Share this page!

Enter URL or ID to Unroll

You can paste full URL like: https://x.com/threadreaderapp/status/1644127596119195649
or just the ID like: 1644127596119195649

How to get URL link on X (Twitter) App

  1. On the Twitter thread, click on or icon on the bottom
  2. Click again on or Share Via icon
  3. Click on Copy Link to Tweet
  4. Paste it above and click "Unroll Thread"!
  5. More info at Twitter Help
Orde F. Kittrie Profile picture
Orde F. Kittrie
@ordefk
Law professor & think tank senior fellow; former US State Dept attorney; author Lawfare: Law as a Weapon of War (Oxford Univ. Press) RT/like/follow≠endorse
Jun 13 • 11 tweets • 6 min read
Thread by Orde Kittrie, former lead US State Department attorney for nuclear issues, explaining why Israel's attack on Iran's nuclear weapons program is fully justified under international law and the several commentators who have argued otherwise are flat wrong.

Bottom line: Since Iran is already engaged in an ongoing armed conflict with Israel, Israel need not wait to take defensive action only just before Iran fires its proverbial next shot. Iran has been engaged in an ongoing armed conflict with Israel since at least April 13, 2024, when Iran fired over 300 drones and missiles at Israel. The 180 missiles launched at Israel on October 1, 2024, plus the Iranian leadership's eliminationist policy towards, and continuing threats against, Israel make clear that the conflict Iran initiated with Israel is ongoing. Given that ongoing armed conflict, Israel did not need to wait until Iran’s nuclear weapons program, or a next round of Iranian attacks, met an “imminence” test (although the imminence test was indeed met). 1/11 Because Iran was already engaged in an ongoing armed conflict with Israel, an imminent nuclear or other attack by Iran was not a necessary condition for Israel’s use of force in self-defense against Iran.

This reflects a long-standing cornerstone of U.S. policy. While serving as State Department Legal Adviser under President Barack Obama, Brian J. Egan explained as follows: “In the view of the United States, once a State has lawfully resorted to force in self-defense against a particular armed group following an actual or imminent armed attack by that group, it is not necessary as a matter of international law to reassess whether an armed attack is imminent prior to every subsequent action taken against that group, provided that hostilities have not ended.”

