The Collapse of Multilateral Law and the Confusion of Battlefields

The United States behaved like barbarians during the Israeli war against Iran. Its president, Donald Trump, claimed responsibility for attacking civilians, even though just a month earlier he had been saying he wanted to liberate them. He went so far as to threaten to eradicate Iranian civilization, despite his ambition to receive the Nobel Peace Prize.

By acting in this way, Washington not only violated the UN Charter, but also forced some of its allies to discover that it was not their protector, but rather, that it was dragging them into a war they had not chosen.

The President of the United States of America, Donald Trump, first stated that “the total destruction of areas and the certain death of groups of people which, until now, had not been considered as possible targets” (S/2026/141) were being seriously considered. Then, on April 7, 2026 [1], he publicly and explicitly threatened to annihilate Iranian civilization, in violation of Article 2.4 of the Charter of the United Nations.

In doing so, the President of the United States has placed himself outside the bounds of civilization. If there is one basic principle of international law, since the Hague Conference of 1899, it is that signatory states must not behave like barbarians.

He did not carry out his threat, but with unprecedented violence, he deliberately destroyed civilian targets.

He began by participating in the assassination of the spiritual leader of millions of Shiites, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei (S/2026/109). Then, he destroyed the Azadi and Besat sports complexes, the Azadegan water park, the Shahidan Esmaeili Stadium, and the Shahid Eskandarloo Sports Hall in Tehran (UN S/2026/130). Next, he attacked the Minab Primary School. He then went on to attack Red Crescent buildings, the Gandi, Motahari, and Khatam hospitals in Tehran, and the Abouzar Hospital in Ahvaz (S/2026/111). He bombed several fuel storage facilities in Tehran, releasing large quantities of hydrocarbons into the atmosphere, including sulfur and nitrogen oxides, causing acid rain, the deaths of many survivors of the Iran-Iraq War gas attacks, and massive fires (S/2026/149). He bombed cultural sites, such as the Qajar dynasty palace, the Golestan (S/2026/180). And, probably due to confusion, he bombed UNESCO and WHO offices (S/2026/269) and even the Pasteur Institute of Iran (S/2026/279).

With its boundless violence, while claiming to be fighting a nuclear threat—we have explained at length that there has been no Iranian military nuclear program since 1988—he bombed the Bushehr civilian nuclear power plant four times, risking the destruction of the cooling system and the release of radiation into all the waters of the region.

Now, the people of the Middle East no longer believe that the United Nations protects them or that the United States can bring them peace [2].

The people of the Gulf, who had accepted US military bases on their soil for their protection, have learned the hard way that they have been deceived. Their American hosts have used their land to wage war against Persian civilization, turning them into targets for Iran’s legitimate resistance.

The confusion that has developed over the past five weeks has shown that multilateralism can conflict with international law. To protect themselves, the Gulf States have issued numerous multilateral declarations: to the Gulf Cooperation Council [3], the Arab League [4], and the International Maritime Organization [5]. They have finally discovered that international law is against them: they are jointly responsible for the US aggression perpetrated from their territory. This confusion reached its peak with the adoption, with two abstentions, of Security Council Resolution 2817, which, on March 11, 2026, disregarded General Assembly Resolution 3314, adopted unanimously and without a vote on December 14, 1974. It is clear that the UN, as we know it, will have to be profoundly reformed or dissolved [6].

The confusion now extends to the Strait of Hormuz. Let us leave aside the period of the war during which Iran prohibited ships from entering the strait, both those of the powers that were aggressing it (Israel, the United States, and the United Kingdom) and those of the countries that allowed them to use their territory to commit their aggression (Germany and Italy, Jordan, and the Gulf States). In the West, there is a consensus that no one can dictate their law in the strait during peacetime. However, this is not straightforward: the waters of the Strait of Hormuz are Omani and Iranian territorial waters, not international waters. Given the strait’s depth, passage is generally more common on the Omani side than the Iranian side.

The two countries can legitimately consult with each other and request a toll, as is the case in the Suez and Panama Canals, even though this is a natural strait [7]. They cannot, however, prevent global shipping traffic from passing “innocently” through their waters, especially since they control access to the Persian Gulf. Except that oil tankers pose a real danger with their highly polluting cargoes in the event of a shipwreck.

The Suez Canal is a prime example: in 1956, the British and French empires, militarily supported by the colonial state of Israel, attempted to seize control of the Suez Canal, which Egyptian President Gamal Abdel Nasser had just nationalized. This operation was a fiasco. It marked the end of both colonial empires and revealed the Franco-British alliance with Israel—an alliance that would be broken by Charles de Gaulle during the Six-Day War. The Strait of Hormuz crisis could, in turn, mark the end of American ambitions in the “rest of the world.”

Another question arises: if Oman and Iran are authorized to collect a toll, how can we ensure that its amount will not be prohibitive, and in what currency will it be paid? On this issue, Iran considered payment in yuan, while the United States, committed to the supremacy of the dollar, would prefer it to be in dollars or, failing that, in Trump Coin ($Trump), the cryptocurrency of the US presidential family and the Emirati royal family, Al-Zayed [8].

If it were not in dollars, oil companies would prepare to abandon this currency. However, the dollar is no longer based on the US economy, but on its role in the global hydrocarbon market. This shift would therefore be a continuation of the war against the “Great Satan.”

On April 12, President Trump posted a message on X: “From this moment forward, the United States Navy, the finest in the world, will begin the process of BLOCKING all vessels attempting to enter or leave the Strait of Hormuz.” At some point, we will reach the principle of “ALL SHALL BE ALLOWED IN WHEN ALL SHALL BE ALLOWED OUT,” but Iran has not allowed this to happen by simply saying, “There may be a mine somewhere,” which no one but them knows about. This is GLOBAL RACKETEERING, and the leaders of countries, especially the United States of America, will never be extorted. I have also instructed our Navy to search international waters and deny access to any vessels that have paid a toll to Iran. None of those who have paid an illegal toll will have safe passage on the high seas.” [9]

Not knowing what to do, Donald Trump himself blockaded the Strait of Hormuz, while the Anglo-Saxons have been enforcing freedom of navigation and trade for two centuries—So much for that.

https://www.voltairenet.org/article224256.html

————————————————