01 May,2026 04:45 PM IST | Tehran | mid-day online correspondent
Pic/AFP
Iran has strongly criticised the United States over its ongoing military campaign, calling it an "act of aggression" and rejecting Washington's justification that the strikes were carried out in self-defence, reported ANI.
Iran's Foreign Ministry spokesperson Esmaeil Baghaei dismissed the US narrative, arguing that there was no valid legal or factual basis for the strikes. In a statement shared on social media, he challenged the claim that the operations were conducted under the principle of collective self-defence.
Baghaei referred to a US State Department position that justified the military campaign as being carried out in support of its ally and in exercise of its inherent right to self-defence. However, he questioned this reasoning, asking what threat justified such action.
The Iranian spokesperson asserted that there had been no armed attack by Iran that could justify a military response. He argued that in the absence of provocation, the US action violated international norms and could not be classified as self-defence.
According to Baghaei, the absence of an initial strike from Iran makes the American military campaign unlawful, reinforcing Tehran's position that the operation constitutes aggression rather than a defensive move.
Despite the escalating tensions, the administration of Donald Trump has maintained that the United States is not formally at war with Iran. This stance comes even as the situation approaches a key legal threshold under the War Powers Resolution, which governs the deployment of US armed forces, reported ANI.
House Speaker Mike Johnson stated that congressional authorisation is not required at this stage, arguing that the US is not engaged in active hostilities. He said efforts are currently focused on brokering peace rather than conducting sustained military operations, reported ANI.
The 1973 law mandates that US forces must be withdrawn within 60 days of engagement unless Congress provides authorisation. With the deadline now reached, concerns are growing over a potential constitutional standoff between the White House and lawmakers.
US Secretary of War Pete Hegseth suggested that the existence of a ceasefire could pause the legal timeline, a position that has been challenged by opposition leaders. Senator Tim Kaine argued that the law does not allow such an interpretation, warning of serious legal implications, reported ANI.
The hostilities began in late February following coordinated strikes by US and Israeli forces targeting sites in Tehran and other regions. Iran responded with retaliatory actions, including strikes on US bases and disruptions to maritime traffic in the Strait of Hormuz, which led to a spike in global oil prices.
Opposition lawmakers, including Adam Schiff, have raised concerns about the cost and consequences of the conflict, calling for reassessment of the military engagement. However, any attempt to limit the administration's actions may face political hurdles, including resistance in Congress and the possibility of a presidential veto.
(With inputs from ANI)
