The Islamic Republic is built on a theocratic power structure. The regime systematically oppresses its own population and supports armed Islamist terrorist organisations.

For Iranians, it appears deeply problematic that the Norwegian government unilaterally emphasises the right to self-defence of such a regime, without clearly pointing out the regime’s boundless violence.

International law as protector of state terrorism?

Following the American-Israeli attacks on Iran in February–March 2026, Espen Barth Eide, Norway’s Minister of Foreign Affairs, criticised Israel and the United States for breaching international law and asserted Iran’s right to defend itself against attacks.

Strictly legally, this is correct. International law permits self-defence in the event of armed attack. But politics is more than law. For Iranians, this is about more than the UN Charter; it concerns political consistency: Can one defend a state’s sovereignty without at the same time making an assessment of the regime and, in this case, taking a clear stand against its ideological power structure, its regional terrorist network and internal abuse of power?

When an Islamist terrorist regime is primarily described as a victim of breaches of international law, it is, to put it mildly, a political displacement. It elevates the principle of the regime’s sovereignty above the principle of freedom for those living under the terrorist regime.

That Norway recognises international law is good, but the same international law cannot be used to legitimise a regime that has shown itself capable of ruthlessly killing between 30,000 and 50,000 of its own citizens by means of terror proxies such as, among others, Hezbollah from Lebanon, Hashd al-Shaabi from Iraq, and the Fatemiyoun Brigades from Afghanistan.

If Norway wishes to be a consistent advocate for democracy and human rights, it must make clear what it is defending; does every terrorist regime automatically have the right to self-defence – even when it systematically kills its own population? Does Espen Barth Eide really wish to defend a world consisting of terrorist regimes – because of international law?

For us Iranians, this is no academic discussion.