90
submitted 7 months ago by Alsephina@lemmy.ml to c/worldnews@lemmy.ml
  • Tehran views the attack as equivalent to an attack on its own territory, so a direct response on Israeli soil by Iran itself is a serious possibility

  • Countries including India, France, Poland and Russia have warned their citizens against travel to the region, already on edge over the war in Gaza ‎⠀

“The revenge will come,” wrote Israel’s largest daily newspaper, Yedioth Ahronoth. “For the moment, the premise is that it will be very soon, in the next few days.” ⠀

“It’s going to be very difficult for Iran not to retaliate,” said Raz Zimmt, senior researcher at Israel’s Institute for National Security Studies.

“I still believe that Iran doesn’t want to engage in full-scale, direct military confrontation against Israel, and certainly not with the United States. But it has to do something.” ⠀

Iranian sources and diplomats from the United States, Israel’s main protector, say Tehran has signalled to Washington that it wishes to avoid escalation and will not act hastily.

But the risk remains that any response might spin out of control. ⠀

Iran has missiles capable of hitting Israel directly and in recent weeks, Israel has bolstered its air defences, which have intercepted thousands of rockets fired by Hamas from Gaza and by Hezbollah from Lebanon.

Archive link

all 23 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] wildbus8979@sh.itjust.works 54 points 7 months ago

I get that the paper is trying to thread carefully. But Iran doesn't just "view" the attack as equivalent to an attack on its own territory. Internat law does.

[-] SlothMama@lemmy.world 4 points 7 months ago
[-] wildbus8979@sh.itjust.works 21 points 7 months ago

Lol nice, yeah international law, obviously. I'm leaving it!

[-] caveman@lemmy.ml 2 points 7 months ago

I'm curious about that.

Could you point to the law, section and paragraph saying that? That's a good argument for me to use in conversations

[-] emergencyfood@sh.itjust.works 2 points 7 months ago

This blog says that an embassy is the property of the sending nation, and enjoys diplomatic immunity, but that it is still part of the host's territory. They cite articles 21-25 of the 1961 Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations.

[-] Nakoichi@hexbear.net 38 points 7 months ago

I mean it's an embassy, it literally is equivalent to an attack on Iranian soil. No viewpoint necessary, that is a fact. Israel committed an act of war against Iran and they are entirely within their right to retaliate.

[-] Flyberius@hexbear.net 12 points 7 months ago

Haven't Israel attacked Iran many times before anyway?

[-] caveman@lemmy.ml 3 points 7 months ago

Could you post some reports/sources on this? I'm interested about it

[-] Flyberius@hexbear.net 3 points 7 months ago

https://iranprimer.usip.org/blog/2022/aug/11/timeline-israeli-attacks-iran

I seem to remember lots of attacks on Iranian nuclear facilities over the years.

[-] caveman@lemmy.ml 2 points 7 months ago
[-] doubtingtammy@lemmy.ml 4 points 7 months ago

Yup. And Ecuador just raided a Mexican embassy last week. It sure seems like the international order is breaking down. Thanks, Biden

[-] bloodfart@lemmy.ml 21 points 7 months ago

squinting at post title

Embassies are universally treated as the territory of the embassy’s nation. That’s why ppl can jump into the embassy of some country without an extradition treaty and say “lol you can’t get me now, coppers!”

Iran doesn’t view the attack as on its territory, the attack was on its territory.

[-] 3volver@lemmy.world 4 points 7 months ago

This is how actual wars begin. An attack on an embassy, then a retaliatory attack, then a huge attack in retaliation of the first retaliatory attack, and then war.

this post was submitted on 12 Apr 2024
90 points (95.9% liked)

World News

32327 readers
577 users here now

News from around the world!

Rules:

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS