Interview with Mousavian
Cairo review, March 1, 2026
As of now, most countries around the world believe that the military attack by the United States and Israel constitutes a clear violation of the UN Charter and the norms and regulations of international law.
In 2018, the United States undermined a UNSC-Resolution 2231 by withdrawing from the JCPOA; in 2025-2026, through direct military strikes against Iran, it has been accused of violating core principles of the UN Charter, particularly those related to sovereignty, the prohibition of the use of force, and non-interference in internal affairs of other countries.
According to Oman’s foreign minister, both the U.S.–Israeli military strike on Iran in June 2025 and the subsequent attack in February 2026 occurred at moments when negotiations had reportedly achieved significant progress. As Oman served as a mediator, this statement implies that Washington bombed diplomacy at critical junctures. From this perspective, diplomacy has effectively been placed in the critical care unit, perhaps for an indefinite period, as many countries now believe that the negotiations were conducted not as a genuine path to compromise but as a strategic instrument.
The consequences of assassinating Ayatollah Khamenei could go beyond the killing of a head of state. He was one of the leading religious authorities (marajiʿ) in the Shiite world, and the U.S. action could be interpreted as a declaration of war against Shiite religious authorities. Consequently, some Shiite clerics have already issued fatwas of jihad and have called on Muslims around the world to avenge the assassination of Ayatollah Khamenei by targeting the United States and Israel. Attacks have taken place against U.S. diplomatic missions in Pakistan and Iraq, and dozens of Shiites have been killed or injured. Washington must therefore be concerned about a long-term ideological hostility from religious Shiites across the globe.
The collapse of the government in Iran as a result of military attack is not a simple matter. Even assuming that the United States and Israel succeed in bringing about regime change, they would still be the losers. Because:
- For the first time since World War II, the most important U.S. military bases have come under attack—a reputational blow to the United States’s prestige far greater than the hostage-taking of American diplomats in Iran.
- Israel and Iran have entered an existential phase of conflict. Iran has sustained severe military blows, while Israel has faced the most intense military attacks on its territory since World War II. Iran’s heavy missile strikes against Israel have exposed the fragility of Israel’s military and security structures.
Following the assassination of Iran’s leader, within less than 48 hours a three-member leadership council was formed in accordance with the constitution, and the next leader of Iran will be appointed by the Assembly of Experts.
With the second U.S. and Israeli military attack, several significant and troubling developments have occurred. First, by assassinating Iran’s leader, the United States crossed a red line of Iran’s current system of governance. Second, the United States officially declared that its objective is the collapse of the Iranian government; therefore, Iran’s response is framed as a defense of its very existence. Third, it was already clear that the conflict would become regional—which it has—and Iran has launched missile attacks against U.S. facilities in the region.
Ultimately, it would be better for President Trump to take the initiative for an immediate ceasefire in order to prevent further catastrophes.
https://www.thecairoreview.com/essays/of-bombs-and-regime-change/
