Iranian Nukes and International Law: Lessons from the Cuban Missile Crisis

A few weeks ago, John wrote about the dearth of public discussion of legal issues related to a possible Israeli or U.S. strike against Iranian nuclear program facilities.  Following up on that, I've published a short essay on lessons from the Cuban Missile Crisis about the roles international law may play in a possible showdown with Iran. As many Lawfare readers know, exactly 50 years ago this week, President Kennedy gave a televised address announcing the U.S. naval "quarantine" of Cuba.  He explained, in language that might well fit the Iran situation:

Neither the United States of America nor the world community of nations can tolerate deliberate deception and offensive threats on the part of any nation, large or small. We no longer live in a world where only the actual firing of weapons represents a sufficient challenge to a nation's security to constitute maximum peril. Nuclear weapons are so destructive and ballistic missiles are so swift, that any substantially increased possibility of their use or any sudden change in their deployment may well be regarded as a definite threat to peace.

This was a strategic and political argument, not a legal one.  As I argue in my essay, though, strategy and law were entwined in that crisis and would be in any future military action against Iran.