In September 1980, Iraqi military forces invaded Iran, sparking an eight year war. This war spread into the Persian Gulf, where Iraq retaliated against Iran by attacking oil tankers on its way to Iranian ports. In October 1987, a Kuwait oil tanker sailing under an American flag was attacked allegedly by Iran. In a separate incident, a U.S. Navy escort ship struck a mine in international waters. These attacks by both Iran and Iraq violated time honored rules of international law regarding neutral shipping and naval warfare.
The United States soon retaliated by destroying two offshore oil production facilities owned and operated by the National Iranian Oil Company. Iran claimed that Iraq was to blame for both the missile and the mine, and brought a claim to the ICJ in November 1992 accusing the United States of unlawfully attacking and destroying the oil platforms. These attacks allegedly violated the Treaty of Amity, Economic Relations and Consular Rights between the United States of America and Iran by impeding the freedom of commerce between two parties. The ICJ can rule only when both parties have consented to its jurisdiction.
In preliminary objections filed, the United States sought dismissal arguing that the treaty did not apply to questions concerning the use of force in self-dense. ICJ rejected the U.S. position. The court’s principal aim was to determine if the U.S. had violated its freedom of commerce obligations. The court rules that the ‘essential security interests’ clause must be interpreted in light of general international law on of force. Therefore, the United States had to show that it was the victim of an “armed attack” by Iran and that it acted in self-defense. The ICJ dismissed both the Iranian claim and the U.S. counterclaim, because the Court found that it could not uphold the submissions of either Government, nor could it uphold the claim of