AhlulBayt News Agency (ABNA): According to the secretariat of the Scientific-Research Center for Religion and Civilization: At the closing session of the Reparations Specialized School, the strategic and legal dimensions of claiming reparations from hostile states during the "Ramadan War" were analyzed. The session, presented by Dr. Abdullah Hadi Goshayesh, focused on components of international law, the jurisprudential foundations of "defensive jihad," and the field requirements of "sustainable deterrence," emphasizing the need to convert military victories into economic and legal gains.
Dr. Hadi Goshayesh stated, "The legitimacy of claiming reparations for the Islamic Republic of Iran is based on two solid foundations:
- Jurisprudential Foundations: Citing the rules of "al-Itlaf" (causing loss) and "absolute liability" (the rule of liability for another's property), as well as the principle of "reciprocity" in defensive jihad (Qur'an, Al-Baqarah: 194), the right to claim damages from the aggressor enemy is defined as a religious and legal right. Experts, referring to the conduct of the Infallible Imams (a.s.) and the opinions of contemporary jurists, consider defensive jihad a legitimate platform for demanding the restoration of the previous state and compensation for damages incurred."
He further noted, "According to international standards based on the 'State Responsibility' draft articles (ILC), the action of the United States and its allies in starting the Ramadan War constitutes a clear violation of Article 2(4) of the UN Charter and the commission of an 'internationally wrongful act.' Experts, referring to historical cases such as 'Nicaragua' and 'Uganda,' emphasized that proving aggression through official documentation provides the necessary legal basis for filing a reparations claim."
This university professor stated, "The Ramadan War is a clear instance of aggression and damage. The damages inflicted on vital infrastructure (including refineries, schools, hospitals, and bridges) during the U.S. and Israeli airstrikes constitute not only violations of the Geneva Conventions but also crimes against humanity. From a strategic perspective, attacks on civilian targets (such as the Minab school) as 'documented crimes' have strengthened Iran's legal leverage in international courts.
Hadi Goshayesh stated, "The field balance is the driving force for enforcing rights. The mere existence of legal documentation is not sufficient to receive reparations from a state like the United States; therefore, 'power' is the sole guarantee of enforcement. The emphasized field requirements are:
- Dominance over energy chokepoints: Maintaining and consolidating control over the Strait of Hormuz and developing the ability to exert power over regional waterways act as an 'operational enforcement guarantee' alongside legal tools.
- Asymmetric and attrition warfare: Utilizing proxy capabilities, cyber operations (such as the actions of the Hanzala hacking group), and intelligence superiority in monitoring enemy movements has maximized Iran's bargaining power.
- Pressure on regional allies: Experts believe that while claiming reparations from a great power (the U.S.) is difficult, the Arab countries of the Persian Gulf, due to their high vulnerability to 'energy blockage' and investment collapse, are more realistic and accessible targets for recovering war damages."
At the end of the session, Dr. Hadi Goshayesh stated the final conclusion: "For the practical realization of 'war reparations,' Iran needs a hybrid strategy:
1. Precise documentation of crimes for use in specialized diplomacy.
2. Maintaining a 'finger on the trigger' status in the Strait of Hormuz to impose unbearable costs on the economies of hostile states.
3. Exploiting political rifts in the enemy camp arising from internal protests against warmongering governments."
"The Islamic Republic of Iran, relying on field superiority and jurisprudential-legal legitimacy, will pursue its right at all levels, and 'reparations' are not merely a financial demand but part of strategic deterrence to prevent the repetition of aggression in the future."
**************
End/ 345E
