Iran - US - Israel
As it happens…

1

Remember this?
The Iranian Revolution & the US Hostage Crisis - 1979
To understand today's tensions, we need to go back to 1979 - when Iran underwent a dramatic revolution that overthrew a US-backed Shah and replaced him with an Islamic theocracy.
The fallout would define US-Iran relations for decades.
1
1953 — CIA-Backed Coup
The US and UK orchestrate the overthrow of Iran's democratically elected PM Mohammad Mosaddegh, reinstating the pro-Western Shah. Iranians never forget.
2
1960s–70s — The Shah's Brutal Rule
The Shah modernises Iran but rules with an iron fist. His secret police (SAVAK) torture and imprison thousands. Resentment grows.
3
January 1979 — The Revolution
Mass protests force the Shah to flee. Ayatollah Khomeini returns from exile and establishes an Islamic Republic. Iran breaks from the West.
4
November 1979 — The Hostage Crisis
Iranian students storm the US Embassy in Tehran, taking 52 Americans hostage for 444 days. The crisis humiliates the US and ends any hope of reconciliation.
5
1981 — The Argo Escape
Six US diplomats secretly hide in the Canadian Embassy. The CIA, posing as a film crew scouting locations for a sci-fi film called 'Argo', smuggles them out. Later dramatised in Ben Affleck's Oscar-winning film Argo (2012).

2

Why It Still Matters
Deep Mistrust
The 1979 revolution created a rupture in US-Iran relations that has never healed
Nuclear Ambitions
Iran's pursuit of nuclear technology is partly rooted in its desire for sovereignty and deterrence against Western interference
The Argo Legacy
The hostage crisis remains a defining moment - a symbol of how quickly allies can become enemies

3

Just a few days ago…
Feb/March 2026 - US & Israel Strike Iran
In February/March 2026, the United States and Israel launched coordinated military strikes targeting Iran's nuclear facilities. Iran retaliated, sparking a major international crisis and widespread global condemnation.
Key Events
1
US & Israel Launch Strikes
Coordinated attacks on Iran's nuclear sites without advance warning
2
Iran Retaliates
Iran launches counter-strikes against Israeli and US military targets
3
UN Emergency Session
Russia and China condemn the attacks; UN Secretary-General Guterres calls for an immediate ceasefire
4
Global Condemnation
Spain, China, and others declare the strikes a breach of international law

4

Watch
Iran–US–Israel Explained
Watch on YouTube
Russia & China Rip Into US at the UN
Watch on YouTube
UN Condemns US-Israeli Strikes
Watch on YouTube
Spain: Strikes Breach International Law
Watch on YouTube
China Condemns Attacks & Calls for Ceasefire
Watch on YouTube
Head of UN's nuclear watchdog says inspectors have not found evidence of a coordinated Iranian programme to build nuclear weapons despite Israeli and US claims

5

6

Are the attacks legal?
Most international law experts currently say the attacks on Iran were likely illegal under international law, although the United States and Israel argue they were lawful self-defence. The legality depends on how the rules on the use of force in the UN Charter are interpreted.
Under the United Nations Charter, states are generally prohibited from using force against another state. This is one of the fundamental rules of the post-1945 international legal order. Two main exceptions exist:
UN Security Council Authorisation
The second exception, authorized by the UN Security Council.

7

Why experts say the strikes were ILLEGAL
No UN Security Council authorisation
The United Nations Security Council did not authorise the attack.
No clear armed attack by Iran
For self-defence to apply, the attacking state must usually show it was responding to an actual or imminent armed attack. Experts say Iran had not attacked the US or Israel immediately before the strikes.
"Preventive war" has no legal basis
Israel described the strikes as pre-emptive or preventive, aiming to stop Iran developing nuclear weapons.
But most international lawyers argue preventive war (stopping a future threat) has no legal basis in the UN Charter. Some experts therefore describe the strikes as “aggression” under international law.

8

Why the US & Israel say the strikes were LEGAL
Iran’s nuclear programme posed an existential threat
Iran supports armed groups attacking Israel (e.g., Hezbollah)
A pre-emptive strike was necessary before Iran could attack
Some states accept anticipatory self-defence if a threat is imminent, though this interpretation is controversial.
Legality of Iran’s retaliation
International law also treats retaliation differently.
If a state is illegally attacked, it can respond with self-defence, provided the response is:
  • Necessary
  • Proportionate
  • Directed at military targets
Attacks on civilian targets would still violate the laws of war.

9

So what is the point of attacking Iran?
The US and Israel have offered several justifications for the strikes — but behind the official reasons lie deeper strategic, political, and geopolitical motivations.
The Official Reasons
Destroy Iran's Nuclear Programme
Iran was allegedly months away from producing a nuclear weapon. The strikes aimed to set back or permanently destroy its enrichment facilities at Natanz, Fordow, and Isfahan.
Eliminate an Existential Threat to Israel
Israel has long argued that a nuclear-armed Iran poses an existential threat. Netanyahu framed the strikes as a necessary act of survival.
Degrade Iran's Military Capability
Beyond nuclear sites, strikes also targeted missile stockpiles and air defence systems to reduce Iran's ability to retaliate or threaten the region.
The Deeper Motivations
Weaken the 'Axis of Resistance'
Iran funds and arms Hezbollah, Hamas, and the Houthis. Crippling Iran weakens this entire network of proxy forces across the Middle East.
Shift the Regional Balance of Power
A weakened Iran strengthens Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and other US-aligned Gulf states — reshaping the Middle East in favour of Western interests.
Trump's 'Maximum Pressure' Strategy
The strikes align with Trump's doctrine of aggressive deterrence — using military force to signal that the US will not tolerate nuclear proliferation by adversaries.
Domestic Politics
Both Netanyahu and Trump face significant domestic pressures. A decisive military strike can rally nationalist support and distract from internal controversies.
The Risks
Regional Escalation → Iran's retaliation could drag Hezbollah, Iraq-based militias, and the Houthis into a wider war
Oil Market Shock → Conflict in the Persian Gulf threatens global oil supplies — Iran could block the Strait of Hormuz
Rallying Iran's Population → Strikes may unite Iranians behind the regime, making regime change or diplomacy even harder

