The IQAC & Research Cell of St Joseph’s College of Law organised a faculty seminar that examined the complex intersections of international law, use of force, and state accountability through the lens of the US–Iran tensions. The session aimed to situate contemporary geopolitical conflict within established principles of international legal order, focusing on how law responds to warlike situations in the absence of formal declarations of war. Dr Basalalli traced the background of strained relations between the United States and Iran, particularly the 2020 targeted killing of Iranian General Qasem Soleimani by the US in Iraq. This incident, she explained, raised profound questions regarding sovereignty, legality of targeted killings, anticipatory self-defence, and the accountability of powerful states within the global legal order.

The seminar examined the legal architecture governing the use of force under the Charter of the United Nations, focusing particularly on Articles 2(4) and 51 and the narrow circumstances in which force may be lawfully employed. The United States’ justification of the strike as an act of anticipatory self-defence was critically analysed as a controversial and weakly grounded claim in international law, raising questions about how far the doctrine can be stretched beyond its accepted contours. The discussion then turned to the legality of targeted killings within the framework of international humanitarian law. The killing of Qasem Soleimani was examined to assess whether it could be situated within an existing armed conflict or whether it amounted to a violation of humanitarian norms. The incident was also viewed through the lens of state sovereignty, as the strike took place on Iraqi territory without explicit consent, highlighting serious concerns regarding territorial integrity and the limits of unilateral military action.

Finally, the seminar addressed the broader issue of accountability in international law, reflecting on the limited capacity of institutions such as the International Court of Justice and the International Criminal Court to effectively hold powerful nations to account. A significant scholarly critique was directed at the tendency of dominant states to interpret international legal principles in a self-serving manner, which, as argued by the speaker, undermines the normative authority of international law and fosters a culture of impunity in global politics.

The session witnessed an engaging and thoughtful interaction with the faculty members. Questions were raised regarding the evolving nature of warfare, the political nature of international adjudicatory bodies, and comparative examples where international law failed to restrain unilateral military action. The discussion reflected deep interest and critical engagement from the participants.

The seminar provided a rich legal analysis of the US–Iran episode as a case study to understand broader questions of war, legality, and accountability. It underscored the tension between legal norms and political power in international relations and encouraged participants to rethink how international law can evolve to address contemporary conflicts. The presence of the Principal and Vice Principal added significance to the event. The guest was formally invited by Mr Satyaki Chakraborty. The seminar concluded with a vote of thanks delivered by Bhaskar Simha, acknowledging the speaker and the organisers for an insightful session.