Following our bombing of Iran, we are hearing the usual caterwauling from the Left about international law. Of course, no one invokes international law when Iran kills our servicemen, or when Hamas massacres Israelis, or when Iran launches missiles against the United Arab Emirates, and so on. There is a certain asymmetry in the invocation of international law.
I took a course in international law when I was in law school. It was taught by a distinguished scholar in that field. As I recall, the first section of the course was devoted to the question, is there such a thing as international law? The answer was, sort of. My own answer would be no: absent any mechanism for enforcement, it is more International Suggestions than International Law. And purported law that can never be invoked in a useful way against the forces of evil, like Iran’s regime, is useless.
I agree with this:
The big “secret” of modern international law is that it is now designed to cripple the West, make wars impossible to win, and keep us trapped in hostile quagmires. That’s the end game. It’s the great “equalizer,” the pinnacle of post-liberal equality. Under international law, bad…
— Erielle Azerrad (@politicalelle) March 1, 2026
Also this:
It is striking that in the current debate over our giving the mullahs their long-overdue deserts, there has been virtually no mention of the United Nations. Even 30 or 40 years ago, the U.N. would have been deemed relevant to the situation. No longer. The demise of the U.N. exposes, I think, the illusory nature of international law.
For a somewhat more positive view of international law, check out law professor Ilan Wurman’s comments on the rationally BASED podcast. This episode puts Ilan in an unusual position, i.e., somewhat to my left. But it is well worth a listen:
