Is this the last chance for the United Nations to take the right side in human history?

Table of Contents

The opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors and in no way represent the editorial position of Euroneus.

“War is a continuation of policy with other means,” Carl von Kroiswitz’s unforgettable observation echoed through generations of politicians, soldiers and scholars.

It is not a celebration of violence, but a calm reflection on the nature of power, diplomacy and human conflict.

Today, this quote is more than an abstract idea. This is the lens that must investigate the paralysis of international agencies, especially the United Nations, in the face of Iran’s nuclear threat.

I have always believed in the importance and power of international organizations and have been involved in efforts to work closely with UN agencies to maintain human rights, protect civilians and cultivate international cooperation.

Like many people who grew up in the shadows of World War II, I thought the United Nations was a moral beacon, a structure built on the ashes of crematoriums, and was forged by collective promises.

Nonetheless, we are here.

Diplomacy only works when it is supported by strength

In 2025, the world’s Jewish population is expected to eventually reach its pre-Holocaust size. It should be a cause of hope, reflection and strict gratitude. Instead, the Jewish state is entrusted with militarily facing the regime of the Republic of Iran, an Islamic republic of Iran that has never tried to hide its desire to annihilate Israel.

From rhetoric of the leader’s massacre to pursuing terrorist proxies and nuclear weapons, Iran’s intentions were by no means speculative. They are spoken clearly, broadcast openly and executed vigorously.

Where was the protest? Where was the moral clarity that once defined the postwar global order?

Israel has no dislike for diplomacy, but rather than preceding a clear demonstration that Iran fails to achieve its goals and fails to achieve its goals, sometimes diplomacy must follow. For now, that lesson must be taught on the battlefield.

As stated in Article 51 of the UN Charter, “the current Charter does not undermine the inherent rights of individuals or groups to self-defense in the event of an armed attack on members of the UN.”

Israel’s actions are not acts of aggression. They were legal acts of self-defense and were taken to prevent October 7th, but in itself were the first acts in this war of aggression by the Islamic Republic and its proxies.

Institutions that are truly committed to peace and security must recognize and support this right, not condemn it from fear or political convenience.

The world should see that diplomacy is not a virtue in itself but a tool, not a virtue. You need to open your eyes and act strategically.

The difficult truth is that diplomacy only works when it is supported by strength. Without it, negotiations are nothing more than performance. This is a charade designed to delay, deflect, and deceive. This is a lesson from Tehran going back decades.

This is also a lesson that agencies like the United Nations tragically forget about them. When I once placed a deep faith in the UN’s moral mission, I now look at it with all my heart as its promises shaking.

Silence is not neutral, it is a message

Working for UN agencies for many years, I witnessed what they could do, but even when facts screamed for judgment, I witnessed what they could do.

Once again, the UN has settled on a diluted resolution aimed at mitigating carelessness. This is an approach that prioritizes false balance over moral clarity.

For a long time, there has been no clear condemnation of the Iranian regime’s threat to Israel. There is no clear condemnation of murder attacks on civilians at that proxy.

Silence, or even worse, symmetry, rules global discourse, as if liberal democracies defending themselves against existential threats, are no different from the theocratic regime seeking genocide.

This silence is not neutral. It’s a message and you won’t notice it.

This moment is not about Israel or Iran. It’s about whether the world still remembers the moral foundations in which institutions like the United Nations were built. If the United Nations cannot withstand a regime that openly declares its intention to destroy member states and its people, exactly, what is it standing for?

Kroiswitz’s saying is not a support for war. That’s a warning: when diplomacy loses credibility, war becomes a tool of last resort.

The United Nations must ask themselves what role they played in this equation. He failed to oppose naked attacks and constant instigation towards genocide.

The Israeli-Iran conflict is not just another diplomatic crisis. This is a test of the moral spine of the international system. The Iranian regime was never made to understand that its nuclear and annihilationist ambitions were incapable of success.