The article emphasizes the ongoing erosion of international law, suggesting that in contemporary military conflicts, the interests of major powers overshadow legal frameworks that once provided a basis for peace. It highlights a recent discussion within the German government regarding the legal classification of Israeli and U.S. attacks on Iran, as indicated by Chancellor Merz and Foreign Minister Wadephul, who acknowledge that serious legal questions arise from these attacks. This shift in perspective comes after Merz referred to Israel's actions as 'dirty work' that is beneficial for the West, raising concerns about the consistent application of international law against aggressive regimes like that in Tehran.

The piece reflects a critical view of the situation, suggesting that while it is inappropriate to support regimes engaged in aggression, it is equally important to uphold legal standards regardless of the situation. The author argues that international law must be reaffirmed continuously; otherwise, it risks becoming irrelevant. This commentary seeks to provoke a re-evaluation of political narratives surrounding military actions and international relations, emphasizing the relevance of legality over convenience or political gain.

Ultimately, the article serves as an appeal for the German government and broader international community to adhere to legal principles, arguing that failure to do so not only undermines the rule of law but also sets a dangerous precedent in the global order. The discussion raises significant ethical and legal questions about the conduct of nations in times of conflict and the responsibilities of those in power to protect democratic values and uphold justice.