[sfmz]

Warning bells are going off in the international community about an imminent attack by Iran on Israel. If it comes, it won’t come be because Iran was unprovoked, as Israel has been provoking Iran into an attack for the last three years by its regular bombing of Iranian bases in Syria, which so far has not worked. Seemingly to increase the provocation, In the first week of April, Israel bombed Iran’s embassy in Damascus, which is a clear violation of diplomatic immunity and which no nation does including in wartime out of respect to other nation’s diplomatic missions.

This bombing provocation went even further than violating embassy sovereignty by Israel killing several of Iran’s high ranking military officers which were meeting in an embassy annex at the time. Israel could not have known about this meeting without high level penetration of Iranian and Syrian governments by Israeli spies. So, just as the war on Hamas was started by inviting the attack by the IDF pulling out most of its soldiers from Southern Israel and leaving it wide open and vulnerable, Israel is apparently itching for a fight with Iran by provoking it. In short, if war comes, Israel will be just as responsible for it as Iran.

https://worldaffairsbrief.com/

[tzs]

> Israel bombed Iran’s embassy in Damascus, which is a clear violation of diplomatic immunity

That is not correct. Protection of embassies only applies against the host country.

[tzs]

Here's an article that goes into more detail on what international law says about embassies [1].

I'm not sure if the NYT enforces their paywall on that article--it works for me and I'm not a subscriber, but I am signed up for one of their email lists and it is possible that's why I can see it.

For those who get stopped by the paywall TL;DR would be that the international law for embassies and other diplomatic facilities is all about what the "receiving state" can and cannot do. The "receiving state" is the state that the embassy is in.

As far as other states go there is nothing legally special about embassies. So if country X attacks country Y's embassy that is located in country Z as far as international law goes it is pretty much the same as attacking any other random building in Z that happens to have people and stuff from country Y inside.

[1] https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/02/world/europe/interpreter-...