The escalation between Iran and the US and Israel amidst the ongoing Iran-US talks has led to concerns. As per the reports of the multiple sources including the BBC and CNN, conflicts began after the US and Israel carried out unilateral and unprovoked strikes on Iran. Iran carried out retaliatory strikes against Israel and several US military bases in several Arab countries including the UAE, Iraq, and Qatar. While there are around 200 deaths in Iran including the supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, former president Ahmadinejad and many high ranked military officials, there were dozens of deaths in other countries including Israel. Strikes and counterstrikes have cancelled the chance of reaching a deal but whether conflicts will end soon remains uncertain.
Various reasons may put hindrances to immediate peace. The desire of the US and Israel for Iranian regime change, the destruction of the Iranian ability of producing nuclear weapons and weakening Iran may lead to further attacks. The US and Iran — pertinently saying — has been seeking regime change in Iran for decades, though inconsistently. The weakest position of Iran because of economic impacts of mounting western sanctions, the US-Israel military attacks in 2025 on nuclear facilities and the latest anti-government movements, even if these were strictly controlled, were utilized by the parties in a planned manner. Given that the supreme leadership is changed but not the Iranian regime, the US-Israel attacks may continue to further weaken the regime and the Iranian military capability.
Tehran, Iran (credit: https://pixabay.com/).
But, contrarily, Iran has no alternative to strike back to Israel and US bases and warships in the Middle East. Iran will probably continue strikes back for various reasons including its survival, protection from the possible collapse of US-Israel attacks and revenge. Iran has already lost several political leaders and many military officials. Iran will not digest these losses and said so several times since the US-Israel attacks and the death of the supreme leader, rendered a hardliner to the west but a hero to most Iranians and many Muslims outside Iran, even if hundreds of thousands of people came to the streets against the regime during the 2021 Women’s Rights Movement and the 2025-06 Anti-regime Movement.
But —moreover — a pertinent side is whether and how much the strike on Iran are justified just because of the perceived and unjustified need of ending the nuclear program. Given the insecurity and rising threats and the need to protect people, every country has the right to develop the system to the extent that are effective. This is guaranteed when ”Sovereignty” is acknowledged in international laws and treaties, including the UN Charter. If the US, Russia, Israel and several other countries have the right to develop nuclear weapons, it remains completely unjustified to claim that other countries having no nukes do not have the right to develop such weapons.
Moreover, the US and Israel have repeatedly claimed that Iran’s military capability is ”Security threats” to them. But the claim of threats also remains unjustified, or at best unilaterally justified, without taking the reasoned interests of other parties due to the power and the ability to deny international laws and norms. These claims also be made against the US and Israel. Alternatively saying, Iran is threatened too by the military capability of Israel and the US. Why it should then be wrong for Iran to violate the sovereign rights of Israel and the US based on the same claim remains unjustified on the same ground. Alternatively saying, might is acting like the right to attack Iran, not reasons and mutually acceptable justification.
But, optimistically saying, the world has progressed much. Many international treaties and conventions including Geneva Conventions have been reached and international and regional organizations have been developed based on the destruction of the World War I and II — which led to the deaths of nearly 50 million people. The development of treaties and institutions provide better protections on various grounds, reduce the risks of anarchy and provide opportunity to mitigate tensions through preventive diplomacy and talks.
The end of the conflicts is desirable. But unless the fundamental concerns such as ”Security threats” are reasonably and mutually justified, such sorts of unjustified conflicts are less likely to end. The world needs to do a lot. It needs to re-define security threats of one country from another and establish the systems that respect security from mutual grounds, rather than from the lens of powerful countries alone. Every country, regardless of region and religion, has the right to ensure its own sovereignty. The world system much ensure this for all.
