological war as well that the U.S. is facing with
04:25China, and Russia in other states.
04:30So, this means that what we're seeing here is just a reconfiguration of power, this reconfiguration of how the U
04:40.S. has been trying under Trump to regain its hegemonic power around the world,
04:47as it has been doing so here in Latin America as well, so this is not about weapons, we have
04:54to be clear about that, this is not about how Iran is or isn't capable of attacking the world.
05:03We have seen also that Iran has shown real intentions of this negotiation because it was into the negotiation, so
05:13Iran has been very clear and, I think, very consistent with his international position, but the U.S. hasn't done
05:22so.
05:23So, this is not a war in which the United States comes as this savior and trying to de-escalate
05:33a probable arms race beginning or coming from Iran.
05:39What we're seeing here really is this reconfiguration of power, how the U.S. is trying to gain its power.
05:47We also see that Israel is backing this, so this means how this long-standing enemy situation, enemy position between
06:01Israel and Iran comes to take re-election into the soil
06:09because this is how Israel, because this is how Israel regains its regional power after this, what we have testified,
06:17of course, this genocide, because it has a name right now, we can call it like that under international law,
06:23and how Israel has debilitating its international image regarding what has happened from October 23 in Palestine and how this,
06:36again, tries to reconfigure and tries to distract us from what is really happening,
06:43trying to blame someone, in this case, Iran, that has not been and hasn't shown any threat to anyone.
06:53And I'm talking about to any state in the world.
06:58So, given the strikes in Tehran, how these attacks will impact the global energy prices and the Strait of Hormuz,
07:11which is one of the main passages of oil through the rest of the world?
07:18Of course, there's economic risks, and these become immediate.
07:24The fact that, for example, Israel has shut gas facilities, even temporarily, that signals authorities view the threat environment as
07:33high enough to affect critical infrastructure,
07:35and that kind of move, what tends to work towards the market and security expectations fast.
07:40So, what we are going to see is how the economic system, and as I was saying before, this economic
07:51risk is going to alter all prices,
07:56but also what this means is that the management of the access to these resources that Iran has, it's going
08:06to be managed in the end.
08:08That's what they're trying to do by those external forces, and I'm talking about primarily, of course, the United States
08:15and Israel.
08:17What Israel is doing, as I was saying before, for example, just to safeguard these gas facilities, that doesn't come
08:26as an isolated measure.
08:28What it's going to do is, of course, worsen this market and security expectations.
08:36So, all the market is going to respond, and probably prices are going to touch the highest levels, and that's
08:43what the U.S. is trying to do.
08:45Remember, or let's remember that now the U.S. has access to the second, first or second, because that's in
08:53discussion as well,
08:54most rich country in the world regarding the oil, and I'm talking about Venezuela,
09:01and how has, after this Maduro detention, how has the U.S. entered into Venezuela to manage all the oil
09:08resources.
09:09So, this doesn't come as isolated measures.
09:11This all has a pattern, and this has not just a structured, but a strategic pattern regarding what the U
09:20.S. wants to do,
09:21and how these intentions of the U.S. become not just more credit, but also disregarding anything,
09:33I mean, disregarding international law, disregarding the international governance system that has been in place up until a few years
09:42ago.
09:43Mentioning international law, what's legal resources does Iran have to hold the Zionist-American coalition accountable
09:51for this flagrant violation of international law?
09:56Okay, according to international law, under the U.N. Charter, what Iran has done is this preemptive,
10:04I mean, this legitimate self-defense, it's completely legal.
10:10One, we can say that is an unlawful reprisal when a country has not been attacked.
10:17In this case, Iran was struck by the U.S. and Israel states, I mean, the military.
10:25So, this response comes in self-defense, and the legal constraints that Iran has to follow,
10:33and as under my view, it has followed, remain the same.
10:37And we're talking about necessity, proportionality, and targeting only what is required to halt or to repel the attack.
10:48So, in this case, it's not to provoke an unlawful harm or a bigger harm,
10:54but just, in this case, striking, for example, the U.S. assets on third-state parties or third-state territory.
11:03So, the thing is that the legality comes a little bit complex because we don't know if those Gulf states
11:13consented previously to the U.S. military operations.
