The Legality of Operation Roaring Lion

This article was last updated September 8th, 2026.

Operation Roaring Lion was not the initiation of a new armed conflict. Rather, it was conducted within the framework of a years-long ongoing armed conflict between Iran and Israel.

For years, Iranian aggression against Israel has included:

• Extensive and systematic attacks through Iranian proxies and affiliated armed groups (including Hezbollah, Hamas, Islamic Jihad and the Houthis).
• Direct attacks by Iran against Israel across multiple domains (including ballistic missile, illegal cluster missiles, and drone attacks).
• Sustained cyber operations and covert attacks. 

This is part of an armed conflict that Iran initiated and has waged for years through a sustained pattern of direct and proxy-based armed attacks against Israel. This conduct has been accompanied by repeated public statements by senior Iranian officials expressing the intent to destroy the State of Israel. 

The Escalating Threat from Iran

The operation was therefore carried out within the wider ongoing armed conflict between Iran and Israel. It addressed escalating threats, including nuclear weaponization efforts and ballistic missile expansion.

Ultimately, it is not that Israel “started” a new war, but that it conducted military operations as part of an already existing international armed conflict that Iran had sustained for years through direct and indirect armed attacks.

Iran started this campaign of aggression, and Israel will ensure the threat is brought to an end.

The Legality of Targeting the Supreme Leader of Iran

Factual Background

On Saturday, February 28th, the IDF eliminated arch-terrorist Ali Khamenei in a precise aerial strike.

By virtue of his role as the Supreme Leader of the Islamic Republic of Iran and in accordance with the regime’s laws, Ali Khamenei served as the Commander-in-Chief of the Iranian Armed Forces.

Accordingly, Khamenei functioned as the highest military authority within the Iranian regime and the final decision-maker on all military matters in Iran.

During the ongoing armed conflict between Iran and Israel, Khamenei actively exercised his authority as Commander-in-Chief and was the guiding and approving authority for the use of force against Israel.

In this capacity, he was responsible for the direction, funding, and strengthening of the regime’s proxies, foremost among them Hezbollah, the Houthis, Shiite militias in Iraq, and other Iranian-backed actors that have operated against Israel, including Hamas.

The Legal Basis for the Strike

The strike was conducted within the context of an ongoing armed conflict between Iran and Israel, in accordance with international law. In the conflict between Israel and Iran, the international law of armed conflict applies.

Distinction and Military Targeting

In accordance with the principle of distinction, and given his role as Commander-in-Chief of the Iranian Armed Forces, Khamenei constituted a lawful military target.

The neutralization of the Commander-in-Chief of the Iranian Armed Forces, together with the senior command echelon, carried a concrete, direct, and significant military advantage, including impairing the ability to plan, direct, and coordinate attacks against Israel.

Proportionality and Military Advantage

In accordance with the principle of proportionality under the law of armed conflict, this military advantage was weighed in advance against the expected incidental harm from the strike, and it was assessed that the anticipated incidental harm would not be excessive in relation to the expected military advantage.

Precautions to Minimize Incidental Harm

In accordance with the obligation to take precautions, feasible operational measures were taken to minimize incidental harm.

Frequently Asked Questions:

Q: Was Operation Roaring Lion the beginning of a new armed conflict? 

 A: No. The operation was conducted within an ongoing armed conflict between Iran and Israel, following years of direct and proxy-based Iranian attacks.

Q: Did Israel attack Iran unprovoked?

A: No. Iran posed a growing threat and was continuing to wage terror attacks through its proxy armies. The operation Israel launched as a response was carried out within the wider ongoing armed conflict between Iran and Israel. It addressed escalating threats, including nuclear weaponization efforts and ballistic missile expansion.

Q: What types of attacks does Iran carry out?

A: The article identifies terror attacks conducted directly by Iran, attacks through Iranian proxies and affiliated armed groups, missile and rocket fire, as well as sustained cyber and covert operations.

Q: Was Ali Khamenei a lawful military target?

 A: Yes, Khamenei served as Commander-in-Chief of the Iranian Armed Forces and actively exercised authority over terror activity during the conflict.

Q: How does the principle of proportionality apply to the strike?

 A: The expected military advantage of impairing Iran's ability to plan, direct, and coordinate attacks was weighed against the anticipated incidental harm, which was assessed not to be excessive.