"Absolutely not self-defence": Iran slams US military campaign as "act of aggression"

Iran has strongly criticised the United States over its ongoing military campaign calling it an ldquoact of aggressionrdquo and rejecting Washingtonrsquos justification that the strikes were carried out in selfdefence reported ANIIran questions legal basis of US military actionIranrsquos 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 selfdefenceBaghaei 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 selfdefence However he questioned this reasoning asking what threat justified such actionSelfdefense against what Was there any armed attack by Iran to justify self defense Definitely notSo this was absolutely NOT selfdefense mdash it was an act of AGGRESSION against the nation of Iran pictwittercomiPemdStD71mdash Esmaeil Baqaei IRIMFA_SPOX May 1 2026lsquoNo provocation from Iranrsquo says TehranThe 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 selfdefenceAccording to Baghaei the absence of an initial strike from Iran makes the American military campaign unlawful reinforcing Tehranrsquos position that the operation constitutes aggression rather than a defensive moveUS administration maintains it is lsquonot at warrsquoDespite 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 ANIHouse 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military operations reported ANILegal debate intensifies in WashingtonThe 1973 law mandates that US forces must be withdrawn within 60 days of engagement unless Congress provides authorisation With the deadline now reached concerns are growing over a potential constitutional standoff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 lawmakersUS 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 ANIConflict timeline and rising geopolitical tensionsThe 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 pricesOpposition 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 administrationrsquos actions may face political hurdles including resistance in Congress and the possibility of a presidential vetoWith inputs from ANI