Research and Development in Public Law

Research and Development in Public Law

Shared Responsibility for the United States' Aid or Assistance to the Zionist Regime in the 12-day Aggression against Iran

Articles in Press

Document Type : Original Article

Authors
saeed mokhtari 1
mohamad setayeshpur 2
1 PhD Student in International Law, Faculty of Law, University of Qom, Qom, Islamic Republic of Iran.
2 Associate Professor, International Law, Faculty of Law, University of Qom, Qom, Iran.
10.22034/jrpl.2025.2075641.1191
Abstract
Abstract
The 12-day aggression of the Zionist regime against Iran in June 2025 represents a critical stress test for contemporary doctrines of shared responsibility in international law. This article examines the international responsibility of the United States for its multifaceted assistance—financial, military, intelligence, and political—to Israel during this conflict. Adopting a theoretical–interpretive approach, it integrates doctrinal analysis of the Articles on Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts (2001) with jurisprudence of the International Court of Justice and the European Court of Human Rights, particularly in areas of due diligence, positive obligations, and extraterritorial jurisdiction.
The study introduces three conceptual innovations: (1) a Layered Responsibility Model, distinguishing between direct commission, facilitative complicity, and coalition omission; (2) a Dynamic Breach Theory, extending the notion of continuing violations to post-ceasefire sanctions and ongoing assistance; and (3) a Facilitation Spectrum, an empirical tool for quantifying levels of participation in collective wrongdoing. These frameworks operationalize Article 16 of the ILC Articles by lowering the traditional threshold of knowledge to encompass “constructive awareness” derived from human-rights jurisprudence, thereby transforming formal attribution into a functional duty of due diligence.
Based on declassified U.S. documents, UN Security Council records, and post-war human-rights reports, the paper argues that U.S. conduct—ranging from aerial refueling and real-time intelligence sharing to direct B-2 strikes and Security Council vetoes—constitutes material and mental elements of complicity in aggression under Article 2(4) of the UN Charter. Furthermore, U.S. post-ceasefire sanctions are framed as continuing breaches, reinforcing systemic complicity in violation of peremptory norms (jus cogens) and the duty of non-assistance under Article 41 of the ILC Articles.
Iran's claim of US responsibility is analyzed as an emerging procedural platform to test this reconceptualization of shared responsibility. The study concludes that while procedural and political impediments—such as Security Council veto power and bilateral defense arrangements like the 2016 U.S.–Israel Memorandum of Understanding—still obstruct accountability, the integration of human-rights–based due-diligence standards into the law of state responsibility provides a viable pathway for advancing collective justice and protecting victims of hybrid warfare.
Ultimately, this article contributes to the evolving discourse on networked accountability by linking jurisprudential developments in human rights to the structural reform of international responsibility in the age of transnational and cyber-enhanced conflicts.
Keywords
Aid or Assistance
Shared Responsibility
Attribution
Breach of Obligation
Due Diligence
Extraterritorial Jurisdiction
Systematic Complicity
Subjects
1. Books:
Crawford, James. The International Law Commission's Articles on State Responsibility: Introduction, Text and Commentaries. Cambridge University Press, 2002.
Mansouri, F. International Responsibility of States. Majd Publications, 2019. (In Persian)
2. Articles:
Biglarbeigi, K., & Azizi, S. Contemporary Challenges to the Law of Neutrality: Analyzing the Interaction Between the Law of Neutrality and Cyber Operations Within the Framework of the Tallinn Manual 2.0. Research and Development in Public Law, 2025, e730105. https://doi.org/10.22034/jrpl.2025.2065349.1159 (In Persian)
Dannenbaum, Tom. “Complicity in Arms Transfers: Yemen and Beyond.” Journal of International Criminal Justice 18, no. 2 (2020): 245–270. https://doi.org/10.1093/jicj/mqaa023
