International law or human rights: my perspective
Iranian-born Reza Mehman explains why he believes human rights take moral precedence over international law, and why Iran’s regime cannot legitimately hide behind it.
The original episode is in German. This is the complete English translation of the article and edited transcript. Political and legal assessments are the speaker’s views at the time, not an independent legal assessment. Some wording in the quoted clip is unclear in the original transcript and is identified below rather than silently reconstructed.
The Iran debate: international law and human rights
International law or human rights: in the context of the Iran conflict, Iranian-born Reza Mehman tackles this fundamental question. In this solo podcast episode, he explains why he considers human rights morally superior to international law, and why Iran’s mullah regime cannot legitimately hide behind international law. He quotes comments, politicians and historians to argue that international law needs reform as long as it protects regimes that systematically violate human rights. Born in Iran and with family still there, Reza brings a personal perspective that goes beyond abstract debate.
Summary
One-sentence version: Iranian-born Reza Mehman argues that human rights take moral precedence over international law and that the Iranian regime cannot legitimately hide behind international law.
Three-sentence version: Debate about the Iran conflict focuses heavily on international law while neglecting human rights. Reza Mehman argues that Iran’s regime systematically violates every fundamental human right: the right to life, freedom of expression, freedom of religion and protection from torture. In his view, international law in its current form protects regimes that disregard human rights and therefore needs fundamental reform.
Five-sentence version: Born in Iran and with family there, Reza Mehman examines the fundamental question: international law or human rights? He believes human rights take moral precedence because international law in its current form protects regimes that systematically violate them. He argues that Iran’s mullah regime has violated every fundamental human right: the right to life, freedom of expression, freedom of religion and protection from torture. Reza quotes historian Michael Wolfssohn on the need to reform international law and argues that the UN Security Council does not work in its current form. His family and friends in Iran are clear: they want their freedom back and the regime overthrown.
Context: who, what and why
Who is speaking: Reza Mehman is a podcaster born in Iran. In this solo episode, he speaks from his personal perspective as someone with family and friends there.
What it is about: The debate about international law versus human rights in the Iran conflict. Reza analyses why he believes international law in its current form protects regimes that violate human rights, and why it needs reform.
Why it matters: The Iran conflict has sparked worldwide debate. Russia and China criticise the attack on Iran as a violation of international law, while Iran’s own regime has violated human rights for decades. This tension between international law and human rights is fundamental.
Three key questions in this episode:
- Why should human rights take moral precedence over international law?
- Which human rights has Iran’s regime violated?
- Why does international law need fundamental reform?
Contents
- Introduction — An overview of the debate about international law and human rights
- Summary — A concise summary in three versions
- Context — Who is speaking, what it is about and why it matters
- Topics and context — The political and social themes
- Key points — The episode’s central arguments at a glance
- Frequently asked questions — Answers to the main questions
- Highlighted quotes — Standout statements from the episode
- The complete conversation — The edited podcast transcript
- Keywords — Relevant search terms
- Names and terms — Important people and terms in the episode
- Passage for quotation — A ready-to-use text
Topics and context
1. International law versus human rights
The fundamental question: which takes precedence? Reza clearly argues for human rights.
Keywords: international law, human rights, UN Charter, Universal Declaration of Human Rights
2. The Iranian regime and its human rights violations
Reza argues that the mullah regime has systematically violated every fundamental human right.
Keywords: Iran, mullah regime, human rights violations, oppression
3. Reforming international law
In Reza’s view, international law in its current form protects regimes that violate human rights and needs fundamental reform.
Keywords: international law reform, UN Security Council, Michael Wolfssohn, need for reform
4. Russia and China as critics
Russia and China criticise the attack on Iran as a violation of international law, despite violating human rights themselves.
Keywords: Russia, China, UN Security Council, double standards
5. A personal perspective as someone born in Iran
Reza’s family and friends in Iran want their freedom back and the regime overthrown.
Keywords: Iranians, family in Iran, freedom, overthrowing the regime
Key points from the episode
- Reza argues that human rights take moral precedence over international law.
- He says Iran’s mullah regime has violated every fundamental human right: the right to life, freedom of expression, freedom of religion and protection from torture.
