محمدرضا دهشیری

The Middle East and North Africa constitute one of the strategic and most significant regions in the world with a turbulent history. The region witnessed the birth of various countries and tense developments from the second decade of the 20th century until the middle of the century, and most of the countries in the region, including Arabic countries and Israel, emerged during the period. In this regard, the countries in the region have experienced conflicts, wars, invasions, and, sometimes, peace, in their relations with Israel. The latest development in this respect is the Saudi-led normalization of ties between some Arabic countries and Israel to oppose Iran and its axis of resistance. Though this has posed a number of threats to Iran’s national security, some opportunities are evident in it, as well. Thus, the main question of the present study is what opportunities the normalization of ties between Saudi Arabia and Israel can have for the empowerment of the axis of resistance. The study utilizes a descriptive and analytical methodology to answer the question, and the overall result of the study – i.e., the tested hypothesis – shows that opportunities like the creation of chasms between the government and society in Saudi Arabia, the pressure felt by Fatah and the need to reconcile with Hamas, Muslims’ reaction to the negation of the Palestinian Dream by Saudis, the creation of chasms between the government and society of Israel, and the gradual withdrawal of the U.S. from the region are all factors that can boost the axis of resistance based on the existence of groups who oppose the process of normalization across Saudi Arabia, Israel, and the Islamic world at large.

The fundamental norms of the United Nations Charter, particularly the prohibition on the use of force and the inviolability of state sovereignty, have been repeatedly challenged in the modern security landscape. The June 2025 military attacks by Israel, with direct support from the United States, on Iranian territory and its safeguarded nuclear facilities represent a critical juncture in this historical context, testing the resilience of the international legal order. This article aims to provide a comprehensive legal assessment of the legality of these actions under international law. Employing a doctrinal legal research methodology, the study conducts a systematic analysis of primary legal sources, including the UN Charter, ICJ jurisprudence, and non-proliferation treaties, integrated with secondary scholarly commentaries and institutional reports. Findings demonstrate that the attacks constitute a manifest act of aggression in violation of Article 2(4) of the UN Charter and the jus cogens rule prohibition on the use of force, as they were undertaken without Security Council authorization or a valid claim to self-defense under Article 51. Furthermore, the targeting of IAEA-safeguarded nuclear facilities breached the NPT and the Convention on the Physical Protection of Nuclear Material, eroding the global non-proliferation regime. The study also concludes that Iran’s defensive response was a legitimate exercise of its inherent right to self-defense. In conclusion, the attacks underscore a profound crisis in the UN collective security system, exacerbated by the Security Council's paralysis. The article ends with normative recommendations for upholding accountability and reinforcing the integrity of international law against unilateral militarism.