To be sure, the human and material costs to Israel of such an existential conflict would be very high, but these costs could not reasonably be compared to the expected consequences of a war with a nuclear Iran. [...] The right of self-defense, we learn from Emmerich de Vattel, gives rise to the “right to resist injustice.” According to the Swiss scholar’s argument in Chapter V of the Law of Nations, or the Principles of Natural Law (1758), “On the Observance of Justice between Nations”: Justice is the foundation of all social life and the secure bond of all civil intercourse. [...] Moreover, unless the nuclear weapons involved were used in a fashion consistent with authoritative expectations of the laws of war - the limits of “distinction,” “proportionality” and “military necessity” - this form of preemption would represent an egregious violation of international law. [...] In the existential matter of a nuclearizing Iran, the outcome of a new war with Israel could be determined before the opening salvo of actual military engagement. [...] For Israel, per Cicero, “The safety of the People shall be the highest law.” In the matter of impending war and accelerating Iranian nuclearization, the safety of the People of Israel could best be served by waging a just war against Iran while that enemy is pre-nuclear.
- Pages
- 27
- Published in
- Israel
