Supplying arms for free is not generally considered an act of war. It’s this consensus that Western powers rely on when supplying weapons to Ukraine. However, one might observe that Russia doesn’t accept that. Of course Putin isn’t that concerned by the niceties of International Law, though even he will seek a veneer of legal cover for his actions. it’s the fear of mutually assured destruction that holds him back from direct conflict with NATO.
However, the consensus assumption does leave us with a big question. What about the actions of Iran over the years? After the October 7th attacks I argued that Israel’s only way to deal with the terror organisations on their doorstep was to go to the source. It has frequently been acknowledged that Iran exercises it’s malign influenced beyond immediate military reach through use of proxies both in the Middle East and around the world.
My argument is that this network of proxies and terror cells goes beyond the supply of weapons. I would argue too that the decision by the UN to support military action into Afghanistan in 2001 to deal with Al Quaeda following 911 supports the principle.
This is an area that International Lawyers should be paying more attention to.
Faithroots 