Bundestag Experts: US-Israeli Attacks on Iran Violate International Law
Berlin, March 29 – The expert services of the German Bundestag consider the war waged by the USA and Israel against Iran to be a violation of international law. They also point out possible consequences for Germany. The attacks by both countries represent “according to the prevailing view” a violation of the prohibition of violence enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations, as they are neither covered by the right to self-defense nor authorized by the UN Security Council, according to an expert opinion by the Bundestag’s experts. The report was commissioned by members of The Left party and is available to the German Press Agency. The “Berliner Zeitung” had previously reported on it.
Germany’s Potential Complicity in International Law Violations
In their 12-page analysis, the scientists examine whether the possible use of military bases in Germany, such as the US Air Force base Ramstein, for attacks against Iran constitutes complicity for which Germany must bear responsibility under international law. They conclude that this is “subject to the specific circumstances of the use (…) at least not excluded.”
Uncertainty Surrounds Ramstein’s Role in Iranian Attacks
However, it remains unclear to what extent Ramstein is being used for attacks on Iran. The base is generally considered a hub for US forces in Europe, the Middle East, and Africa. Whether and how it is directly used for combat operations is not publicly known.
Spain had prohibited the use of two US military bases in Andalusia for attacks on Iran right at the beginning of the war. The German government has refrained from such a step for the US Air Force bases Ramstein and Spangdahlem in Rhineland-Palatinate.
Government spokesman Stefan Kornelius stated at the beginning of March: “The use of military bases in Germany is subject to legal agreements or treaties that are valid under international law and also fall within the framework of our legal system. Therefore, we will not restrict them.”
Background to the Conflict and International Law
The expert opinion underscores the ongoing debate about the legality of military interventions and the responsibilities of host nations for foreign military operations on their soil. The principle of the prohibition of the use of force, enshrined in Article 2(4) of the UN Charter, is a cornerstone of international law. Exceptions to this principle are limited to self-defense under Article 51 of the UN Charter or actions authorized by the UN Security Council under Chapter VII.
The report’s findings suggest that the actions of the US and Israel against Iran do not meet these criteria, thereby classifying them as violations of international law. This assessment has significant implications for Germany, particularly concerning its sovereignty and its obligations under international law, should its territory be used to facilitate such actions.
Political Reactions and Future Implications
The commissioning of this report by The Left party highlights the political sensitivity surrounding Germany’s military cooperation with the US and its stance on international conflicts. The findings could fuel further parliamentary debate and potentially lead to calls for greater scrutiny of foreign military activities on German soil.
The German government’s position, as articulated by Stefan Kornelius, emphasizes adherence to existing legal agreements. However, the expert opinion introduces a new legal interpretation that challenges the perception of these agreements in the context of international law violations. This could necessitate a re-evaluation of Germany’s legal framework and its foreign policy decisions regarding military bases and international conflicts.
The ongoing conflict and the legal interpretations presented in this report underscore the complex interplay between national sovereignty, international law, and global security. The implications for Germany could range from diplomatic challenges to potential legal liabilities, depending on how these findings are addressed and acted upon by the government and the international community.
