The Doctrine of Asymmetric and Combined Response: An Analysis of Iran's Legal-Political Strategy in the Twelve-Day War

Document Type : Research Paper

Author

PhD graduate in Jurisprudence and Private Law, Shahid Motahari University and Graduate School, Tehran, Iran

10.22099/jls.2026.54478.5391

Abstract

Abstract
Technological developments in the sphere of international security have transformed the nature, scope, and speed of conflicts, confronting the classical paradigms of law and strategy with fundamental challenges. While the twentieth century was the era of symmetric warfare, the twenty-first century is characterized by asymmetric and hybrid threats operating in the "gray zone" between peace and war. The Twelve-Day War of Summer 1404 (2025), initiated by the Zionist regime's direct attacks on Iran's military and nuclear facilities, served as a turning point in modern conflicts. This event highlighted those legal concepts derived from the Westphalian order, such as the prohibition on the use of force (Article 2(4) of the UN Charter) and self-defense (Article 51), require redefinition to address the realities of the digital age. The core problem of this research stems from the tension between traditional law and modern technology. The primary objective is to analyze Iran's legal-strategic response to this aggression and to answer the question: What strategy did Iran adopt to legitimize its defensive actions against a technological and asymmetric threat? The Doctrine of Asymmetric and Combined Response: An Analysis of Iran's Legal-Political …
Methods
This research employs an analytical-descriptive approach, relying on a "documented case study" method. The study first examines the theoretical foundations of the "right to self-defense" and the legal challenges posed by emerging technologies, utilizing sources such as the "Tallinn Manual" to interpret cyber operations within the framework of armed attacks. Subsequently, the article conducts a detailed analysis of the Twelve-Day War's timeline, evaluating the military and cyber actions of both parties. The methodology involves scrutinizing the legal arguments presented by both sides—specifically Israel's invocation of the "preemptive defense" doctrine versus Iran's reliance on "self-defense" and "countermeasures"—against customary international law criteria such as necessity, proportionality, and immediacy. The focus is on extracting Iran's strategic behavioral pattern from operational data and official political stances. 
Results and Discussion
The findings indicate that Israel's initial military strike on June 13, 2025, justified under the rejected doctrine of "preemptive defense," lacked the prerequisite of an "imminent threat" and thus constituted a clear violation of international law and an act of aggression. In response, the analysis reveals that Iran, rather than engaging in a symmetric response (e.g., air-to-air combat), implemented an innovative doctrine termed the "Asymmetric and Hybrid Response Doctrine." This doctrine comprised three simultaneous components:
Asymmetric Kinetic Response: Iran shifted the battlefield from air superiority (the enemy's advantage) to missile and drone warfare. "Operation True Promise 3," involving hundreds of ballistic missiles targeting strategic Israeli infrastructure, was designed to impose direct costs and psychological shock, justified legally under Article 51.
Offensive Cyber Warfare: Complementing the kinetic strikes, Iran launched extensive cyberattacks against Israel's critical infrastructure (banking, media, services). The strategic goal was the "functional paralysis" of the enemy's society, framed as legitimate countermeasures against prior Israeli sabotage.
Expansion of the Front (Gray Zone): The activation of proxy actors, such as the Houthis, to launch attacks from different fronts served to exhaust Israel's air defense resources and create "legal ambiguity" regarding state attribution.
The discussion highlights that this "legal-military" conflict exposed the inefficacy of collective security institutions like the UN Security Council and demonstrated how both parties utilized international law as a tool.
Conclusions
The research concludes that Iran successfully combined classical deterrence with modern asymmetric warfare tools to execute a unique "legal-operational strategy." This approach not only responded to the immediate threat but also aimed to shape future legal norms in cyberspace. However, the conflict underscored significant gaps in international humanitarian law, particularly regarding the protection of dual-use infrastructure in hybrid wars. The article suggests that adapting to these new realities requires the formulation of a "Digital Additional Protocol" to the Geneva Conventions and the establishment of an independent international body for the technical attribution of cyberattacks to prevent miscalculations and the escalation of future conflicts.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

