Collection: Iran

Congress should establish a bipartisan commission to investigate errors in going to war with Iran and how the war has been waged.

Operation Epic Fury demonstrates that airpower is both essential and insufficient. A review of what the campaign reveals about airpower's promises, limits and lessons in Iran.

Experts analyze the US-Israel Iran military conflicts - covering nuclear diplomacy; strategic, security, and regional implications; and domestic and international law.

Civilian infrastructure is not targetable merely because it is economically significant or politically useful to strike, but only when it offers a definite military advantage.

Applying Clausewitz’s principles to Operation Epic Fury reveals the war’s strategic design–architecture linking military action to political purpose–was deficient from…

How allowing Iran to charge for transit in the Strait of Hormuz could undermine U.S. strategy in the Pacific and beyond

Former U.S. Navy Commander, JAGC Mark Nevitt clarifies the 5 "blockades" in the U.S.-Iran conflict and the different legal issues and operational risks at stake.

U.S. policies of funding rebel groups to achieve shared strategic objectives while turning a blind eye to ideology and international law has proven to be myopic time and again

It is the violation of fundamental principles of international law that ultimately constitutes an existential threat to all members of the international community.

A 1983 Supreme Court ruling eviscerated the law allowing Congress to end war. The Iran strikes make that a five-alarm emergency.

The relationship between regime change and IHL is of inherent tension, incentivizing battlefields where the law is viewed as an obstacle rather than an essential constraint.

Former US State Department attorney writes that the United States' "Article 51" letter to the UN Security Council fails to identify legal basis for Iran attack.