Hosseini Akbarnezhad, H., & Hosseini Akbarnezhad, H. “Targeted Killing: Violation of Non-Reciprocity in Fundamental Obligations of Humanitarian Law and Human Rights.” Journal of Legal Research 17, no. 35 (2018): 199–242. https://doi.org/10.48300/jlr.2018.79343 (In Persian)
Krieger, Heike. “Quantifying Complicity in Modern Conflicts.” American Journal of International Law 117, no. 1 (2023): 45–78. https://doi.org/10.1017/aju.2023.5
Lanovoy, Vladyslav. “The Use of Force by Non-State Actors and the Limits of Attribution of Conduct.” European Journal of International Law 28, no. 2 (2017): 563–585. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejil/chx025
Milanovic, Marko. “State Responsibility for Genocide: A Follow-Up.” European Journal of International Law 18, no. 4 (2007): 669–694. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejil/chm037
Milanovic, Marko. “Extraterritorial Jurisdiction and Overreach in Shared Responsibility.” Leiden Journal of International Law 35, no. 2 (2022): 289–310. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0922156522000011
Nollkaemper, André, and Dov Jacobs. Shared Responsibility in International Law. Cambridge University Press, 2019.
Sadat-Akhavi, S. A., & Hosseini Akbarnezhad, H. “Extraterritorial Effect of the European Convention on Human Rights in the Case-Law of the European Court of Human Rights.” Private Law Studies 39, no. 4 (2009): 233–256. (In Persian)
Setayeshpour, M. “Confronting the Challenges of Using Drones as a New Technology in International Human Rights Law and International Humanitarian Law.” Journal of New Technologies Law 4, no. 8 (2023): 199–220. (In Persian)
Shamsaei, M., & Salimi Turkmani, H. “A Reflection on the International Responsibility of States Arising from the Violation of International Humanitarian Law.” Islamic Law Journal 5, no. 17 (2008): 177–200. (In Persian)
Vermeer, K. “Predictive Knowledge in Cyber Complicity.” International & Comparative Law Quarterly 70, no. 3 (2021): 567–589. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020589321000185
Vermeulen, P. “Solidarity in Extraterritorial Duties.” International Theory 16, no. 1 (2024): 34–58. https://doi.org/10.1017/S175297192300031X
Zamani, S. G. “UN International Law Commission and the Result of Seventy Years of Efforts to Compile the Law of International Responsibility.” Research and Development in Public Law 2, no. 3 (2025): 171–191. https://doi.org/10.22034/jrpl.2025.726141 (In Persian)
3. Cases and Documents:
Al Nashiri v. Poland, App. No. 28761/11 (ECtHR, July 24, 2014).
Al-Skeini and Others v. United Kingdom, App. No. 55721/07 (ECtHR, July 7, 2011).
Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Bosnia and Herzegovina v. Serbia and Montenegro), Judgment, ICJ Reports 2007.
El-Masri v. North Macedonia, App. No. 39630/09 (ECtHR, December 13, 2012).
Hirsi Jamaa and Others v. Italy, App. No. 27765/09 (ECtHR, February 23, 2012).
Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, Advisory Opinion, ICJ Reports 2004.
M.S.S. v. Belgium and Greece, App. No. 30696/09 (ECtHR, January 21, 2011).
Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua, ICJ Reports 1986.
South Africa v. Israel, Provisional Measures (ICJ, January 26, 2024).
SS and Others v. Italy, App. No. 21686/18 (ECtHR, January 16, 2025).
Tarakhel v. Switzerland, App. No. 29217/12 (ECtHR, February 4, 2014).
Human Rights Watch. Iran: 12 Days of Devastation—Indiscriminate Attacks and Cluster Munitions. 2025.
International Atomic Energy Agency. Preliminary Assessment of Damage to Iranian Nuclear Facilities. 2025.
Iranian Ministry of Health. Casualty Report: June 2025 Aggression.
SNN. “Draft Ceasefire Resolution Between Iran and the Zionist Regime Presented to the UN Security Council.” October 1, 2025.
U.S. Central Command. “THAAD Deployment to Israel.” Press Release, June 14, 2025.
U.S. Congress. Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2025, Pub. L. No. 119-12.
U.S. Department of Defense. Operation Midnight Hammer Report. 2025.
U.S. Department of State. Declassified Cables on Middle East Intelligence Sharing, Cable 25STATE-4567.
UN Security Council. Resolution 2729, UN Doc. S/RES/2729 (2025).
UN Security Council. Verbatim Record of the 9876th Meeting, UN Doc. S/PV.9876 (2025).
Research and Development in Public Law

Articles in Press, Accepted Manuscript
Available Online from 03 December 2025