11:17We don't know if they were aware of this attack.
11:20So, in a way, Iran may argue that those bases are part of the attack's operational chain,
11:26so that brings other actors into the scene.
11:30Or, in this case, what can also be argued, we don't know yet,
11:36is that Iran is violating territorial integrity of those states.
11:41I'm talking about the Gulf states.
11:42So, those states can also claim their own Article 51 of the U.N. Charter.
11:50That means they can also call the legitimate defense against Iran.
11:55So, potentially, what this happens will widen the coalition against Tehran.
12:01So, this is the big problem when bilateral confrontation becomes a regional, epileptic security cascade, illegal form,
12:11even if politically everyone says we want restraint.
12:20So, international institutions like the U.N. or even the Criminal Court of Justice,
12:27can they hold accountable the U.S. or Israel for this flagrant violation of international law?
12:35Yes.
12:36Okay.
12:36We have to differentiate between those institutions.
12:40The first one, the U.N.
12:43The U.N., the entity responsible for blaming or just giving responsibility
12:53to those who violate international law and international security is the Security Council.
13:03The big problem is that the Security Council is not a judicial body.
13:09It's a political entity with 15 members and five of them being the permanent members.
13:16And the U.S. is sitting in as a permanent member.
13:21Iran isn't.
13:22So, this is the big blockchain that we have faced since the U.N. has been working after 1945
13:33because being a political body, the decisions that are taken there are not judicial, are political,
13:42even though that the Security Council has the mandate to apply the legal framework of the use of force
13:52that is contained in the U.N. Charter.
13:54Even with this legal mandate, the U.N. Security Council remains a political body.
14:01So, in this case, the United States, with its veto power, is not going to apply the measures against itself.
14:11So, this is not a scenario or this is not an entity that we can look at.
14:18And the United States knows this perfectly.
14:20On the other side, we have the International Criminal Court.
14:23But the International Criminal Court is in charge of criminal responsibility, individual criminal responsibility.
14:30This means that states are not taken before the court, but persons, individual persons.
14:37So, in this case, nor the United States nor Israel are part of the Rome Statute.
14:44So, they are not part of the International Criminal Court.
14:51Iran isn't part of the, as far as I know, and I may be mistaken, but it's not part of
14:56the International Criminal Court.
14:58However, one of the mechanisms to activate the International Court jurisdictions
15:06is when potential criminal conduct takes place within a territory that is part of the criminal court.
15:17So, we have to look into that.
15:19And the other thing is what will be the charges and who will be charging, who will be charged under
15:29the Rome Statute.
15:31So, we have to look at the main crimes that are contained within the Rome Statute.
15:39One could be, and the only one that could be taking place here is a crime of aggression.
15:47But to take place and to be, as I was saying before, just to wrap up this idea,
15:57the person who comes before the court has to be an individual that is a part, a national from a
16:07state that is a party to the court.
16:09So, this is another blockchain, and again, I say it, the U.S. knows this very well and knows how
16:19to bypass the system
16:21because the international legal system that is mounted until today responds directly to the state's will.
16:35And that is the big problem here because when there is no state's will, all the system just breaks.
16:46So, the United States and Israel are targeting residential areas.
16:53And even we have reports of a school being hit by bomb beams that killed at least 60 people among
17:02them 40 children.
17:03This clearly represents a state of terrorism.
17:07So, how should the global human rights community categorize the deliberate targeting of civilian areas under the guise of military
17:15necessity?
17:18Yes, there is another part of international law that is the use in velo, that's international humanitarian law.
17:27This will, or this IHL, sorry, comes into action when there is an ongoing conflict.
17:37Even if one side claims, in this case, Iran, a lawful basis, for example, under Article 51 of the UN
17:47Charter,
17:48the IHL applies once an armed conflict exists.
17:52So, this, as you were mentioning, the rules of distinction, the rules of proportionality, and precautions take place and come
18:02into action.
18:03The fastest legitimacy collapse internationally usually comes from strikes on civilian objects, infrastructure that do not make effective military contribution,
18:16high civilian casualty incidents, as we are saying here, children, schools, those people that are not involved in the conflict,
18:28of course,
18:28or attacks on energy installations with severe civilian reverberating effects.
