Nour News: December 9, 1991, holds a special and uplifting place in Iran’s political memory. On that day—eleven years after the start of the Iran–Iraq War and three years after its end—the legal and diplomatic efforts of Iranian diplomats finally paid off. A clear truth that had long been buried under propaganda and power politics was officially acknowledged.
On this day, Javier Pérez de Cuéllar, the UN Secretary-General at the time, announced in his official report to the Security Council that Baghdad had initiated the Iran–Iraq War. The report declared Iraq’s attack on Iran on September 22, 1980, “devoid of any legal or moral justification” and directly held Saddam’s regime responsible for starting the war.
This conclusion was the result of months of document exchanges, legal arguments, and tireless diplomatic work. Iraq submitted vague and baseless explanations, while Iran presented a comprehensive and well-documented case. Ultimately, de Cuéllar concluded that what had happened was a clear violation of the UN Charter and a direct attack on the territorial integrity of a UN member state. He even emphasized that the international community’s initial silence toward Iraq’s aggression paved the way for a greater disaster: Saddam’s invasion of Kuwait—an admission major powers later were forced to acknowledge.
However, there was a striking difference. In the case of Kuwait, the Security Council labeled Iraq the aggressor from the very beginning, activated compensation mechanisms, and Kuwait received all of its damages “to the last dollar.” But regarding Iran, the Secretary-General’s report never turned into a binding Security Council resolution. The truth was acknowledged, yet Iran’s lost rights were never restored. It was there that the gap between declared justice and enforced justice emerged.
Hoping History Repeats—This Time for the 12-Day War
Today, more than three decades after that historic report, the world and its international institutions—especially the UN—face a similar test. The 12-day U.S.–Israeli war against Iran has once again brought the issues of who initiated the conflict and legal responsibility to the forefront of global debate. Iran is once again asking for the same principles the UN used in 1991 to identify Saddam as the aggressor: prohibition of the use of force, respect for national borders, and transparency regarding responsibility.
This time, too, the evidence is clear: direct attacks, blatant violations of the UN Charter, cross-border operations, and threats to regional and global peace. If such actions were enough to label Iraq the aggressor in 1980, they apply equally to Israel and the United States today. Iran’s demand is straightforward: an official report from the Secretary-General identifying the initiator of the recent conflict and recording the truth in UN documents. This demand is neither political nor propagandistic; it is based entirely on the same framework used by the UN in 1991.
The real question is whether the international community will repeat its bitter mistake of silence. Will political considerations once again outweigh the truth? Just as a decade of silence toward Iraq paved the way for the invasion of Kuwait, today’s indifference may carry even heavier consequences for the region and the world.
The 1991 report is not merely a memory of diplomatic success; it is a measure of the international community’s current claims. The Secretary-General of that time proved that even under pressure, truth can be acknowledged and an aggressor can be named. Now history has returned this responsibility to the UN: Is the prohibition of aggression a universal principle, or does it apply only when it aligns with the interests of great powers? And can today’s Secretary-General issue an official report naming the initiator of the 12-day war and assign political and moral responsibility to the Israeli aggressors?
Once again, history’s judgment will be simple. Just as international officials eventually admitted their mistake in staying silent about the Iran–Iraq War, future generations will judge the UN’s behavior today. December 9 has already proven once that the truth—though delayed—is ultimately recordable and provable. Today, the world is watching to see whether the UN, with the lessons of those years, chooses the right path or once again takes on the burden of a historic mistake.
NOURNEWS