SATISH SHARMA - not just Rotigraphy.: ‘In 2003, governments at least felt compelled to argue the legality of war. In 2026, a possible strike on Iran proceeds without even the pretence of legal justification….

https://x.com/MaryKostakidis/status/2027512222101213610

Mary Kostakidis

The total unravelling of international law by the powerful may not be a major issue for western countries but we must then also not be surprised when there is blowback. ‘In 2003, governments at least felt compelled to argue the legality of war. In 2026, a possible strike on Iran proceeds without even the pretence of legal justification…. After months of opinion management in the west which grossly exaggerated the threat posed by Saddam Hussein, the attack proceeded without UN backing in March 2003. The majority of international lawyers today consider it to have been an illegal war… Whatever the outcome of the conflict, further regional instability and growing anti-western sentiment are bound to ensue. Even Iran’s Sunni antagonists in the Persian Gulf have tried to dissuade Trump from actions that will only create uncertainty and unpredictable downstream effects across the Middle East. For those who instigate them, wars always have unintended consequences and usually go awry. As with Israel’s merciless slaughter in Gaza and subsequent attacks on the United Nations and International Criminal Court, in 2026 the protections afforded by international law have all but vaporised. Dropping bombs on other countries, killing journalists, medics and aid workers, threatening nations with annihilation, imposing embargoes on their economies, starving their populations, “cleansing” people based on their ethnicity so their land can be stolen, committing acts of genocide and kidnapping their heads of government, are now disconnected from international jurisprudence. The ‘rules-based international order’ is nothing more than orders by the powerful that the weak obey their rules.’ By

@IRanalyst

From johnmenadue.com

9:32 AM · Feb 28, 2026