In addition, Paul Ney, the DOD General Counsel at the time of the first Trump administration’s killing of IRGC commander Qasem Soleimani, took an approach similar to Egan:
"Some have questioned whether another Iranian armed attack against the United States was “imminent” at the time of the strike targeting Soleimani. This is a red herring, as the saying goes. Under international law, an imminent attack is not a necessary condition for resort to force in self-defense in this circumstance because armed attacks by Iran already had occurred and were expected to occur again . . . the January 2, 2020, air strike against Soleimani in Iraq was lawful as a matter of international law as an exercise of the inherent right of self-defense recognized by Article 51 of the U.N. Charter. An imminent attack is not a necessary condition for use of force in self-defense under Article 51 when an armed attack has already been perpetrated and the response is necessary and proportionate." 2/11 defense.gov/News/Speeches/…
Nov 21, 2024 • 5 tweets • 2 min read
Thread: Comments on ICC warrants by former US State Department attorney Orde Kittrie: There is no factual or legal basis for these warrants against top Israeli officials. The warrants are clearly driven by politics and the same anti-Israel animus that has long dominated the United Nations and other international organizations. These filings should be treated as what they are: quintessential lawfare, a political vendetta masquerading as a legal proceeding. 1/5 The ICC warrants indicate a clear double standard. The ICC has not issued arrest warrants for the Islamic Republic of Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei or any other Iranian official, Syrian President Bashar al-Assad or any other Syrian official, or the genocidal Chinese President Xi Jinping or any other Chinese official. While the Islamic Republic of Iran, Syria, and the People’s Republic of China are, like Israel, not ICC members, the ICC has only concocted a specious jurisdiction claim for Israel, a democratic nation with a robust and independent judiciary. This is an outrageous abuse of power. 2/5
May 20, 2024 • 10 tweets • 3 min read
Thread by me, a former US State Department attorney and author of a book on lawfare, regarding today's outrageous ICC filing of arrest warrants for Israeli PM Netanyahu and Defense Min. Gallant: There is no factual or legal basis for these warrant filings against top Israeli officials. The filings are clearly driven by politics, and the same anti-Israel animus that has long dominated the United Nations and other international organizations. These filings should be treated as what they are: quintessential lawfare, a political vendetta masquerading as a legal proceeding. 1/11 The only serving national leaders for which the ICC has previously issued such arrest warrants are Libya’s Muammar Gaddafi, Russia’s Vladimir Putin, and Sudan’s Omar al-Bashir. Israel’s leaders do not belong in such company. 2/11
Jan 26, 2024 • 9 tweets • 3 min read
Thread: Analysis of today's ICJ order by Orde Kittrie (law professor, senior fellow, and former US State Dept. attorney):
ICJ order's negative impact on US national security: “The ICJ’s failure to entirely dismiss South Africa’s meritless claims undermines the West’s on-going fight against the many authoritarian and terrorist leaders who are willing to drive up their own sides’ casualties by using their own civilians as human shields. The court ignored that Gaza civilian casualties are massively inflated by Hamas' rampant use of Palestinian civilians as human shields.  But the court used those inflated civilian casualty figures, for which Hamas is responsible, to justify measures against Israel. In doing so, the ICJ incentivized the use of human shields by authoritarian enemies such as China and Russia, and by terrorist enemies such as ISIS and the Taliban, who like Hamas are happy to sacrifice their own civilians if it will help them to undermine Western militaries by falsely accusing them of war crimes.” 1/9 Former State Dept attorney Orde Kittrie on inaccuracy of using term “genocide” to describe Israel’s actions in Gaza: “South Africa failed to provide any substantive evidence (because there is none) that Israel is either committing or intending to commit genocide.  Indeed, Israel's advance warnings and other steps to mitigate harm to Gaza civilians make clear Israel's goal is not genocide but, far from it, to minimize Palestinian civilian casualties while lawfully exercising Israel's rights to free the hostages, apprehend October 7 atrocity perpetrators, and protect Israel's population from further attacks.” 2/9
Mar 7, 2022 • 15 tweets • 4 min read
🧵As part of new Iran deal, US to reportedly lift all sanctions on many of Iran’s most barbaric abusers of human rights, including Khamenei, Raisi, Rezaei, Deghhan. This thread gives five reasons why that is a very bad idea and describes each of their abuses of human rights. 1/ Lifting sanctions on Iran's worst human rights abusers sends a dangerous message of impunity to Putin and his henchmen at a time when they are committing war crimes in Ukraine and human rights abuses in Russia. 2/
Mar 5, 2022 • 4 tweets • 2 min read
🧵As war rages in Europe, US & Russia must carefully avoid getting close to the nuclear brink. The stakes are too high. Even in less tense periods, technical & other errors have several times nearly led to nuclear war between the US and Russia/USSR. 1/ ucsusa.org/resources/clos… For example, on January 25, 1995 the launch of a Norwegian scientific rocket was misunderstood by Russian military as a US nuclear attack (Norway's letter notifying of the launch got lost in Russia's bureaucracy). Then-President Boris Yeltsin activated his "nuclear football." 2/
Jul 14, 2021 • 8 tweets • 3 min read
Thread -- The Israel Defense Forces announced today its discovery that Hezbollah is storing rockets, military-grade explosives and other weapons in a home 25 meters from a children's school in Lebanon. 1/ jpost.com/middle-east/id… By using the civilian students of the school and civilian residents of the home as human shields for its weapons, Hezbollah is engaging in a war crime, in violation of the Geneva Conventions and customary international law. fdd.org/2020/10/15/tim… 2/
Jul 13, 2021 • 4 tweets • 2 min read
Thread: The FBI and U.S. prosecutors today announced "the government of Iran directed" its agents "to plot to kidnap a U.S.-based journalist and American citizen" in New York City and smuggle her to Iran because she criticized the Iranian regime's human rights abuses. 1/ This is not first time Iranian govt has engaged in crime in U.S. In 2011, Iran plotted to bomb DC's Cafe Milano, to kill Saudi ambass. Iran's agent “made it clear that the bombing needed to go forward, even if doing so would" kill "hundred" Americans. 2/ washingtonpost.com/history/2020/0…
Jun 24, 2021 • 10 tweets • 2 min read
Thread on my new article, which lists numerous examples of Hamas use of human shields (a war crime) during May 2021 Gaza conflict and explains why Biden should fulfill his statutory obligation, under the Shields Act, to respond with sanctions. 1/ fdd.org/analysis/2021/… During May war, UN Comm. for Middle East Peace said:“Hamas & other militants’ indiscriminate launching of rockets & mortars from highly populated civilian neighborhoods into civilian population centers in Israel violates [the law of armed conflict] and must cease immediately." 2/
Nov 30, 2020 • 16 tweets • 5 min read
2/ Obama DOD Law of War Manual, issued 2016, restated & endorsed long-held JAG position that "civilian scientists occupying key positions in a weapons program regarded as vital to a nation's national security or war aims [are] liable to legitimate attack." dod.defense.gov/Portals/1/Docu… 3/ Obama Admin's DOD Law of War Manual also restated & endorsed that "more than 900 of the World War II Project Manhattan personnel were civilians, and their participation in the U.S. atomic weapons program was of such importance as to have made them liable to legitimate attack."
Nov 30, 2020 • 5 tweets • 2 min read
WSJ news article: "There is broad agreement that the killing of Mr. Fakhrizadeh removed a manager with unparalleled knowledge of Iran’s past work & current capabilities, according to a former senior U.S. intelligence official."