18:35So, this comes, or brings into another problem, because when we are talking about IHL,
18:44we do come to tackle international criminal liability.
18:50This will, could bring international criminal liability under the Rome Statute with a lot of requirements and issues regarding how
19:04the criminal court has jurisdiction.
19:06But it has a link, and that's what I'm, the point that I'm trying to make, when IHL becomes violated.
19:15The other thing is human rights, that the system, the human rights system, is always working.
19:23It's an underlying, it's the basis of everything, when we are at peace or when we are at war.
19:30So, this is another thing that has to bring international attention.
19:36What I'm really worried here about is that we've seen almost, almost three years of a genocide of crimes against
19:47humanity with the conduct of Israel in Palestinian territory.
19:54And so far, what we have is the arrest warrant for Netanyahu, but without the willingness of state to bring
20:02him to court, nothing is happening.
20:04And the criminal court could not go beyond its competitions and try to bring him to trial.
20:14So, these blockchains come, again, to the point of state willingness, because what we've seen is the most irrational violation
20:27of international law, of international humanitarian law, regarding what Israel has done.
20:33So, there is not a surprise that what we are seeing right now with these attacks are also violating gravely
20:42and seriously all of the international system.
20:45But they know in a way, and I'm saying this in a colloquial way, but those attacking states know that
20:55nothing has happened before with more serious violations.
20:59So, this, again, leaves us just completely defendless against power.
21:09And that is an issue that we cannot forget.
21:13Yvonne, by launching strikes while active Omani broker negotiations were ongoing in Geneva,
21:20has the U.S. belated its legal obligation to settle international disputes by peaceful means?
21:29Yes, that is another underlying principle of international law.
21:34All states are obliged to resolve their disputes peacefully.
21:41They have all the mechanisms.
21:44International law brings all the mechanisms here.
21:46So, yes, of course, it has violated because you cannot be at a table of negotiation at the same time
21:55attacking a country that is not liable, that is completely unlawful.
22:00So, yes, this legal principle is also being violated.
22:05UN experts have repeatedly warned that attacking safeguarding nuclear facilities like Nathans or Fordow is a violation of international norms
22:17due to the risk of radiological disaster.
22:21What is the legal liability for the environmental aggression caused by these strikes?
22:27UN experts, in general, under the Roms statute, there is an ongoing debate about the Echocide crime.
22:38And that comes along with, I mean, the way it is being designed and the way discussions are being taken
22:48means that this kind of conduct from states
22:54could also hold very serious environmental and climate harm.
23:03But this is an undergoing negotiation.
23:06This has not been accepted as a crime under the Rome Statute.
23:11So what we have is doctrine here.
23:13However, we cannot oversee the fact that this collateral damage
23:20that somehow has been, in a way, gained, I think, less attention
23:29because it's like a common thing that comes along
23:33with international conflicts and with war.
23:35But those collateral damages are, yes, I mean, have been developed
23:46under international justice, under the ICJ, the International Court of the UN.
23:56So we're not talking about here specifically conflict,
24:02but we're talking about this damage that is called transboundary harm
24:08regarding environmental and climate harm that can be caused by these actions.
24:15So this is another, yes, this is another legal issue
24:19that could add to this whole conflict, not as a, not labeled as a crime,
24:27but just, yes, as a unlawful conduct
24:31that could bring international responsibility for states.
24:35Yes, this is another issue.
24:37But we have to, like, to think about international law
24:41in different scenarios, in different aspects in which it works.
24:46So this will be another one that adds up to the conflict.
24:50Yvonne, the U.S. is calling to the Iranian people
24:54to take over the government, to rise up.
24:58Does this call constitute an illegal intervention
25:01in the internal affairs of a sovereign state
25:04belating the principle of no intervention?
25:09As well, this principle is also violated
25:13because there is a clear limit and a clear prohibition
25:17for states and for international organizations,
25:21anything, anyone, to just respect the state sovereignty
25:29and the state independence.
