Suchergebnisse

1International Court of Justice — Alleged violations of Treaty of Amity, Economic Relations, and Consular Rights, 1955 — Alleged violations of customary rules of international law on sovereign immunity — Preliminary objections — Jurisdiction of the Court — Admissibility of claimsInternational Court of Justice — Jurisdiction — Jurisdiction under Article XXI(2) of Treaty of Amity, Economic Relations, and Consular Rights, 1955 — Jurisdiction ratione materiae — Article XX(1)(c) and (d) of 1955 Treaty — Whether 1955 Treaty including restrictions on scope of International Court of Justice jurisdiction — Issue already decided in Court's earlier jurisprudence — Confirmation of earlier findings — Whether certain provisions of 1955 Treaty incorporating rules of customary international law on sovereign immunity — Article IV(2) — Article XI(4) — Article III(2) — Article IV(1) — Article X(1) — Definition of "company" under Article III(1) of 1955 Treaty — Whether Central Bank of Iran a "company" under 1955 Treaty — Relevance of an entity's functions for it to be a "company" under 1955 Treaty — Determination of functions a matter for merits — Whether objection possessing an exclusively preliminary characterClaims — Admissibility of claims — Abuse of process — Distinction from abuse of rights — Abuse of process not a new objection — Re-characterisation of objection — Exceptional circumstances not present — Unclean hands — Allegations of sponsoring terrorism — No decision on status of unclean hands doctrine under international law — Whether conditions for unclean hands doctrine satisfied in the circumstances

The Biden administration's Oct. 27 attempt to deter Iran and its proxies from further strikes on U.S. bases in Iraq and Syria has failed, as the militias launched an additional 21 attacks since that date.
The post U.S. launches second strike on Iranian assets in Syria first appeared on FDD's Long War Journal.

After American diplomatic and consular personnel in Iran were taken hostage in that country, the United States Treasury on November 14, 1979 promulgated the Iranian Assets Control Regulations. The regulations were of a sweeping character and, among other things, prohibited the Government of Iran, Iranian governmental entities, and Iran's central bank from transferring or withdrawing dollar-denominated deposits held with foreign branches and subsidiaries of U.S. commercial banks (as well as deposits with domestic offices) without authorization by the Treasury. Iran's central bank, Bank Markazi Iran, instituted suits in London and Paris to obtain court orders for withdrawal of its funds, notwithstanding the U.S. "freeze." Those suits were essentially mooted by the Algeria-United States-Iran declarations and agreements of January 19 and 20, 1981, which provided for transfer of these funds as part of the arrangement to release the American hostages held by the Iranian authorities. While the litigation in London and Paris is now inactive, it raised issues that deserve thought because they are not necessarily unique and may arise again in other situations.

In response to a spate of attacks on U.S. bases in Iraq and Syria by Iran-backed militias, the U.S. military struck two IRGC weapons storage sites in Syria. After years of largely ignoring these strikes, the Biden administration wants to deter the militias from future assaults. It may be too late.
The post U.S. military strikes Iranian assets in Syria after weeks of militia attacks first appeared on FDD's Long War Journal.