In an exclusive commentary for the F.A.Z., former constitutional judge Andreas Paulus argues that many international law experts are oversimplifying the complex legal issues related to Iran, especially in the context of the ongoing Gaza conflict. He specifically critiques the prevailing opinion that suggests Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyah should be arrested if he visits Germany, a stance that reflects deep divisions among legal scholars regarding the implications of international law on government actions. Paulus believes that this view overlooks crucial legal questions that should be considered in such discussions.

Furthermore, a significant portion of the German legal community has increasingly opposed the German government's stance on Iran and its military support to Israel. Paulus highlights that while the government has been consistently reluctant to commit to a definitive stance on Israeli actions in the Gaza war, many international law experts challenge the legitimacy of such support given their interpretations of international law. The commentary suggests that a more nuanced understanding is necessary, one that takes into account the complexities of international relations and treaties.

The German government is currently fighting a legal battle at the International Court of Justice to maintain its arms shipments to Israel, resisting calls to halt these operations. Many international law experts assert that the U.S.-Israeli strategy towards the Iranian regime might violate international norms, making it critical for policymakers to grapple with these legal perspectives. Paulus's piece invites a deeper exploration of the legal frameworks governing such international conflicts, suggesting that simplistic interpretations are insufficient to address the serious implications of these international relations.