25:33So any intervention in this case regarding, for example,
25:37how to raise this upheaval of people
25:41as the U.S. is trying to do
25:43is completely unlawful conduct.
25:46No, there is not a state nor an authority
25:50that could ask for people to rise against this government.
25:55This is completely unlawful.
25:57And this is another violation, yes.
25:59So China has historically avoided military entanglement
26:04in the Middle East.
26:05However, are we on the wake of a broader conflict
26:09that could draw the involvement of power such as China?
26:13Well, I think that we have seen China lately.
26:25How can I say this?
26:27I mean, China has been restraining itself
26:29to being very active regarding this last terrible conflict
26:36that we've seen since the 2022
26:41with the Russian and Ukrainian problem.
26:44Even when we know that China has been an ally to Russia,
26:50we've seen that China has not been very active
26:57argumentatively and diplomatically taking opinion,
27:04making opinions or taking part of an active part
27:08during this conflict.
27:09What we have seen is China calling for the terrorists
27:13and calling for going back to respecting
27:17the international legal system.
27:20We've seen, I mean, less active discourse
27:25and more deterrence regarding their involvement
27:29in those conflicts.
27:30So I think that we have to analyze China's conduct
27:35before this escalation I'm talking about today
27:40because I think this signals how China will act
27:46in the future, in the near future.
27:48I think that the United States is not going to touch China
27:53and that is probably the most sensible point for the US.
28:00As we've seen, for example, in the conflict
28:03regarding Taiwan and how China and the US
28:06are completely in tension regarding Taiwan.
28:11But we see that there is a mutual deterrence between them
28:15because they know the capabilities, the big capabilities.
28:20And we're just not talking about military capabilities,
28:22but talking about technological capabilities
28:24and, of course, military capabilities.
28:27So I don't think that in this case, China,
28:32even though it doesn't, for example,
28:35even if it doesn't back up or support what the US is saying,
28:43I don't think that China is going to take a very active position here.
28:47Probably what China is going to do is keep on with this discourse
28:54of deterrence, of calling back to international safety,
28:59calling back to peaceful dispute resolution,
29:04but not getting very active into the conflict
29:07unless China is touched, unless China's territory is touched,
29:12unless China's territorial interests are touched, are threatened.
29:20But I don't think that the United States is going to go
29:23as far as to threaten China,
29:28because I think that is the only,
29:33under my view, that is the only limit
29:35that the United States has right now.
29:38What it is trying to do is to regain this hegemonic power,
29:42this geopolitical management of resources around the world,
29:47because it is under a conflict, an ongoing conflict,
29:51kind of a cold conflict against China,
29:54but not a direct one.
29:56So what the US is trying to do is simply regain hegemonic.
30:00And we're talking about, of course,
30:03hard power, and that comes with the economic interest of the US.
30:07And I think that's as far as we can see.
30:11But if the Gulf countries come into this territorial conflict,
30:18this regional conflict,
30:19and probably with an escalation where we have to look at
30:24if this happens, hopefully not,
30:26but if this happens,
30:28then we have to look again
30:31and see what is China's conduct,
30:34what is China's diplomacy,
30:35what is China's foreign policy saying regarding this conflict,
30:40maybe to analyze if China is thinking about
30:44another kind of involvement in the conflict.
30:48Yvonne, you mentioned Russia also,
30:51and I would like to ask you,
30:53is it possible,
30:54because Russia and Iran have deep bilateral ties,
30:58so do you think that Russia could move from diplomatic condemnation
31:05to military support?
31:09It is a possibility,
31:11yes, because we're talking about a triade,
31:15I mean, a very strong ally support here,
31:22we're talking about China, Russia, and Iran.
31:27Those, all of them, big, big powers.
31:32However, the only problem, I think,
31:36is that Russia, it is,
31:39it has lessened its military capacity,
31:44its economic capacity with all the blockades
31:47and all the consequences that it has faced
31:51after the Ukrainian conflict.
31:56I'm not analyzing the conflict right now,
31:58that, not talking about that one,
32:00but talking about the real capabilities
32:02that Russia has right now.
32:04Again, going back to military capacity
32:07and economic capacity.
32:09We know that a very strong force
32:12for Russia has been China.
