Diplomacy Betrayed: Experts Criticize US-Israeli Aggression Against Iran

Diplomacy Betrayed: The Case of US-Israeli Aggression against Iran

An international panel at Tehrans IPIS featuring Irans Foreign Ministry spokesman condemned the recent US-Israeli aggression as a betrayal of diplomacy that deliberately targeted a nation in the midst of active peace negotiations.

At the "International Law Under Assault, Aggression, and Defense" conference on November 16 at Tehran’s Institute for Political and International Studies (IPIS), a high-level panel titled “Diplomacy Betrayed: The Case of US-Israeli Aggression against Iran” highlighted the serious legal and diplomatic implications of recent attacks on Iran’s peaceful nuclear facilities.

Moderated by Alireza Khoda Gholipour, Deputy Director General of IPIS, the discussion featured experts from Iran, Lebanon, Iraq, and Europe, including Esmaeil Baghaei, Mohammad Amersi, Eldar Mamedov, Ali Hassan Khalil, Naseer Mezher Abbood, and Naser Hadian. Panelists warned that unilateral actions justified under subjective “security imperatives” weaken the authority of the UN and normalize the violation of international legal norms.

Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmaeil Baghaei argued that the attack on Iran was a unique betrayal because it occurred just two days before a planned sixth round of negotiations. "We were attacked while we were negotiating in good faith," Baghaei stated, adding that this set a uniquely dangerous precedent for the global community. He asserted that the act directly targeted a diplomatic process, sending a message that "you can no more trust any negotiating process" and establishing a pattern of lawlessness that erodes the entire fabric of the UN system.

Mohammad Amersi, Chairman of the Amersi Foundation, offered a strategic motive for the attack, arguing the West saw a "weakened Iran" following setbacks for its allies in the region. He claimed Israel and the West used this as a pretext to both cripple Iran’s nuclear potential and precipitate regime change, believing its ability to retaliate was "extremely limited."
This sentiment was linked to a growing debate within Iran by Eldar Mamedov, a council member at Pugwash. He noted that many in Iran see a demand for transparency without any reciprocal benefit, leading to the conclusion that the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) has not safeguarded Iran's interests but has instead limited its deterrence capabilities. "The question of exit from the NPT is no longer entirely theoretical," he warned.

Naser Hadian, a professor at Tehran University, argued that world politics is dominated by great powers, with the US as the "only one global power," primarily due to its unparalleled military reach. This, he explained, allows the US to project force and act with a degree of impunity that underpins the current international order.

The panel concluded by stressing the need for principled diplomacy, accountability for breaches of the UN Charter, and stronger engagement from the Global South to restore a genuinely law-based international order.