- In his view, international law in its current form protects regimes that disregard human rights, which is a fundamental flaw.
- The UN Security Council no longer works when Russia and China wield their vetoes.
- Russia criticises the attack on Iran despite waging its own war of aggression against Ukraine.
- China demands compliance with international law while itself violating human rights.
- The episode claims that Iran spent several years on the UN Human Rights Council, presenting this as an illustration of systemic failure.
- Reza’s family and friends in Iran want their freedom back and the regime overthrown.
- The Americans have their own interests, but as long as the Iranian people’s interests are also protected, many Iranians agree with what is happening.
- International law needs reform, not abolition: its problems should be addressed systematically.
Frequently asked questions
Why should human rights take precedence over international law?
Reza Mehman argues that human rights are universal and inalienable, whereas international law is a framework created by states that can protect regimes which systematically violate human rights. The question “How morally superior are you if you demand enforcement of international law that protects those who disregard human rights?” captures this dilemma.
Which human rights has the Iranian regime violated?
The episode argues that Iran’s mullah regime has violated all fundamental human rights: the right to life, with tens of thousands said to have been murdered; freedom of expression, with people killed for taking to the streets; freedom of religion, in connection with the regime’s chants of “Death to America and death to Israel”; and protection from torture, with systematic torture documented.
Why does international law need reform?
Reza argues that international law in its current form protects regimes that violate human rights. Russia and China’s vetoes block the UN Security Council. The episode also claims that Iran spent several years on the UN Human Rights Council. Historian Michael Wolfssohn’s argument, as quoted here, is that if international law enables peoples to be legally oppressed, it needs reform.
What do Iranian people think about the attack on the regime?
Reza Mehman’s family and friends in Iran are clear: they want their freedom back and the regime overthrown. He says that, as long as the Iranian people’s interests are protected, many Iranians agree with what is happening, even though the Americans have their own interests.
Why does Reza consider Russia’s criticism of the Iran attack hypocritical?
Russia criticises the attack on Iran as a violation of international law while itself waging a war of aggression against Ukraine. Reza points out that even the AfD leadership has described Russia’s war as a war of aggression. He therefore sees Russia’s criticism of the Iran attack as a double standard.
What does “à la carte international law” mean?
Reza Mehman criticises politicians such as Ralf Stegner for applying international law selectively: choosing what they like and ignoring the rest. He sees this as political opportunism rather than consistent application of the law. Instead, international law’s shortcomings should be identified and addressed systematically.
Highlighted quotes
“How morally superior are you if you demand enforcement of international law that protects those who disregard human rights?”
— YouTube comment quoted by Reza Mehman
“If and as long as international law has shortcomings and allows peoples to be oppressed entirely legally under international law, it needs reform.”
— Historian Michael Wolfssohn, quoted by Reza Mehman
“Iran is where I was born, but I haven’t been there for a very, very, very long time. I don’t call myself an Iran expert. Apparently there are a great many Iran experts today, because suddenly everyone has something to say about Iran.”
— Reza Mehman
“They all share one view: they want their freedom back, and they want the regime finally to be overthrown.”
— Reza Mehman, on his family and friends in Iran
“If your beloved boy has cancer, an infectious factor in his body, do you care whether the doctor has a green head or a yellow hand? No. I need an operation. Right now.”
— Iranian activist quoted by Reza Mehman; wording retained from the original transcript
“As long as the Iranian people’s interests are protected too, many Iranians agree with what is happening.”
— Reza Mehman
The complete conversation
Introduction: international law versus human rights
Reza Mehman:
As someone born in Iran, I’ve naturally spoken a lot about Iran in recent podcast episodes. I think it affects many people deeply, including me, of course. And I’m surprised by how many different opinions there can be about Iran. People talk a great deal about international law. My impression is that human rights are being completely neglected. I recently found a comment on my YouTube channel, and I’m very grateful to the person who wrote it, because it captures my thoughts and expresses them very, very well, in my view. I’d like to read it briefly.
“How morally superior are you if you demand enforcement of international law that protects those who disregard human rights?”