wsj.com/articles/irans… WSJ news article: "His [Fakhrizadeh's] knowledge would have been important for Iran to mount a crash effort to build a nuclear bomb, current and former Western officials say."
wsj.com/articles/irans…
Nov 30, 2020 • 8 tweets • 3 min read
Thread on goals/progress of Iran's nuclear bomb program under Mohsen Fakhrizadeh. 1/ Evidence of goal: Photo below of Shahab-3 missiles on parade in Iran. The sign on the front truck says: "Israel must be destroyed." 2/ Evidence of progress on sign goal: Iran, led by Fakhrizadeh, designed & modeled "removal of the conventional high explosive payload from the warhead of the Shahab-3 missile and replacing it with a spherical nuclear payload"(quote from IAEA 2011 report)

iaea.org/sites/default/…
Nov 30, 2020 • 8 tweets • 3 min read
Thread:Why Israel & its GulfArab allies insist renewed Irandeal also limit new, far more accurate Iran missiles:"the continued growth in size & accuracy of Iran’s missile force ensures its ability to saturate & overwhelm missile defenses in Gulf & Israel." bit.ly/3o4ADMU 2/ "With enough PGMs (precision guided missiles) fired at the same target, Iran’s proxies may be able to outmaneuver, outsmart, or overwhelm Israeli missile-defense systems, with the result that one or more rockets would get through." commentarymagazine.com/articles/jonat…
Nov 28, 2020 • 8 tweets • 3 min read
Thread: 1/ EU is wrong to call killing of Fakhrizadeh "a criminal act." The U.S. Army JAG Corps has explicitly taken the position that such a killing is legal during international armed conflict, using as an example the U.S.'s own nuclear weapons program. law.upenn.edu/institutes/cer… 2/ Per the JAG Corps' definitive memorandum: "More than 90% of the World War II Project Manhattan personnel were civilians, and their participation in the U.S. atomic weapons program was of such importance as to have made them liable to legitimate attack." law.upenn.edu/institutes/cer…
Nov 28, 2020 • 7 tweets • 3 min read
Thread: 1/ EU is wrong to call killing of Fakhrizadeh "a criminal act." The US Army JAG Corps has explicitly taken the position that such a killing is legal during international armed conflict, using as an example the U.S.'s own nuclear weapons program. law.upenn.edu/institutes/cer… 2/ Per the JAG Corps' memorandum: "More than 90% of the World War II Project Manhattan personnel were civilians, and their participation in the U.S. atomic weapons program was of such importance as to have made them liable to legitimate attack." law.upenn.edu/institutes/cer…
Nov 27, 2020 • 4 tweets • 2 min read
Thread: 1/ To those calling illegal Israel's killing of Iran nuclear weapons program chief Fakhrizadeh: US Army JAG Corps has explicitly taken the position that such killing is legal during international armed conflict, using as an example the U.S.'s own nuclear weapons program. 2/ Per the JAG Corps' memorandum: "More than 90% of the World War II Project Manhattan personnel were civilians, and their participation in the U.S. atomic weapons program was of such importance as to have made them liable to legitimate attack."

law.upenn.edu/institutes/cer…
Nov 27, 2020 • 4 tweets • 2 min read
1/ No, the Fakhrizadeh killing is not a violation of international law. The reasoning of the US Military Academy's law department (in the Soleimani case) explains why. Iran & Israel are engaged in an international armed conflict.

lawfareblog.com/was-soleimani-… 2/ Fakhrizadeh, an IRGC official, was developing a weapon designed to enable Iran to achieve its genocidal vow to wipe Israel off the face of the earth. Israel has the right to defend itself, in accordance with Article 51 of the UN Charter.
Oct 2, 2020 • 7 tweets • 4 min read
Thread: 1/ Hezbollah just proved accurate #Netanyhu UN speech revealing 3 missile factories next to or under civilian homes. After speech, in effort to debunk, #Hezbollah gave tour of site. Tour video shows IT IS A MISSILE FACTORY, w/ missile production machines clearly visible. 2/ My article explains that #Hezbollah by placing missile factories next to or under civilian homes (apartment buildings here) is clearly using those civilians as human shields, which is a war crime under international law, prohibited by Geneva Convention. fdd.org/analysis/2020/…
Sep 29, 2020 • 4 tweets • 2 min read
Thread: 1/Why are #Azerbaijan & #Armenia fighting? When USSR broke up chaos was avoided by its successor states accepting previous boundaries despite numerous enclaves. Exception: Armenia seized part of Azerbaijan, in move rejected by UN & US. More: fdd.org/analysis/2020/… 2/"According to Serzh Sarkisian, who commanded the Armenian forces during the war and later became the country’s president, Armenia employed a deliberate policy of mass killing to cause the civilian Azerbaijani population to flee" Nagorno-Karabakh. 700,000 became refugees.
Sep 26, 2020 • 4 tweets • 3 min read
Thread: 1/
@AOC needs a history lesson. #Rabin's funeral was attended by Pres. Mubarak of Egypt & King Hussein of Jordan, which lost the '67 war to Israel led by Rabin. Hussein gave a eulogy: "You lived as a soldier, and you died as a soldier of peace." baltimoresun.com/news/bs-xpm-19… 2/ @AOC: At Rabin's funeral King Hussein said, "As long as I live I will be proud to have known him, to have worked with him as a brother, a friend." Hussein was King of Jordan in '67 when it lost to IDF led by Rabin, and made peace with Israel only the year before Rabin's death.
Sep 24, 2020 • 5 tweets • 1 min read
Thread: Citing GOP sources, Atlantic's Barton Gellman reports Trump campaign is "discussing contingency plans to bypass election results and appoint loyal electors in battleground states where Republicans hold the legislative majority."(AZ,FL,MI,NC,PA,WI) theatlantic.com/magazine/archi… 2/Gellman writes: "We are accustomed to choosing electors by popular vote, but nothing in the Constitution says it has to be that way. Article II provides that each state shall appoint electors “in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct.”"