The principle prohibiting the use of force (Article 2(4) of the UN Charter) is a *jus cogens* norm and an obligation *erga omnes*, serving as a cornerstone of the post-World War II legal order. Employing a descriptive-analytical method and relying on documentary and library sources, this study examines the nature of military attacks, the assassination of officials and scientists, and violations against the diplomatic premises of the Islamic Republic of Iran perpetrated by the United States and the Zionist regime, as well as the mechanisms available for Iran to vindicate its rights. The findings indicate that these actions—viewed in light of UN General Assembly Resolution 3314, the 1961 and 1963 Vienna Conventions, and norms of international human rights and humanitarian law—constitute acts of aggression and internationally wrongful acts. Furthermore, the doctrines of preemptive and preventive self-defense lack a legal basis, as they conflict with Article 51 of the Charter, which predicates the right to self-defense on the occurrence of an armed attack. Finally, strategies are proposed across four levels: action within the United Nations framework; litigation before international judicial bodies; utilization of domestic courts and universal jurisdiction; and the establishment of a national committee to assess damages.