International law versus human rights: some people decide very quickly. I agree one hundred per cent. In my view, if you really think about human rights — and that’s what I want to do with you in today’s podcast — they clearly rank much higher than international law.
Definition: what is international law?
Reza Mehman:
Before I explain my own view, I’d like to define it briefly so that we really are talking about the same thing. International law. One definition I found says that international law isn’t a single legal code. It consists of several sources. Its most important foundation is the United Nations Charter of 1945. This establishes central principles of the international system, such as state sovereignty, the prohibition on the use of force between states, territorial integrity and peoples’ right to self-determination. So far, so good. I think we all understand that.
Definition: what are human rights?
Reza Mehman:
The media also talk and argue a great deal about international law; I’ll come to that shortly. But now we come to the interesting concept of human rights. To be absolutely clear, I personally firmly believe that human rights take precedence over international law. How and where are human rights enshrined, and what exactly are they? International human rights are primarily recorded in three central documents. These are often called the International Bill of Human Rights. I’ll discuss one of these central documents: the Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1948. It was adopted by the United Nations after the Second World War. It contains fundamental rights such as the right to life, freedom of expression, freedom of religion, protection from torture and equality before the law.
The Iranian regime and its human rights violations
Reza Mehman:
If we think about which of these rights the Iranian regime hasn’t violated recently, it becomes very clear that the regime cares precisely zero about human rights. If we went through them one by one: the right to life, clearly violated. We saw it in January. How many tens of thousands of people were murdered within a few days? Freedom of expression. They were murdered precisely because they took to the streets, because they wanted to express their opinions freely, say something against the regime, speak out against oppression and, of course, against the financial burden, and so on.
Freedom of religion. I did a little research. In Iran, besides being Muslim, apparently you’re officially allowed to be Christian, Jewish or Zoroastrian. The problem, though, is that when the mullah regime shouts “Death to America and death to Israel” from morning to night, I see it as clearly directed against Christians and Jews. So I certainly don’t believe their claim to religious freedom. Protection from torture. Honestly, you can almost only laugh bitterly at that.
Russia, China and double standards
Reza Mehman:
To those who criticise everything I say here: even the AfD leadership has said that Russia is waging a war of aggression against Ukraine. So there is agreement about who is attacking whom. Yet Russia criticises the attack on Iran — America’s attack on Iran. China has commented too: the war against Iran should never have happened, says China’s foreign minister. He criticised the world returning to the law of the jungle. This very problem with the Security Council is one of the reasons I say international law needs updating.
The need to reform international law
Reza Mehman:
I’ll come to that in a moment. I also have a clip I’d like to play. But clearly international law is no longer functioning properly in times like these, when a regime massively oppresses its people and no longer allows their actual human rights. Historian Michael Wolfssohn put this very well. The problem with international law — and this isn’t the first time we’ve seen it — is that, unfortunately, in practice it often leads to this, as we’ve seen in Iran for decades. Iran was, “appropriately enough” in quotation marks, on the UN Human Rights Council for several years, as were other unjust systems repeatedly. International law needs reform here.
If and as long as international law has shortcomings and allows peoples to be oppressed entirely legally under international law, it needs reform. Does the need for reform mean we only apply it when we feel like it? No, not that. There needs to be a systematic examination. But you can’t pick things à la carte, as Mr Stegner does, for example, and say: I like this and I like that. Instead, you have to recognise this shortcoming and identify alternatives to put an end to that situation.
A personal perspective and conclusion
Reza Mehman:
In today’s podcast, I’ve played a great many clips. A comment accused me at one point of only expressing my own opinion and asked me to show sources too. I know it’s difficult, of course, to present other clips, social media clips or clips of politicians as sources here. But I wanted to show that I’m not the only person who thinks this way. Other people either think exactly as I do or hold the opposite view.
I’d also like to clarify something. I was born in Iran, but I haven’t been there for a very, very, very long time. I don’t call myself an Iran expert. Apparently there are a great many Iran experts today, because suddenly everyone has something to say about Iran. All I can say is that we’re in regular contact with family, friends and acquaintances in Iran. They all share one view: they want their freedom back, and they want the regime finally to be overthrown.
