Assassination of the “Leaders of Victory” in Public International Law

The assassination of the two martyrs, Al-Muhandis and Soleimani, is an international crime that lacks any legal justifications and is deemed an arbitrary and extrajudicial execution. The utilization of drones in the assassination operation poses a significant threat to international peace, as the principle of non-intervention in the internal affairs of nations is a fundamental principle governing international relations, ensuring the respect for the sovereignty of other countries, particularly neighboring nations. However, the significance of this principle has diminished over time, to the point where its violation has become more common than the exception. Sovereignty is constantly eroded by human rights considerations, and the concept of sovereignty being a responsibility rather than an absolute privilege remains a topic of debate. The practices of the UN Security Council concerning violations of international humanitarian law during non-international armed conflicts are perceived as posing a threat to international peace and security. Chapter Seven of the Charter grants extensive authority to the Security Council to undertake measures for the suppression or prevention of aggression, breaches, or threats to international peace in accordance with Article 39. It is important to note that acts of terrorism can occur both during armed conflicts and in times of peace. When we refer to the framework of international humanitarian law, we see that terrorist acts do not align with the provisions of this law as applied in armed conflicts. Such acts of terrorism are considered grave violations of international humanitarian law. It imposes an obligation on states to abstain from resorting to acts of terrorism and to establish suitable domestic legislation to guarantee compliance with public international law. The justifications put forth by the United States for the assassination of these individuals are unfounded and in violation of international law. Washington has failed to provide official explanations to the UN Security Council confirming whether these individuals were targeted due to their alleged involvement in an ongoing or imminent attack, as claimed by the United States. Consequently, the United States bears responsibility for the repercussions of these actions. Failure to address these grave violations will only serve to pave the way for future assassinations of senior officials from United Nations member states. Hence, international peace will deteriorate and descend into a perilous decline. Previously, Washington classified the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps as a terrorist organization, but it is important to note that other countries are not obligated to adopt this classification. President Trump alleged that the US embassy in Baghdad was under threat from Iran, subsequently expanding this claim to include four embassies, despite the lack of substantiated evidence or concrete proof. Washington's justification for the killing of Soleimani is presented as a preventive measure to deter future attacks, yet it lacks clarity regarding the specific locations and timing of these potential threats. Washington has failed to provide evidence demonstrating that General Soleimani posed an immediate and imminent threat that necessitated his assassination. </strong>