Blog Archive

Thursday, May 14, 2026

Just War, Self-Defence and the West Asia Conflict

 

Just War, Self-Defence and the West Asia Conflict

Understanding International Law, UN Charter, NATO, Strait of Hormuz and Balance of Power

This article discusses one of the deepest questions in international relations:

When is war legally or morally justified?

It examines:

  • the concept of “Just War,”
  • self-defence under international law,
  • U.S.-Iran-Israel tensions,
  • and the weakening of global institutions like the United Nations.

This topic is highly important for UPSC because it connects:

  • International Relations
  • International Law
  • UN Charter
  • West Asia
  • Geopolitics
  • Ethics in Global Politics
  • Balance of Power Theory

Let us understand the article step by step in very simple language.


What is the “Just War” Theory?

The idea of:

Just War

means:

a war that is morally or legally justified.

Historically, thinkers tried to define:

  • when war is acceptable,
  • who can start war,
  • and what limits should exist.

Hugo Grotius and International Law

Hugo Grotius argued:

  • wars should follow legal and moral principles,
  • countries should respect international law.

He is often called:

“Father of International Law.”


Balance of Power

The article begins with a quote by:
Alexander Pope.


What is Balance of Power?

A situation where:

no single country becomes overwhelmingly dominant.

This balance discourages war because:

  • powerful states check each other.

Example

During the Cold War:

  • U.S. and Soviet Union balanced each other.

This reduced chances of direct world war.


Hague Convention (1907)

An important international agreement.

It attempted to regulate:

  • warfare,
  • declarations of war,
  • rules of armed conflict.

League of Nations

League of Nations was created after World War I to maintain peace.

It believed:

  • disputes should be solved peacefully,
  • countries should avoid war.

But it failed to prevent World War II.


Kellogg-Briand Pact (1928)

An international agreement where countries promised:

not to use war for solving disputes.


Why Did It Fail?

Because:

  • there was no strong enforcement mechanism,
  • aggressive powers ignored it.

United Nations Charter

After World War II,
United Nations was created.

Its Charter became the foundation of modern international law.


Article 2(4) of UN Charter

One of the most important legal principles.

It prohibits:

threat or use of force against another state’s territorial integrity or political independence.


Territorial Integrity

Respecting another country’s borders and sovereignty.


But There Is an Important Exception:

Article 51 — Self-Defence

Article 51: Right of Individual or Collective Self-Defence Against Armed Attack\text{Article 51: Right of Individual or Collective Self-Defence Against Armed Attack}

Article 51: Right of Individual or Collective Self-Defence Against Armed Attack

Article 51 recognises:

the inherent right of self-defence if a country faces armed attack.


What is Self-Defence?

A country protecting itself from attack.

Example

If Country A attacks Country B,
Country B can legally defend itself.


The Big Debate: Anticipatory Self-Defence

One of the central ideas in the article.


What is Anticipatory Self-Defence?

Using force:

before an actual attack happens,
because an attack is believed to be imminent.


Example

If a country believes:

  • missiles are about to be launched against it,

it may attack first claiming:

anticipatory self-defence.


Why Is This Controversial?

Because countries may misuse this idea to justify aggression.


Language Difference in UN Charter

The article highlights differences in:

  • English,
  • French,
  • Spanish versions of Article 51.

This affects interpretation.


French Interpretation

The French wording may allow:

  • self-defence before attack occurs.

English Interpretation

The English wording suggests:

  • armed attack must already happen.

Why Is This Relevant?

Because the U.S. and Israel justify actions against Iran by claiming:

  • future threat,
  • nuclear danger,
  • preventive necessity.

NATO and Collective Defence

North Atlantic Treaty Organization allows:

collective self-defence.


What is Collective Defence?

If one NATO member is attacked,
others may respond together.


Article 5 of NATO

Attack on one member =
attack on all members.


Why Did Some NATO Countries Distance Themselves?

The article says many NATO countries argued:

“This is not our war.”

Meaning:

  • they did not want direct involvement.

Different Responses by Countries

United Kingdom

Allowed U.S. use of bases.

Spain

Denied use of airspace.

This shows:

  • alliances are not always fully united.

Iran Nuclear Issue

The U.S. and Israel claim:
Iran may develop nuclear weapons.


But Iran Argues

Its nuclear facilities:

  • were open to inspections,
  • intended for peaceful purposes.