32:15How this asphyxiation and asphyxia
32:20that the world and the US has placed on Russia
32:24has been, in a way, relieved by China
32:26and by the economic muscle
32:28that China has with Russia.
32:33So, maybe what we could foresee
32:37is probable military support, yes,
32:40from Russia, but I think that the Pence
32:43has a direct dependence
32:45on how China, in the back,
32:48could support these actions
32:50because I don't think that Russia,
32:52even though Vladimir Putin
32:54has stated some, in a way,
32:58I don't know if threats
33:00or calls for independence or not,
33:02but we have seen his foreign policy
33:04in the latest months regarding,
33:06for example, the European Union,
33:08but we don't know exactly
33:11its real military capacities
33:14at the moment
33:15because there's almost more than four years
33:19of an ongoing conflict
33:20and there's, I mean,
33:22it's more than,
33:25it's very, very, very up
33:27or, I mean, very complicated
33:31that a state could retain
33:35the same capability
33:37that it had four years ago
33:40because the conflict
33:42is just draining,
33:44I mean, it drains any state,
33:47even though it has very strong forms,
33:53economic ways and military ways.
33:56So, it is a possibility,
33:59but it has to be tied,
34:01I think, to China's decision.
34:04Yvonne, one of the intentions
34:06behind Israel
34:07and the United States' attacks on Iran
34:10was targeting Iranian supreme leader
34:14Ayatollah Ali Khamenei
34:16and also the president,
34:19Masud Pesizkian.
34:21How come,
34:22what would be the consequences
34:24of social action
34:25for the entire region?
34:28Well, again,
34:30we go back to
34:31the same principles here.
34:34I'm talking about
34:37the non,
34:38I mean,
34:39the interference,
34:40in this case,
34:41the intervention,
34:42interference
34:42into sovereign affairs
34:46of the state.
34:46In this case,
34:48what the United States
34:50is doing
34:50and the targeting,
34:52of course,
34:52of their leaders
34:53will mean
34:54the dismounting
34:56of the regime
34:57and that's what
34:59the U.S.
34:59is trying to do,
35:01trying to go back
35:02to before 1979
35:06when the U.S.
35:08had,
35:08in a way,
35:09almost a complete control
35:11of Iran
35:12and Iran's resources.
35:15So,
35:16this goes back
35:18to the same discourse,
35:19I mean,
35:21and the same criteria
35:22regarding the non-interference
35:24and, of course,
35:25there is another,
35:26another legal issue here
35:29that a state,
35:31I mean,
35:33Iranian leaders
35:34are the ones in power,
35:36are the ones
35:37that are legitimately
35:40in power
35:41and representing
35:42the state.
35:43So,
35:43a representative
35:44of the state
35:45could not be removed
35:46from its functions
35:47from any other entity
35:49and any foreign entity,
35:50any foreign state,
35:51and this,
35:53again,
35:54goes
35:56in a direct
35:58and serious violation
36:00of all international law
36:01principles
36:02and rules
36:03regarding
36:04what a state
36:05cannot do
36:05in this case
36:06to target
36:07the authorities,
36:09what they are doing,
36:11basically,
36:12of course,
36:13is just
36:14trying to dismount
36:15the regime
36:16and trying to
36:17gain
36:18a complete control
36:19of the country
36:20because they know
36:21that when,
36:22as long as the regime
36:23stays still
36:25and stays strong,
36:26they will not,
36:29I think,
36:30cause any more harm
36:31than what we are seeing
36:32right now.
36:33So,
36:33what they want to do
36:35is completely
36:35enter the country
36:36as they have done so
36:38with other countries
36:38in history
36:39and the recent history.
36:41So,
36:42thank you,
36:42Yvonne,
36:43for your insights
36:44regarding these issues today.
36:46That was Yvonne Tellez.
36:48She is an international law expert.
36:50We continue with more.
36:51The Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs
36:53called the U.S.-Israeli aggression
36:54on Iran
36:55a deliberate,
36:57premeditated,
36:58and unprovoked act
36:59of armed aggression
37:00against a sovereign
37:01and independent
37:02UN member state.
Comments