JEFF CHILDERS

Iran is illegal and breaks international laws or something. On Wednesday, the New York Times quietly reported, “U.N. Security Council Condemns Iran’s Retaliatory Strikes in the Middle East.” The sub-headline added, “In an overwhelming vote, the council backed a resolution condemning Iran. A Russian proposal calling for an end to the war that didn’t assign blame or even name the parties was rejected.”

It wasn’t even close. In fact, the vote established the single largest coalition around a UN Security Council resolution in history. Thirteen of fifteen Security Council members agreed —Russia and China abstained but did not oppose it— and a historically ‘overwhelming’ 135 other member nations joined in condemning Iran. Not condemning Trump. Not condemning the United States. Iran.

The Security Council —the body that defines international law— called Iran’s attacks against its neighbors “a breach of international law and a serious threat to international peace and security.” Iran is the threat. Iran is breaking international law.

Russia attempted to pass a bland, competing resolution addressing the broader war and generally calling on “all parties” to stop fighting (without blaming anyone). Even that weak gesture still failed: only 4 votes in favor, 2 against, 9 abstentions. It probably didn’t help much that Russia is currently attacking Ukraine. Being engaged in active hostilities against your neighbor is not a particularly compelling look when calling for somebody else to quit fighting. The jokes write themselves.

In any event, neither Russia nor China formally criticized the US.

Meanwhile, Democrats and legacy media pundits continue to insist Trump’s Iran campaign is “illegal” and violates international law. Just this week, Senate Democrats pushed a War Powers resolution to halt the operation, questioned whether Trump had already committed “war crimes,” and the New York Times’ live blog has helpfully reminded readers approximately forty-seven times that Trump never got congressional authorization.

What about international law! The rules-based order! Won’t somebody think of the norms!

But, now that the world’s premier international law body looked at the situation and decided to condemn Iran, will Democrats modify their stance? (The UN didn’t even condemn Israel, which is probably another record.) Somehow, I imagine that Democrats will keep on forgetting to mention this vote, as they and their media allies have done ever since the vote was taken.

But my goodness. With a historic vote showing UN unanimity like never before in human history, you’d almost think the rules-based international order they keep invoking actually agrees with Trump on Iran. That’s a very inconvenient fact when their entire argument depends on him being the rogue actor. Just. Saying.

……

IRAN HAS NO FRIENDS