(MENAFN) For nearly two years, Israel has kept up a campaign against Palestinians and neighboring states — damaging Lebanon and Syria, repeatedly striking Iran and Yemen, and influencing political and media circles in the West to silence opposition. Now it has intensified its aggression by directly assaulting Iran, its last nearby adversary strong enough to pose a serious challenge.

Some view this attack as a clear violation of the UN Charter and international law. Israel’s claim to “self-defense” is dismissed by many as pure propaganda — a convenient way to justify aggression against Iran and disguise it as a defensive move. Furthermore, Iran arguably would have a more legitimate claim to a preemptive attack, given Israel’s persistent threatening posture against it.

This view underscores a key reality: international law has become a tool manipulated by powerful states. The principle that aggression should be condemned is disregarded when the aggressor is supported by a dominant actor — in this case, the USA. Without US backing — political, financial, and military — Israel would not be able to pursue its policies with impunity.

Some have gone so far as to say that this culture of impunity has turned Israel into a state that disregards legal and moral limits. The real question, then, is not whether Israel’s attack was legally or morally justifiable — it clearly wasn't — but how it has gotten away with it. The answer lies in its close relationship with the USA and the willingness of Washington to sponsor its aggression while denying direct knowledge or involvement.

In this context, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio’s claim that the attack was “unilateral” and without US participation rings hollow. Few are naïve enough to believe that Israel would attack Iran on this scale without at least a green light from Washington. The US-Israel bond is simply too strong for such an action to happen independently.

MENAFN15062025000045015687ID1109675936