74 No. 76 JUSTICE Tel Aviv and Haifa to the ground’ while stating that the ‘resistance front’ was at peak readiness.35 In October 2023, another senior IRGC general stated that ‘[t]he resistance front’s shocks against the Zionist regime [Israel] will continue until this cancerous tumor is eradicated from the world map.’36 Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamanei has also threatened to attack Israel in response to Israel’s attacks on the Iranian proxies, stating that ‘[t] he enemies, whether the Zionist regime or the United States of America, will definitely receive a crushing response to what they are doing to Iran and the Iranian nation and to the resistance front.’37 The April 2024 attack was carried out in coordination with simultaneous attacks by Iranian proxies in Lebanon, Yemen, and Iraq. After the direct attack in October 2024, the regime stated that the attack was carried out as retaliation for the death of Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh in Teheran and Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah in Lebanon, as well as the death of the Iranian general in charge of the IRGC’s operations in Syria and Lebanon. The relationship between Iran and its network of organized armed groups is buttressed by intelligence; for example, Israel has released intelligence of a concrete Iranian plan to coordinate a simultaneous mass invasion of Israel from different fronts, with the express aim of destroying Israel.38 3. Israel’s conduct during the Operation: commitment to the law of armed conflict Israel is committed to carrying out its military operations in accordance with international law, including the law of armed conflict. Israel is a party to several international treaties which form part of the law of armed conflict and abides by all applicable rules of customary international law, including those embodied in treaties to which it is not a party (such as rules with customary status that are reflected in the 1977 Additional Protocols to the Geneva Conventions).39 Israel has incorporated the law of armed conflict into all aspects of its military operations through legal training, operational procedures and planning, continuous operational legal advice, and robust and independent investigation mechanisms for addressing misconduct. For example, the IDF maintains a regulated targeting process involving intelligence, operational planning, and other professional input that is required prior to approving attacks. Legal advice forms part of this process and is provided by lawyers from the International Law Division in the Military Advocate General’s Corps, a dedicated unit that operates independently from the IDF chain of command. Distinction In accordance with the rules of distinction, the IDF directed its attacks only at objects that qualify as military objectives, against members of Iran’s armed forces, and against other persons who take direct part in the hostilities. The Iranian regime maintains a number of organizations that are designated officially under Iranian law as the State’s armed forces, including the IRGC, Iran’s traditional armed force that preexisted the Iranian Revolution (the Artesh), the Khatam al-Anbiya (Emergency Command), and Internal Security (together, the ‘Iranian armed forces’). In terms of objects, Israel applies the customary definition of ‘military objectives.’40 35. Israel Will Be Wiped Out in a Major Attack ‘at the Right Time,’ IRGC General Says, Iran International (Feb. 21, 2025), https://www.iranintl.com/en/202502215094. 36. Iran’s Guards Commander Warns of Another Shockwave If Israel Does Not End “Atrocities” in Gaza, Reuters (Oct. 17, 2023), https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/irans-guards-commander-warns-another-shockwave-if-israeldoes-not-end-atrocities-2023-10-17/. 37. Khamenei Threatens Israel and U.S. With ‘A Crushing Response’ Over Israeli Attack, Times of Israel (Nov. 2, 2024), https://www.timesofisrael.com/khamenei-threatens-israel-and-us-with-a-crushing-response-over-israeli-attack/. 38 IDF Reveals the Iranian Plan to Destroy Israel, IDF (June 25, 2025), https://www.idf.il/en/mini-sites/idf-pressreleases-israel-at-war/june-25-pr/idf-reveals-the-iranian-plan-to-destroy-israel/. 39. The Islamic Republic of Iran is also not a party to the 1977 Additional Protocols to the Geneva Conventions. 40. This customary rule is reflected in Article 52 of Additional Protocol I of the Geneva Conventions. According to this Article, ‘military objectives’ are limited to ‘those objects which by their nature, location, purpose or use make an effective contribution to military action and whose total or partial destruction, capture or neutralization, in the circumstances ruling at the time, offers a definite military advantage.’ See Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to the Protection of Victims of International Armed Conflicts (Protocol I), adopted June 8, 1977, entered into force Dec. 7, 1978, United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 1125, p. 3 (hereinafter Additional Protocol I).
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjgzNzA=