The Twelve-Day Iran-Israel War and Reconsidering the Criterion of Immediacy in States’ Self-Defense through the Use of Artificial Intelligence

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

1 PhD student in International Law, Department of Law, Na.C, Islamic Azad University, Najafabad, Iran

2 . Professor, Department of Law, Na.C, Islamic Azad University, Najafabad, Iran

3 Assistant Professor, Department of Law, Na.C, Islamic Azad University, Najafabad, Iran

10.22099/jls.2026.55451.5459

Abstract

Introduction
Developments arising from the twelve‑day war between Iran and Israel in 2025 once again highlighted the issue of the use of force and the conditions for invoking self‑defense in international law. One of the key elements in assessing the legality of self‑defense is the criterion of “immediacy,” traditionally understood as the need for a prompt response to an armed attack. However, the emergence of modern threats such as hybrid warfare, cyber operations, and data‑driven security environments has challenged the classical understanding of this requirement. In many contemporary situations, threats develop gradually through multiple indicators, making it more difficult to determine when the threshold of an armed attack has been crossed. At the same time, advances in artificial intelligence enable the rapid




The Twelve-Day Iran-Israel War and Reconsidering the Criterion of Immediacy …




analysis of large volumes of intelligence and security data. Accordingly, this study aims to reconsider the concept of immediacy in contemporary international law and to examine the capacities and limitations of artificial intelligence in assessing imminent threats, using the twelve‑day war between Iran and Israel as a case study.
 
Methods
This study adopts an analytical‑exploratory approach with an interdisciplinary perspective. It first examines the legal foundations of the requirement of immediacy within the framework of Article 51 of the United Nations Charter and the principles of necessity and proportionality. It then analyzes transformations in the nature of contemporary threats, particularly hybrid warfare and cyber operations. The research is based on the analysis of legal sources and scholarly literature, alongside a qualitative case study of the twelve‑day war between Iran and Israel in order to assess the role of data‑driven analysis and artificial intelligence technologies in evaluating threats and supporting decisions related to self‑defense.
 
Results and Discussion
The findings indicate that the traditional understanding of immediacy as a strictly instantaneous response to an armed attack is increasingly inadequate in contemporary conflict environments. In the case of the twelve‑day war between Iran and Israel, the evaluation of potential self‑defense situations was not limited to a single overt military act but rather involved the interpretation of a complex set of intelligence indicators, security assessments, cyber activities, and patterns of hostile conduct. This suggests that determining whether the threshold of an armed attack has been reached often requires the simultaneous analysis of diverse and rapidly evolving sources of information. Artificial intelligence technologies can assist in this process by enabling the rapid processing and analysis of large volumes of military, intelligence, and security data. Through pattern recognition, predictive analytics, and large‑scale data processing, AI systems can help identify emerging threats and generate real‑time assessments that support decision‑makers in evaluating the immediacy of potential attacks. Nevertheless, the study also demonstrates that the assessment of immediacy retains both objective and subjective dimensions. The objective dimension relates to the existence of verifiable evidence indicating an imminent threat, while the subjective dimension concerns the perception and judgment of the state facing that threat at the moment of decision‑making. AI technologies can strengthen the objective dimension by providing comprehensive data analysis and improving situational awareness. However, the legality of invoking self‑defense ultimately requires normative interpretation, legal reasoning, and the evaluation of principles such as necessity and proportionality. For this reason, decisions concerning the use of force cannot be delegated entirely to algorithmic systems. Instead, artificial intelligence should function as a supportive analytical tool that enhances the informational basis of decision‑making without replacing human legal judgment. The findings further suggest that the integration of artificial intelligence into assessments of immediacy must be accompanied by appropriate legal and institutional safeguards. These safeguards include effective human oversight over AI‑assisted analytical processes, transparency regarding the algorithms and datasets used in threat analysis, mechanisms to detect and mitigate algorithmic bias, and the preservation of state accountability for decisions taken on the basis of technological assessments. Without such safeguards, excessive reliance on AI may lead to inaccurate threat evaluations and potentially encourage overly broad interpretations of the right of self‑defense.




Volume 18, Issue 1, Spring 2026
 




 
 
Conclusion
The study concludes that revisiting the requirement of immediacy in contemporary international law requires a careful balance between technological innovation and the normative framework governing the use of force. Artificial intelligence can enhance states’ analytical capacity to detect emerging threats and support more timely assessments of potential attacks. However, its use must remain subject to human legal judgment, transparency, and accountability in order to ensure that technological tools complement rather than undermine the fundamental principles of international law.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

Asser Institute. (2024). Experts urge immediate safeguards on military use of AI decision support systems. (https://www.asser.nl/about-the-asser-institute/news/experts-urge-immediate-safeguards-on-military-use-of-ai-decision-support-systems/)
Burri, T. & Trusilo, D. (2024). Ethical Artificial Intelligence: An Approach to Evaluating Disembodied Autonomous Systems. Rain Liivoja and Ann Väljataga (eds), Autonomous Cyber Capabilities in International Law, 2021, Tallinn, NATO Cooperative Cyber Defence Centre of Excellence, p. 51-66
Black, J., et al. (2024). Strategic competition in the age of AI. RAND Europe, 01-114.
Budacu, D. (2024). The Impact of Artificial Intelligence on Hybrid Conflicts in the 21st Century. Editura Universitatii Lucian Blaga din Sibiu, 87-108
Burri, T. (2021). The New Regulation of the European Union on Artificial Intelligence: Fuzzy Ethics Diffuse into Domestic Law and Sideline International Law, The Cambridge Handbook of Responsible Artificial Intelligence, CUP, 2022, pp. 104-122
Canadian Artificial Intelligence and Data Act (AIDA). (2024). (https://ised-isde.canada.ca/site/innovation-better-canada/en/artificial-intelligence-and-data-act-aida-companion-document)
Csernatoni, R. (2024). Governing Military AI Amid a Geopolitical Minefield. Online Published, Published on July 17, 2024, https://carnegieendowment.org/research/2024/07/governing-military-ai-amid-a-geopolitical-minefield?lang=en.
Cheverton, D. (2025). Second-order impacts of civil artificial intelligence regulation on defense: Why the national security community must engage. Report June 30, 2025, https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/in-depth-research-reports/report/second-order-impacts-of-civil-artificial-intelligence-regulation-on-defense-why-the-national-security-community-must-engage/
Chad Gellers, J. & Gunkel, D.J. (2022). Artificial Intelligence and International Human Rights Law: Implications for Humans and Technology in the 21st Century and Beyond. n A. Zwitter and O.J. Gstrein (Eds.), Handbook on the Politics and Governance of Big Data and Artificial Intelligence. Cheltenham, 01-29.
Clapp, S. (2025). Defence and Artificial Intelligence. European Parliamentary Research Service (EPRS). Members’ Research Service. (569), 01-12.
Corn, G. & Talbot Jensen, E. (2023). “Attacking” Big Data: Strategic Competition, the Race for AI, and the International Law of Cyber Sabotage. BYU Law Research Paper No. 23-48.
Digmelashvili, T. (2023). The Impact of Cyberwarfare on the National Security. Future Human Image, (19), 12-23.
Dataprocorp. (2024). The Role of Natural Language Processing in Legal Data Analysis. [https://dataprocorp.tech/the-role-of-natural-language-processing-in-legal-data-analysis/](https://dataprocorp.tech/the-role-of-natural-language-processing-in-legal-data-analysis/)
Deeks, A. & Lubell, N. & Murray, D. (2020). Machine Learning, Artificial Intelligence, and the Use of Force by States. Journal of National Security Law & Policy (2019, Forthcoming), Virginia Public Law and Legal Theory Research Paper, (2018), 63-90.
Deeks, A. (2024). Using Artificial Intelligence in Warfare Creates Constitutional Concerns, Argues Professor, https://www.law.virginia.edu/news/202410/using-artificial-intelligence-warfare-creates-constitutional-concerns-argues-professor.
Esmaeili, M., Alizadeh, N. (2025). Feasibility analysis of Al-Aqsa storm operation in the light of the right of legitimate defense. Journal of Legal Studies, 16(4) 281-314. [In Persian].
