Journal of World Sociopolitical Studies

Abstract 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.

Abstract The efforts of the international community to free the Middle East from weapons of mass destruction (WMDs) date back five decades ago. This process was initiated with Iran’s proposal in 1974 and has not yet achieved its goals after almost five decades. The main question in this article is how to achieve a WMD Free Zone in the form of a regional arms control and disarmament regime in the Middle East. The answer is formed in the form of the hypothesis that despite the presence of Israel as the only possessor of nuclear weapons in the region and uncertainties about Iran's nuclear program, reaching a WMD-free zone will not be far from reach. Using the theoretical framework of international regimes, in this article the possible actions needed to create a WMD Free Zone will be discussed.

Abstract Human rights diplomacy is considered as a consequence of globalization. While many norms and issues are extensively globalized, nonetheless they can be implemented based on cost and benefit analysis (i.e. maximization of benefits and minimization of costs). States have to take their responsibility of human rights by demonstrating their responsiveness towards their people, international organizations, human rights entities, civil societies and NGOs. This accountability would improve their position in international public opinion and would prove their legitimacy in the globalized world. Human rights diplomacy could be defined at strategic and tactical levels. The main question treated in this article is how Brazil has planned its strategies and tactics on human rights diplomacy? The importance of scrutinizing on Brazilian human rights diplomacy is that Brazil, as an emerging power, has been playing an effective role in the transitional international system. In fact, Brazil, as a first step, has defined its proper and suitable strategies and tactics, and as a second step, it has been highlighting its role in international organizations inter allia the United Nations, and finally it has increased its credit and prestige among south counties in the framework of BRICS and south-south dialogue. Analysis of Brazilian human rights strategy indicates that this country tries to stratify its human rights diplomacy firstly at regional level and secondly at international level; to implement this multilayered diplomacy, it seeks to involve interested stakeholders including NGO’s and civil society actors.