IPFS Stephen Lendman

More About: Iran

World Court to Hear Iran's Case Against US Sanctions

World Court to Hear Iran's Case Against US Sanctions

by Stephen Lendman (stephenlendman.org - Home - Stephen Lendman

Unilaterally imposed sanctions by one nation on others breaches international law.

UN Charter Article II prohibits the practice.

It mandates that all member states "settle…disputes" according to the rule of law.

It bans the threat or use of force by one nation against another.

Under Article 41, unilaterally imposed sanctions by one nation against others have no legal validity.

No nation or combination thereof may intervene against another without Security Council authorization.

It's permitted only in self-defense or to enforce the rule of law when breached by a nation-state.

Security Council members alone may legally impose sanctions on nations, entities or individuals. 

US sanctions on targeted nations constitute war by other means.

They're weaponized to pressure, bully, and terrorize targeted nations into bending to its will.

Nations observing them are complicit in law-breaking.

In 1933, years before the UN Charter's creation, the Montevideo Convention of Rights and Duties prohibited nations from intervening in the internal affairs of others — calling their sovereign territory "inviolable."

The principle of non-intention is affirmed in other international law.

Notably throughout the post-WW II period, the US and its imperial partners operate by their own rules exclusively.

Their actions repeatedly and flagrantly breach core international law principles.

Nations unwilling to subordinate their sovereign rights to a higher power in Washington are considered enemies of its interests.

In late January at his first news conference, Tony Blinken said US sanctions on Iran will remain in place until its ruling authorities comply with unacceptable US demands.

He falsely accused the Islamic Republic of being "out of compliance on a number of fronts, and it would take some time, should it make a decision to do so, for it to come back into compliance, and (some time) for us then to assess whether it was meeting its obligations (sic)."

Under JCPOA Articles 26 and 36, Iran continues to comply with principles of the landmark nuclear agreement.

Increasing uranium to 20% purity and other actions taken are reversible in short order if the US and E3 countries fulfill their abandoned obligations.

It's for them to take good will first steps, not Iran.

They breached the agreement, not the Islamic Republic.

Their "credible path back to diplomacy" is all about getting Iran to accept unacceptable demands it rejects.

Claiming Iran is "divert(ing) toward making nuclear weapons in return for sanctions relief from world powers" is a bald-faced Big Lie.

No evidence remotely suggests it. Plenty of indisputable evidence proves otherwise.

Biden/Harris hardliners are pursuing a path of confrontation with Iran, not mutual cooperation.

It's an ominous sign for what may lie ahead.

Iran is not in violation of "JCPOA curbs."

The US and E3 countries are in flagrant violation of breaching their JCPOA obligations.

On Wednesday, a 16-judge International Court of Justice (ICJ) panel agreed to hear Iran's case against illegally imposed US sanctions — supported by its imperial partners.

Submitted to the Court in 2018, Iran accused the Trump regime of breaching the 1955 US-Iran Treaty of Amity, Economic Relations, and Consular Rights by imposing unlawful sanctions.

Iranian Foreign Minister Zarif applauded the court's decision, tweeting: 

"The @CIJ_ICJ just dismissed all US preliminary objections in the case brought by Iran over unlawful US sanctions." 

"Another legal victory for Iran following 3 Oct. '18 Order." 

"Iran has always fully respected int'l law." 

"High time for the US to live up to ???????????? int'l obligations."

In October 2018, Pompeo unilaterally ended the friendship treaty with Iran.

It was in force when Iran submitted its complaint to the Court.

It'll likely take some time before the ICJ rules on this issue.

If it favors Iran over the Trump regime, it has no power to force US compliance.

In 1986, the IDJ's ruling for Nicaragua was ignored by the US.

The Court ordered Washington to pay reparations to Nicaragua for contra war mass slaughter, destruction, and related high crimes against a sovereign state.

The pattern is virtually sure to repeat if the Court supports Iran's legal claim against the Trump regime.

In October 2018, the ICJ ruled for Iran against US sanctions on humanitarian goods, calling Trump regime measures "illegitimate and cruel."

Pompeo and other regime hardliners ignored the ruling.

A similar response is virtually certain whenever judicial rulings go against US actions and interests.

It's how the scourge of US imperialism operates.

VISIT MY WEBSITE: stephenlendman.org (Home - Stephen Lendman). Contact at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net.

My two Wall Street books are timely reading:

"How Wall Street Fleeces America: Privatized Banking, Government Collusion, and Class War"


"Banker Occupation: Waging Financial War on Humanity"