References
ABC7NY (2025). Iranian hackers may conduct malicious cyber activity, US agencies warn. (Viewed on October 8, 2025) at: https://abc7ny.com/post/iran-news-today-iranian-hackers-may-conduct-malicious-cyber-activity-us-agencies-warn/16888067/
Andress, J., & Winterfeld, S. (2013). Cyber Warfare: Techniques, Tactics and Tools for Security Practitioners. Elsevier.
Ansar Security Consultants (2025). From the First Shot Doctrine to Human Rights Violations in the 12-Day War. (Viewed on October 8, 2025) at: https://www.mashreghnews.ir/news/1737257/ [In Persian]
Atlantic Council (2025). What the Israel-Iran conflict revealed about wartime cyber operations. (Viewed on October 8, 2025) at: https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/new-atlanticist/what-the-israel-iran-conflict-revealed-about-wartime-cyber-operations/
Bílková, V. (2020). State Responsibility for Cyber Operations by Non-State Actors. Czech Yearbook of Public and Private International Law, 11, 127-145.
Binding Hook (2025). How Israel and Iran Brought Cyber Conflict to Centre Stage. (Viewed on October 8, 2025) at: https://bindinghook.com/how-israel-and-iran-brought-cyber-conflict-to-centre-stage/
Brownlie, I. (2008). Principles of Public International Law. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Cassese, A. (2019). International Law. Translated by Morteza Kalantarian, Tehran: Shahr Danesh. [In Persian]
Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) (2023). PRC State-Sponsored Actors Compromise and Maintain Persistent Access to U.S. Critical Infrastructure. (Viewed on October 8, 2025) at: https://www.cisa.gov/news-events/cybersecurity-advisories/aa23-335a
Dinstein, Y. (2011). War, Aggression and Self-Defence. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
EU Council (2025). Statement by the High Representative on behalf of the European Union on the malicious cyber activity in the Middle East. Brussels.
Fars News Agency (2025). Disclosure of Israel's Cyber Operations Network in Iran + Document. (Viewed on October 8, 2025) at: https://farsnews.ir/aa_mir78/1759645499439499512/ [In Persian]
Farwell, J. P., & Rohozinski, R. (2011). Stuxnet and the Future of Cyber War. Survival, 53(1), 23–40.
Fazaeli, M. (2024). Cyber Sovereignty in Light of International Law. Strategic Studies Quarterly, 26(1), 7-30. [In Persian]
Franck, T. M. (2002). Recourse to Force: State Action Against Threats and Armed Attacks. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Gerke, M. (2019). Ahead of the Curve: Due Diligence in International Cybersecurity Law. Global Affairs, 5(4-5), 419-431.
Gharibabadi, K. (2021). Nuclear Diplomacy and Iran's Deterrence Doctrine. Tehran: Soroush Publications. [In Persian]
Giles, K. (2016). Handbook of Russian Information Warfare. NATO Defense College.
Glennon, M. J. (2003). The Fog of Law: Self-Defense, Inherence, and Incoherence in Article 51 of the United Nations Charter. Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy, 25(2), 539-558.
Gray, C. (2018). International Law and the Use of Force. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hathaway, O. A., et al. (2012). The Law of Cyber-Attack. California Law Review, 100(4), 817–886.
Hoffman, F. G. (2007). Conflict in the 21st Century: The Rise of Hybrid Wars. Arlington, VA: Potomac Institute for Policy Studies.
Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses (IDSA) (2025). The 12-Day War: Cyber Frontlines Between Israel and Iran. (Viewed on October 8, 2025) at: https://www.idsa.in/publisher/comments/the-12-day-war-cyber-frontlines-between-israel-and-iran
International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) (2005). Customary International Humanitarian Law, Volume I: Rules. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
International Court of Justice (ICJ) (1949). Corfu Channel Case (United Kingdom v. Albania), Merits, Judgment. ICJ Reports 1949.
International Court of Justice (ICJ) (1986). Military and Paramilitary Activities in and Against Nicaragua (Nicaragua v. United States of America), Merits, Judgment. ICJ Reports 1986.
International Institute for Iranian Studies (Rasanah) (2025). Analyzing the Strategic Impacts of the Israel-Iran War. (Viewed on October 8, 2025) at: https://iranthinktanks.com/analyzing-the-strategic-impacts-of-the-israel-iran-war
International Law Commission (ILC) (2001). Draft Articles on Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts.
Iranian Association for UN Studies (IAUNS) (2025). Legal Analysis of the Israeli Attack on Iran: Answering a Few Questions. (Viewed on October 8, 2025) at: https://unstudies.ir/iauns-forum/تحلیل-حقوقی-حمله-اسرائیل-به-ایران:-پاسخ-به-چند-پرسش/ [In Persian]
Iranian Diplomacy (2025). Assessing the Impacts of the 12-Day War on the Military Doctrines of Iran and Israel. (Viewed on October 8, 2025) at: http://www.irdiplomacy.ir/fa/news/2035015/ [In Persian]
Islamic Parliament Research Center (IPRC) (2025). Legal Dimensions of the Aggressive Attack by the Zionist Regime on the Islamic Republic of Iran. (Viewed on October 8, 2025) at: https://rc.majlis.ir/fa/news/show/1843363 [In Persian]