10

7 Lies You're Being Told About the Iran War
According to Harrison Mann — Former US Army Major & Defense Intelligence Agency Analyst - I Was a US Intelligence Analyst. Israel and the US Are Lying to You About Iran
Trump and Netanyahu have launched their most dangerous war yet — but the justifications are built on half-truths and outright lies. Here's what a former US intelligence insider says is really going on.
The 7 Key Lies
1. 'This war will keep Americans safe'
Iran has no weapons capable of striking the US. The DIA confirmed there was no imminent Iranian threat - and the war has already resulted in US casualties.
What is true is that the Iranian government’s missiles, drones, and proxies can strike US forces in the region, which is exactly what started happening on Saturday after US planes started bombing Iran.
2. 'Iran is the greatest threat to Middle East stability'
The 2003 Iraq invasion and Israel's occupation of Palestinian territories — not Iran — are the principal sources of regional instability.
"Iran hawks point to the Iranian government’s myriad and all-too-real crimes – from murderously suppressing protests to backing the brutal dictator Bashar al-Asad in Syria as he slaughtered his own people – to support the fantasy that regime change in Iran would be a cure-all for the region’s woes.
It’s a fantasy because it ignores the principal sources of instability in the region: Endless US and Israeli military aggression.
The calamitous 2003 US invasion of Iraq – the aftershocks of which are still ongoing – and the Israeli military occupation of the Palestinian territories, most recently culminating in the Gaza…, had nothing to do with Iran…
Israeli ministers and US officials alike don’t even bother to cite an Iranian threat when advocating for a “Greater Israel” that would swallow up large chunks of its neighbors’ territory (Israel already occupies small parts of Syria and Lebanon...."
3. 'Trump has a plan for how this ends'
There are no defined goals, no exit strategy, and no guarantee Iran will accept any "off-ramps." History in Iraq and Afghanistan shows how this plays out.
4. 'Negotiations broke down'
Just like back in 2025 - negotiations were never in good faith. Just this week, Iran agreed to major concessions - including surrendering enriched uranium - hours before the bombs fell.
Trump’s diplomacy was never in good faith, which he made clear with his varied, often ill-defined, and at times deliberately unacceptable demands to Iranian officials. Last month, Trump threatened strikes if the Iranian government didn’t stop killing protesters. By last week, he’d forgotten the protesters and had focused negotiations on curtailing Iran’s nuclear program. And Friday night, after the Iranian government had agreed to “unparalleled” concessions, including getting rid of its enriched uranium, Trump started bombing and announced a host of additional goals, including destroying Iran’s conventional military, its ballistic missiles, its regional proxies, and its political leadership. The aims of this war bear little resemblance to the so-called negotiations that captured recent headlines..
5. 'This is about promoting democracy'
Trump is simultaneously dismantling democracy at home. His record - from Venezuela to the operation of ICE to the January 6 insurrection - shows no genuine interest in democratic values abroad.
Less than two months ago, Trump abducted authoritarian Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro, only to leave the rest of his government intact as long as they agreed to let Trump confiscate Venezuela’s oil wealth. You’d also have to have been absent for years of Trump’s escalating attempts to dismantle democracy in the United States itself, from his insurrection-inspiring “big lie” that the 2020 election was stolen to his deadly militarization of US cities with lawless ICE thugs to his plans today to restrict voting access and assert executive branch control over voting. As Trump threatens civil society, arrests activists, and his own masked goons beat, tear gas, and murder people in the street, you shouldn’t believe he wants to fight for democracy in Iran or anywhere
6. 'There's a plan for what comes after'
There is no post-war plan. The most likely outcome is a failed state - like Libya after 2011 - with catastrophic consequences for Iran's 90 million people.
7. 'This is just Trump and the Republicans'
Some Democrats also backed or failed to stop the war. Only 21% of Americans supported it - yet party leaders on both sides were slow to oppose it.
Who Is Harrison Mann?
Former US Army Major
Served in the US Army and led the DIA's Middle East/Africa Regional Center
Resigned in Protest
Left his post in protest of US intelligence support for Israel's war in Gaza under Biden
Now with Win Without War
Currently advocates against US military interventionism through the group Win Without War

11

Summary
Most international law scholars believe the bombing of Iran likely breached the UN Charter’s prohibition on the use of force, because it was not authorised by the UN Security Council and was not clearly in response to an armed attack.
However, the United States and Israel argue the strikes were lawful anticipatory self-defence, a contested interpretation of international law.

12