French President Emmanuel Macron strongly condemned recent U.S. airstrikes targeting Iran’s nuclear facilities, asserting they lack legal justification under international law. At a joint press conference with Norway’s Prime Minister Jonas Gahr Store in Oslo on June 23rd, Macron stated there was “no legal framework behind these strikes”, though acknowledging France’s opposition against Iran acquiring nuclear weapons – though he recognized France’s position against this happening, according to The Guardian.com.
Macron stressed that any attempt at regime change should come from within Iran’s own people–not via military force. He upheld its territorial sovereignty and stated, “we cannot force change upon its people”. Hence he also stressed his point with regard to their leadership being decided democratically rather than forced from outside by others like NATO forces, for instance
His strong remarks serve as a powerful rebuke of the Trump administration’s policy and contribute to an ever-expanding chorus of international disapproval.
Operation Midnight Hammer was initiated on June 22 by U.S. bomber and submarine forces and targeted Iran’s Natanz, Fordow, and Isfahan sites – with President Trump declaring them successful at “completely and totally obliterating” Iran’s nuclear infrastructure (reuters.com/Wiki/Tobahan+15). For additional coverage see: Wpnews.com +15; En Wikipedia+15 + 15 and APN News (+15).
U.S. intelligence assessments indicate the impact may have been far less severe, possibly only delaying Iran’s program by several months (reuters.com/+11).
International reactions have varied; United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres called for urgent diplomacy while European leaders like Macron emphasized a negotiated solution within the Non-Proliferation Treaty framework (EN.wikipedia.org, NYPost.com).
Russian and Chinese officials both condemned the strikes as illegal, saying military interventions violate established treaties and increase risk of wider conflict escalation (gcaptain.com; time.com and reuters.com, respectively).
Macron’s comments found widespread approval within Europe, particularly among Germany and UK partners who are joint participants in Geneva nuclear talks with Iran that were initiated on June 20. These talks aim to reduce enrichment levels and address regional security concerns; critics suggest that unilateral military action undermines ongoing diplomatic efforts and makes consensus harder to attain.
President Trump justified his unilateral military strike without congressional approval as necessary to counter what he labeled as an imminent nuclear threat from Iran. Meanwhile, many veteran lawmakers invoked the War Powers Resolution against such strikes (M.Facebook.com/WarPowersResolution or https://m.Facebook.com/WarPowersResolution), challenging presidential authority for such military operations (The Guardian/YouTube.com). The controversy over legality caused much debate within Washington; for instance some invoked War Powers Repression to contest Presidential Authority over such strikes (M.Facebook/M/War PowersResolution to challenge Presidential authority). In Washington some veteran lawmakers invoked War Powers Resolution in an attempt to challenge Presidential authority for military strikes (m.Facebook/Worming_war Powers Re Resolution invoked; see The Guardian/YouTuBlock 7]. YouTuB/54854954
However, Iran has strongly denounced these attacks. Their parliament moved to end cooperation with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), while their nuclear agency called them an act that violated both UN Charter and Non-Proliferation Treaty and threatened retaliatory strikes – further heightening regional tensions and heightening regional instability. Washingtonpost.com reported
Legal scholars highlight the risk associated with creating such precedents. According to them, striking at safeguarded nuclear sites without approval from UN Security Council or compelling self-defense reasons violates international norms and compromises future antiproliferation enforcement efforts.
Macron advocated for restraint, asserting that for any permanent solution to arise it must come through diplomacy, transparency and respecting existing treaties–not through unilateral military strikes. As the world observes closely the legality and long-term effects of strikes over nuclear diplomacy and transatlantic alliances.