European Parliament. (2024). [Artificial intelligence and human rights: Using AI as a weapon and for security, (https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/IDAN/2024/754450/EXPO_IDA(2024)754450_EN.pdf)
European Defence Agency. (2025). TRUSTWORTHINESS FOR AI IN DEFENCE, (https://eda.europa.eu/docs/default-source/brochures/taid-white-paper-final-09052025.pdf)
Facaros, D.J. (2018). Destroying the Caroline: The Frontier Raid That Reshaped the Right to War. Irwin Law. https://globaljustice.queenslaw.ca/news/book-review-destroying-the-caroline-the-frontier-raid-that-reshaped-the-right-to-war-by-craig-forcese-may-2018-irwin-law.
Gabriel Wood, N. (2024). Explainable AI in the military domain. article (29), 88-136.
Grimal, F & Pollard, M.J. (2022). Embodied Artificial Intelligence and Jus ad Bellum Necessity: Influence and Imminence in the Digital Age. Georgetown Journal of International Law, (05), 210-279.
Gul, S & Malik, W. (2024). Cyber Conflict and International Security: Legal Challenges and Strategic Solutions in Cyberspace, The Journal of Research Review, 1(04), 305–314. Retrieved from http://www.thejrr.com/index.php/39/article/view/54
Hashemi, S.M.A (226). Criminal Responsibility of intelligence organizations in applying counterintelligence rules in times of security crisis. Jornal of Legal Studies, 17(4), 71-106. [In Persian].
Herning Sitabuana, T. & Ranaivo Mikea Manitra, R. & Sanjaya, D. & Fulenzi Amri, I. (2024). THE URGENCY OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE CODE OF ETHICS, Indonesia Law Review 14(3), 147-169.
Sayyed, H. (2024). Artificial intelligence and criminal liability in India: exploring legal implications and challenges. Law, Criminology and Criminal Justice, Article: 2343195 | Received 01 Aug 2023, Accepted 11 Apr 2024, Published online: 19 Apr 2024, https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2024.2343195
Hu, X. & Liu, Sh. (2025). The legality and enlightenment of preventive self-defence in international counter-terrorism. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 12(879), 25-45.
Japan Guidelines. (2025). New Guidelines for Incorporating AI into Defense Equipment. (https://www.asianmilitaryreview.com/2025/06/japan-reveals-new-guidelines-for-incorporating-ai-into-defense-equipment/)
Johnston, K. (2025). Artificial Intelligence and the "Armed Attack" Threshold in International Law. International Law Studies, 106, 01-36.
Kumar, S. & Brown, G. & Ragavan, S. & Cerrato, M. & Nagar, G. (2025). NATO Self-Defense - Is Article 5 the Right Framework for Responding to Sub-kinetic Cyber Aggression? Texas A&M University School of Law Legal Studies Research Paper, 01-10.
Li, Y. & Liu, Q. (2021). A comprehensive review study of cyber-attacks and cyber security: Emerging trends and recent developments. Energy Reports, (7),19-38.
Leslie, D. & Maia Perini, A. (2024). Future Shock: Generative AI and the International AI Policy and Governance Crisis. Harvard Data Science Review, Special Issue 5: Grappling With the Generative AI Revolution, 01-92.
LinkSquares. (2024). How is AI Used in Legal Technology?. [https://linksquares.com/inhouse-insights/how-is-ai-used-in-legal-technology/](https://linksquares.com/inhouse-insights/how-is-ai-used-in-legal-technology
Linarelli, J. (2021). A Philosophy of Contract Law for Artificial Intelligence: Shared Intentionality. Martin Ebers, Cristina Poncibò, and Mimi Zou eds. Contracting and Contract Law in the Age of Artificial Intelligence (Hart, Forthcoming), 01-25.
Martínez Esponda, P. (2023). Norm-instability as a Strategy in International Lawmaking: The Case of Self-defence against Non-state Actors', in Nico Krisch, and Ezgi Yildiz (eds). The Many Paths of Change in International Law (Oxford, 2023; online edn, Oxford Academic, 14 Dec at: https://academic.oup.com/book/55327/chapter/428795311
Marushchak, A. & PetrovStanislav Petrov, S. & KhoperiyaAnayit Khoperiya, A. (2025). Countering AI-powered disinformation through national regulation: learning from the case of Ukraine. Machine Learning and Artificial Intelligence, (7), 01-25,| https://doi.org/10.3389/frai.2024.1474034
Mashkovich, D. (2024). Facing New Threats: Is International Law’s Self-Defense Sufficient?https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/facing-new-threats-international-laws-self-defense-din-mashkovich-tqs9f
Mirlohi, S.A (2026). The Doctrine of Asymmetric and Combined Response: An Analysis of Iran's Legal-Political Strategy in the Twelve-Day War. Journal of Legal Studies, 17(4), 41-70. [In Persian].
Mohammadpour, H., Hersani, S (2026). Examining the Military Objective Criterion in International Humanitarian Law: Emphasis on Israel's Attack on the Islamic Republic of Iran Broadcasting during the 12-Day War. Journal of Legal Studies, 17(4), 107-142. [In Persian].
Noguer I Alonso , M. & Chatzianastasiou, F.S. (2024). The Case for Artificial Intelligence Regulation in the Financial Industry. Artificial Intelligence in Finance Institute, Artificial Intelligence in Finance Institute, 01(02), 41-70.
Parentoni, L. (2021). LAW, TECHNOLOGY AND INNOVATION – v. II: Insights on Artificial Intelligence and the Law. UFMG Law School, https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3899552.
Pałka, P. & Jabłonowska, A. (2024). Consumer Law and Artificial Intelligence. Research Handbook on Law and Artificial Intelligence” Woodrow Barfield & Ugo Pagallo (eds.) Edward Elgar Publishing (2024).
Pacholska, M. (2022). Military Artificial Intelligence and the Principle of Distinction: A State Responsibility Perspective. Published online by Cambridge University Press: 13 December 2022.
Poesen, M. (2021). Regulating Artificial Intelligence (AI) in the European Union (EU): Exploring the Role of Private International Law. Recht in beweging – 29ste VRG-Alumnidag 2022 (Gompel&Svacina 2022), 297-314
Sadeghi, Didokht. (2013). International responsibility to protect and state sovereignty. Journal of International Relations Studies, 6, 133-156. [In Persian].
Schmitt, M.N. (2020). Autonomous cyber capabilities and the international law of sovereignty and intervention. International Law Studies, 01(96), 549-576. ISSN 2375-2831
Sharifi Tarazkoohi, H.; Mehrani, F. (2012). An analytical study of the conditions of the right to self-defense with emphasis on armed actions by states against attacks by international terrorist groups. Knowledge and Legal Research, 1, 66-111. [In Persian].
Sharifi Tarazkoohi, H.; Piri, H. (2012). Vital national interests in light of international judicial decisions. Journal of Public Law Research, 14, 6-37. [In Persian].
Stepanian, A. (2022). European Artificial Intelligence Act: Should Russia Implement the Same? Kutafin Law Review, 8(3), 403–422, doi: 10.17803/2313-5395.2021.3.17.403-422
Siregar, N. & Churul Aini, D. & Rehulina, R. & Yogi Subandi, A. (2024). The Use of Artificial Intelligence in Armed Conflict under International Law. Hasanuddin Law Review, 10(2):189-215 , DOI:10.20956/halrev.v10i2.5267
Schmitt, M.N. (2025). Interpreting the Law of Self-Defense. Jun 27, 2025, Online Publishing, https://lieber.westpoint.edu/interpreting-law-self-defense/.
United Nations Charter. (1945).
US Congress. (2024). Regulating Artificial Intelligence: U.S. and International Approaches. [PDF](https://www.congress.gov/crs_external_products/R/PDF/R48555/R48555.2.pdf)
Ugochukwu O. Matthew; Jazuli S. Kazaure; Amaonwu Onyebuchi; Ogobuchi Okey Daniel; Ibrahim Hassan Muhammed; Nwamaka U. Okafor. (2020). Artificial Intelligence Autonomous Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) System for Remote Sensing in Security Surveillance. Published in: 2020 IEEE 2nd International Conference on Cyberspac (CYBER NIGERIA)
Young, Stephen. (2022). Contesting Subjects: International Legal Discourses on Terrorism and Indigenous Peoples’ Human Rights. Asian Journal of International Law , First View, 01-36.
Ye, S. (2023). Research on the Right of Self-Defence from the Perspective of International Law. Lecture Notes in Education Psychology and Public Media, 5(1):844-852. DOI:10.54254/2753-7048/5/2022994
Williams, J. (2025). Military AI: Operational dangers and the regulatory void. https://www.diplomacy.edu/blog/why-military-ai-needs-urgent-regulation/
 
Cases
International Court of Justice (ICJ). (2003). Oil Platforms (Islamic Republic of Iran v. United States of America), Judgment.
International Court of Justice (ICJ). (2005). Armed Activities on the Territory of the Congo (Democratic Republic of the Congo v. Uganda), Judgment.
 

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics