International Court of Justice

Legality of Israel's 2025 Strikes on Natanz: Self-Defence or Violation of State Sovereignty

In an increasingly competitive era, multiple nations are racing to achieve rapid development, expand their influence, and strengthen their global standing. The ICJ will deliberate on whether Israel's 2025 strikes on Natanz, Iran's key nuclear facility, and other military targets were legally justified as an act of self-defence — or whether they violated the fundamental principles of State sovereignty and the prohibition on the use of force under international law.

Human rights groups and international jurists condemned the strikes as violations of territorial sovereignty, while the debate centred on whether the actions fit the strict interpretations of Article 51 of the UN Charter concerning Israel's right to self-defence. The Court will confront a central dilemma: is future security worth the cost of present devastation?

Entrusted with the peaceful settlement of international disputes, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) serves as the United Nations' primary judicial body, applying international legal principles to resolve conflicts between sovereign States. It safeguards international peace and security by upholding a rules-based international system through the judicial resolution of conflicts and reinforcing the restrictions imposed on unlawful acts of aggression.

Delegates will explore, research, and dive into the sea of global geopolitical power, highlighting the urgent need to uphold international law, diplomacy, and the protection of civilian lives as they assume the roles of judges and counsel before the Court.

Scope of Discussion: The prohibition on the use of force, self-defence under Article 51 of the UN Charter, State sovereignty and territorial integrity, treaty interpretation, state responsibility, and humanitarian law.