M.K. Bhadrakumar
The Israeli Defence Forces called the aerial attack on Iran by some 200 planes in the early hours of Friday, June 13, as a “preemptive strike.” International law gives no scope to attack a country over 1000 kms away on a vague pretext of ‘self-defence’ — or, ‘an immediate operational necessity.’
The UN Charter allows acts in self-defence, but there is nothing that Iran has done in the recent period — at least after President Donald Trump returned to the White House — that can be construed as threatening Israel. Israelis claim to have significantly weakened Iran’s capacity to threaten their country.
So, call it naked aggression. The statement by US Secretary of State Marco Rubio sought to distance the US from Israeli strikes stressing that “Israel took unilateral action” and had advised Washington that “they believe this action was necessary for its self-defence.”
Trump had been telling Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu that such attacks would only undermine the ongoing nuclear negotiations with Iran. The sixth round of US-Iran negotiations is scheduled to take place in Muscat on June 15.
Rubio’s statement underscored that “We are not involved in strikes against Iran and our top priority is protecting American forces in the region.” Rubio did not make the slightest attempt to voice US support for Israel in defending against any Iranian counterstrikes. This is extremely unusual.
The big question is, what forced Netanyahu’s hands — apart from the obvious one of distracting attention from the aggravating domestic political crisis?
One factor is that his personal equations with Trump have been steadily going south, especially since the removal of Mike Waltz on May 1 from the crucial post of National Security Advisor, a key policy-shaping role in the White House.
No comments:
Post a Comment