Australia is expected to consider this week a request from the US to join a coalition of allies in a military effort to reopen the Strait of Hormuz – called the “Maritime Freedom Construct.”
Australia should refuse, even in the unlikely event that others join.
To accept while hostilities continue would make Australia an accessory to the international crime of waging an aggressive war.
The air and sea war by Israel and the US against Iran simply does not fit with any of the internationally recognised justifications for military action.
One of the reasons given by US President Donald Trump for the bombing campaign (Operation Epic Fury) is that it was a response to a threat from Iran in the form of Iran’s pursuit of nuclear weapons.
It was a long bow. Iran is a long way off even weapons-ready uranium let alone producing the wherewithal to deliver a bomb to continental US. And even if Iran had developed a bomb and announced it, that would not justify an attack. India, Pakistan and North Korea have nuclear weapons. That would not justify any of them or their neighbours or the US attacking any other of them with the aim of disarming the nuclear weapons.
The US, UK, France, China, and Russia have nuclear weapons. That is not of itself a justification for attacking any them.
The UN Charter (to which all nations have subscribed) has only two grounds for the use of military force against other nations: individual or collective self-defence following an armed attack; and authorisation by the UN Security Council to restore peace.
Neither applies in this case. Very simply, those individuals in government who directed the air and sea strike on Iran committed the war crime of waging an aggressive war. The individual soldiers following rules of engagement, on the other hand, would not be committing that crime.
In short, Trump is a war criminal. Indeed, his behaviour has followed the pattern of common criminals caught by law enforcement: they keep changing their story as each version of events becomes untenable. They end up with inconsistent stories and justifications for their criminal conduct.
In the case of Operation Epic Fury, it was almost like watching a criminal being interviewed by detectives in real-crime TV series.
“Oh, we had to do it because Israel was going to do it anyway.”
“We had to do it because Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu asked us to.”
“Iran was going to attack us, so we had to pre-empt that.”
“We had to attack to get rid of a regime that was murdering its own citizens.”
“We had to stop Iran’s support for its violent proxy forces, especially Hamas and Hezbollah.”
“We had to finish off Iran’s nuclear program and its missile-launching capacity.”
“We had to impose a blockade to pressure Iran.”
As the weakness in each rationale was pointed out, Trump pulled out another justification. Why did he need to destroy Iran’s nuclear capacity in February and March 2026 when he said after US military strikes on nuclear facilities in June 2025 that he had “obliterated” Iran’s nuclear capacity?
Excuse after excuse, justification after justification. None stood up to the requirements for a defence of self-defence. Where the responsibility lies for the dead civilians, many of whom were children, and the destruction of housing and infrastructure is now obvious.
Waging an aggressive war is perhaps the highest crime there is. The person guilty of it must bear responsibility for all of the death and destruction that follows. Too often, though, whole nations are put down as culpable. For example, in 2002 George W Bush described Iraq, Iran, and North Korea as an Axis of Evil.
The better way to assign blame was done by Pope Leo XIV who said after hostilities in Iran broke out: “The world is being ravaged by a handful of tyrants . . . . They turn a blind eye to the fact that billions of dollars are spent on killing, on devastation.”
The Axis of Evil therefore is not a group of nations, but a list of men (and they are all men): Netanyau, the Ayatollahs, Trump, Putin, Xi, and Kim.
They as individuals have done the murder and destruction. The vast majority of the people who have the misfortune to live in these nations do not want the waging of aggressive wars, creeping militarism, and oppression at home. They want peace, dialogue, and the prosperity that comes with it.
Even the vast majority of Israelis who were attacked by Hamas did not want the criminal, disproportionate genocide that Netanyahu inflicted in Gaza.
Last week the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute reported that global military expenditure increased to $2887 billion in 2025, the 11th year of consecutive rises. The institute rightly calls it a “burden” not an “investment” – the word used by the military-industrial complex.
This spending is worse than a mere waste because when its products are used they lay waste to a thousand times more value, not to mention the concomitant death and injury to people and animals.
As the Pope said: “The masters of war pretend not to know that it takes only a moment to destroy. Yet often, a lifetime is not enough to rebuild.”
When Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and his Cabinet discuss sending ships to the Strait of Hormuz let us hope he heeds the Pope’s words: “Sit at the table of dialogue and mediation, not at the table where rearmament is planned and deadly actions are decided.”
Albanese and other leaders should aim to reap the economic benefits of aiming for peace. Helping Trump in any way will only be counter-productive.
The aims of Trump’s criminal aggressive war are unlikely to ever be achieved. There was no regime change in Teheran, indeed there is now more support for it. And Iran has gained a weapon of economic mass destruction by demonstrating the ease with which it can choke off one of the main arteries of western capitalism.
Australia should quickly and quietly remove ourselves from reliance on that artery. According to a YouGov poll out today (5 May), it is what the great majority of Australians want.
Crispin Hull
This article first appeared in The Canberra Times and other Australian media on 5 May 2026.