Jamshidi, M. (2023). International Responsibility of the State for Cyber Attacks by Non-State Actors. Journal of Legal Studies, 15(3), 93-118. [In Persian]
Jennings, R., & Watts, A. (Eds.). (1992). Oppenheim's International Law (9th ed., Vol. 1). London: Longman.
Jensen, E. T. (2018). The Tallinn Manual 2.0: Highlights and Insights. Georgetown Journal of International Law, 49(3), 775-799.
Jerusalem Post (JPost) (2025). How IDF, Mossad neutralized Iran's air defenses in 12-day war. (Viewed on October 8, 2025) at: https://www.jpost.com/middle-east/article-863827
Lieber Institute at West Point (2025). Non-State Cyber Actors, the 12-Day War, and the Gray Zone of LOAC, Part I. (Viewed on October 8, 2025) at: https://lieber.westpoint.edu/non-state-cyber-actors-12-day-war-gray-zone-loac-part-i/
Lin, H. (2012). Cyber Conflict and National Security. New York: The National Academies Press.
Nextgov (2025). New research shows Iran’s expansive cyber offensive during 12-Day War with Israel. (Viewed on October 8, 2025) at: https://www.nextgov.com/cybersecurity/2025/08/new-research-shows-irans-expansive-cyber-offensive-during-12-day-war-israel/407207/
Nezam Masael (2025). A Strategic Analysis of the 12-Day War: Present and Future. (Viewed on October 8, 2025) at: https://nezammasael.com/?p=2147 [In Persian]
Politico (2025). U.S. gave tacit support to Israeli strikes that triggered war with Iran. (Viewed on October 8, 2025) at: https://www.politico.com/news/2025/06/22/us-israel-iran-war-cyber-attacks-00417782
Rid, T. (2013). Cyber War Will Not Take Place. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Roscini, M. (2014). Cyber Operations and the Use of Force in International Law. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Rostami, S. (2022). The Principle of Non-Intervention and the Threshold of Sovereignty in Cyberspace. Journal of Legal Studies, 14(2), 155-178. [In Persian]
Salimi, H. (2019). Theoretical and Practical Dimensions of the National Security Doctrine of the Islamic Republic of Iran. Tehran: Allameh Tabataba'i University Press. [In Persian]
Schmitt, M. N. (Ed.). (2017). Tallinn Manual 2.0 on the International Law Applicable to Cyber Operations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Security Scorecard (2025). From the Depths of the Shadows: IRGC and Hacker Collectives of the 12-Day War. (Viewed on October 8, 2025) at: https://securityscorecard.com/blog/from-the-depths-of-the-shadows-irgc-and-hacker-collectives-of-the-12-day-war/ Access-Date) at: [Link to WSJ article, e.g., https://www.wsj.com/...]
Sharifi, M. (2023). A Critique on the Approach of the Iranian Legislator towards Green Criminality. Journal of Legal Studies, 15(1), 64-92. [In Persian]
Sofaer, A. D. (2003). On the Necessity of Pre-emption. European Journal of International Law, 14(2), 209-226.
Tabrizi, B. (2018). Iran's Cyber Power: A Study of its Strategic Dimensions. Middle East Policy, 25(1), 89-103.
Tasnim News Agency (2025). A Review of the Fiqhi-Legal Dimensions of the 12-Day War of the Zionist Regime against Iran. (Viewed on October 8, 2025) at: https://www.tasnimnews.com/fa/news/1404/05/09/3366369/ [In Persian]
Tehran International Studies & Research Institute (2025). The Visible and Hidden Dimensions of the Inefficiency of International Law in the 12-Day War. (Viewed on October 8, 2025) at: http://iict.ac.ir/1404/04/ [In Persian]
The Record (2025). Widespread internet outages reported in Iran amid conflict with Israel. (Viewed on October 8, 2025) at: https://therecord.media/iran-internet-outages-israel-conflict
Tikk, E., & Kaska, K. (2017). Due Diligence in Cyberspace. Tallinn: NATO CCDCOE Publications.
United Nations (1945). Charter of the United Nations. 1 UNTS XVI.
United States Marine Corps University (USMCU) (2025). Forecasting Iranian Government Responses to Cyberattacks. (Viewed on October 8, 2025) at: https://www.usmcu.edu/Outreach/Marine-Corps-University-Press/MCU-Journal/JAMS-vol-13-no-1/Forecasting-Iranian-Government-Responses-to-Cyberattacks/
Wall Street Journal (2025). Israel is running low on Arrow interceptor missiles, U.S. official says. (Viewed on October 8, 2025) at: [Note: Full URL needed if available, e.g., https://www.wsj.com/...]
Waxman, M. C. (2011). Cyber-Attacks and the Use of Force: A Primer. Yale Journal of International Law, 36(2), 421-450.
Zafari, M. et al. (2023). The Legal Basis of Preemptive Self-Defense in International Law. Foreign Relations Quarterly, 15(3), 199-220. [In Persian]
Zamani, S. Q. (2022). International Law and Cyber Security. Tehran: Shahr Danesh Institute for Legal Studies and Research. [In Persian]
Zamanian, M. (2022). Strategic Legal Studies: The Application of International Law as a Foreign Policy Tool. Tehran: Mizan Publishing. [In Persian]
Zetter, K. (2014). Countdown to Zero Day: Stuxnet and the Launch of the World's First Digital Weapon. New York: Crown Publishing Group.

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics