Is the Killing of Qasem Soleimani by the United States of America Legal Under International Law?

Abstract

General Qasem Soleimani, the Commander of Iran’s Quds Force was killed on 3rd January 2020 near Baghdad airport by a US drone strike. In the wake of the killing which has escalated tensions in the ever-volatile Middle East, one of the predominant questions has been on the legality or otherwise of the US strike. As a justification of the strikes, Trump’s Secretary of State, Mike Pompeo and other senior officials of the Trump administration have maintained that shortly before his killing, General Soleimani was planning multiple attacks on US military bases and diplomats in the Middle East. They also argue that the planned attacks on US interests were imminent and the killing was to disrupt the planned attacks and to deter future attacks. Trump also stated that the attack was not to start a war with Iran but to avoid a war. The argument advanced by the US is that of self-defense which is a legitimate use of force in international law. While the US is yet to make the evidence of the imminence of the planned attacks public, the imminent attacks argument is advanced to confer legality on the killing. Assuming there was an imminent threat of attack on US interests as claimed by Trump and senior administration officials, the question is whether the imminence of the planned attacks confers on the US a right of preemptive self-defense which renders the killing legal under international. This article seeks to answer this question through an analysis of the current normative order on use of force and the doctrine of self defense under international law.