Of course, many people then say: yes, but the Americans aren’t your friends; they have their own interests too. Sometimes I wonder — how can I put it — how stupid other people think we are. We’re fully aware of that. I’m fully aware the Americans aren’t there to get free saffron rice with “Jujube-Kebab” and “Kuhbideh-Buns”, as the original transcript puts it. They have their own interests. But as long as the Iranian people’s interests are protected too, many Iranians agree with what is happening.
I’ll play one final clip which, in my view, sums it up well.
[Clip: an Iranian voice]
A voice quoted in the conversation
The following clip contains unclear or apparently mistranscribed wording in the German source. The translation retains that wording; it should not be read as a verified account or a reconstruction of the original audio.
“What exactly? The attack on the ramps [unclear in the source]. Yes, we agree with that. The attack happening today? Yes. Congratulations to the gentleman. You are in Israel, my family, my mother, my sister, my two or three sisters, my brother, the whole family, all my friends who lived there, who had lived there, they have all been killed in Europe [wording in the source]. So they say, oh, because Israel is saving them. Oh, I don’t want that. Of course, I don’t care about them [unclear in the source]. You save them. You do it, I do it, he does it. It doesn’t matter which flag it is. My house is on fire. My children are being killed.
If your beloved boy has cancer, an infectious factor in his body, do you care whether the doctor has a green head or a yellow hand? No. I need an operation. Right now. My childhood must survive [wording in the source]. I ask the doctors: if you go to hospital and see that the doctor is Jewish, do you say: no, no, no, don’t let me die?”
Reza Mehman:
That’s it for today’s podcast. Leave your opinion in the comments. Share a few thoughts: what do you think about international law versus human rights? Thank you for listening. Until next time. Bye, bye, bye.
Keywords
Tags: Iran international law, human rights in Iran, mullah regime, UN Security Council, Michael Wolfssohn, Ralf Stegner, Russian double standards, Chinese foreign policy, Reza Mehman, Iran war, Universal Declaration of Human Rights, reforming international law, Iranian-born, freedom in Iran
Names and terms
Reza Mehman, Michael Wolfssohn, Ralf Stegner, Iran, mullah regime, UN Security Council, United Nations Charter 1945, Universal Declaration of Human Rights 1948, International Bill of Human Rights, international law, human rights, Zoroastrians, saffron rice, Jujube-Kebab, Kuhbideh
Passage for quotation
International law or human rights: Iranian-born Reza Mehman believes human rights take moral precedence over international law.
He argues that Iran’s mullah regime has violated every fundamental human right: the right to life, freedom of expression, freedom of religion and protection from torture.
In his view, international law in its current form protects regimes that disregard human rights; the episode also claims that Iran spent several years on the UN Human Rights Council.
Historian Michael Wolfssohn’s argument, as quoted here, is that if international law enables peoples to be legally oppressed, it needs reform.
Reza’s family and friends in Iran are clear: they want their freedom back and the regime overthrown.
Episode notes and discussion
International law or human rights? Iranian-born Reza Mehman explains why he believes human rights take moral precedence over international law and why Iran’s regime cannot legitimately hide behind it.
Timestamps:
00:00 — Introduction: international law versus human rights
01:30 — Definition: what is international law?
03:00 — Definition: what are human rights?
05:00 — The Iranian regime and its human rights violations
09:00 — Russia, China and double standards
12:00 — The need to reform international law
16:00 — A personal perspective and conclusion
Find the podcast and listening links.
#RezaMehman #Iran #InternationalLaw #HumanRights #MullahRegime #Podcast #Politics #Freedom
International law or human rights? As someone born in Iran, I have a clear answer.
In my new podcast episode, I analyse:
- Why human rights take moral precedence over international law
- Which human rights Iran’s regime has violated
- Why international law needs reform
#Podcast #Iran #InternationalLaw #HumanRights #RezaMehman #Freedom #Politics
International law or human rights: which takes precedence? Iranian-born Reza Mehman has a clear answer. In this podcast episode, he explains why he believes Iran’s regime cannot legitimately hide behind international law, and why international law needs fundamental reform. Explore the podcast and read the full conversation above.
Find more conversations and sources in my collection about Iran.