Nuclear Enrichment

A process increasing concentration of uranium isotopes.


Why Is It Sensitive?

Because highly enriched uranium can potentially be used:

  • for nuclear energy,
    OR
  • nuclear bombs.

The Article’s Main Criticism

The author argues:

  • powerful countries increasingly misuse “self-defence” to justify intervention.

Examples mentioned:

  • Vietnam,
  • Iraq,
  • Afghanistan,
  • Libya,
  • Iran.

Doctrine of State Responsibility

The idea that states may intervene to:

  • protect citizens,
  • prevent threats.

Historically this has sometimes been used to justify intervention abroad.


Caroline Incident (1837)

A famous international law case.

Britain destroyed an American ship claiming:

  • self-defence.

Daniel Webster’s Principle

Daniel Webster argued:
self-defence must satisfy:

  • necessity,
  • proportionality.

What is Proportionality?

Response should not be excessive.

Example

A minor threat should not justify massive destruction.


West Asia Conflict

The article strongly criticises:

  • Israeli military actions,
  • U.S. support,
  • regional interventions.

Strait of Hormuz

Strait of Hormuz is central to the conflict.


Why Is It Important?

Huge amounts of global oil pass through it.

Control over Hormuz affects:

  • oil prices,
  • global economy,
  • energy security.

Gulf Countries’ Security Dependence

The article says Gulf countries historically depended on:

  • British protection,
    then
  • American military protection.

Why?

Because many Gulf states:

  • have oil wealth,
  • but limited military capability.

Kharg Island

A strategically important Iranian oil export island.

The article warns:
attacks there could escalate conflict severely.


Reparations

Meaning

Compensation paid after war for damage caused.

The article questions:
who will rebuild Iran if war causes destruction?


Munich Analogy (1938)

The article refers to:

Munich Agreement of 1938.

This is often used as a warning against:

  • weak diplomacy,
  • appeasement,
  • failure to stop aggression early.

Multilateralism

The author supports:

multilateral negotiations.


What is Multilateralism?

Many countries participating together in diplomacy.

Opposite of:

  • unilateral action by one powerful country.

Why Is UN Criticised?

The article argues:

  • the UN has weakened,
  • global institutions are losing credibility,
  • major powers ignore rules when convenient.

WTO Mention

World Trade Organization is also described as weakening amid global tensions.


Moral Voice of People

The article concludes with a philosophical point:

governments may fail morally,
but ordinary people still represent humanity’s moral conscience.


Key Terms for UPSC

TermMeaning
Just WarMorally/legal justified war
Balance of PowerNo state dominates others completely
Self-DefenceRight to protect against attack
Anticipatory Self-DefenceAttacking before expected attack
Territorial IntegrityRespect for national borders
Collective DefenceJoint defence by allies
ProportionalityLimited and necessary response
MultilateralismCooperation among many countries
ReparationsCompensation after war
RealpolitikPolitics based on power and practical interest

Major Themes in the Article

1. Weakening of international law

2. Rise of power politics

3. Misuse of self-defence arguments

4. Crisis in West Asia

5. Decline of multilateral institutions

6. Importance of balance of power


UPSC Prelims Important Points

  • Article 51 deals with self-defence.
  • Article 2(4) prohibits use of force.
  • NATO’s Article 5 enables collective defence.
  • Strait of Hormuz is a major oil chokepoint.
  • Kellogg-Briand Pact attempted to outlaw war.

UPSC Mains Perspective

Possible Questions

  1. Examine the concept of anticipatory self-defence in international law.
  2. Discuss the relevance of balance of power in maintaining global peace.
  3. Evaluate the effectiveness of the United Nations in preventing conflicts.
  4. How do energy geopolitics shape conflicts in West Asia?

Simple Conclusion

The article argues that modern wars are increasingly justified through:

  • flexible interpretations of self-defence,
  • geopolitical interests,
  • and strategic power calculations.

As global institutions weaken,
international relations are becoming more dependent on:

  • power balances,
  • strategic alliances,
  • and geopolitical bargaining.

The larger message is that:

peace cannot survive only through laws and treaties; it also requires fairness, balance of power, diplomacy, and the moral pressure of people across the world.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Rise of China vs U.S. Dominance

  Rise of China vs U.S. Dominance Understanding Trade War, GDP, Rare Earths, R&D, Exports and Global Power Shift The article discusses...