German parliament questions legality of US-Israel attacks on Iran
Israel claimed its pre-emptive attack was aimed at preventing Tehran from developing a nuclear weapon. The US followed up with strikes on Iranian nuclear infrastructure after nearly two weeks of hostilities between the Middle Eastern countries, before pushing both sides to agree to a ceasefire.
German Chancellor Friedrich Merz publicly endorsed the initial attacks, calling it 'the dirty work that Israel is doing for all of us.' Iran has consistently denied any military aim for its nuclear program. Countries including Russia and China condemned the Israeli and American actions, arguing they undermined the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, which protects the right of signatories to pursue nuclear energy for peaceful purposes.
Legal experts from the Bundestag's Research Services argued that 'the vast majority of international lawyers' do not consider Israel's actions to be a valid exercise of self-defense under the UN Charter, according to dpa. Their findings were compiled in a 54-page report reportedly shared with the news agency.
To legally justify the strikes, Israel would need to demonstrate that Iran had both the intent to deploy a nuclear weapon and immediate capability to produce one, the experts stated. The report also noted that the US could not claim the right of collective defense if Israel's initial strike was itself unlawful.
Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov accused Western countries of complicity in what Moscow calls a US-Israeli breach of international norms. He claimed that the UK, Germany, and France pressured the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to use imprecise language in a report on Iran's nuclear program presented to the UN nuclear watchdog's board by Director General Rafael Grossi just weeks before the escalation.
'The Europeans took a purely imperialist, neocolonial position,' Lavrov said. 'They pushed Grossi to use highly ambitious and negative phrases in the document, which he did.'
Israel launched military action right after the board accused Tehran of breaching its obligations under the NPT.
The Bundestag's legal analysis was commissioned by lawmaker Ulrich Thoden of The Left party. Thoden called the findings 'a slap in the face for the German government' and criticized its alignment with Israel and the US during the crisis.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Russia Today
6 hours ago
- Russia Today
US imposes sanctions on UN human rights official critical of Israel
The US has announced sanctions against UN Special Rapporteur on the occupied Palestinian territories Francesca Albanese, who condemned Israel's war in Gaza. In a post on X on Wednesday, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio said the measure is a response to Albanese's 'illegitimate and shameful efforts to prompt the International Criminal Court action against US and Israeli officials, companies, and executives.' 'Albanese's campaign of political and economic warfare against the United States and Israel will no longer be tolerated. We will always stand by our partners in their right to self-defense,' Rubio said. Albanese was appointed by the UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC), which US President Donald Trump has accused of bias and spreading antisemitism. In February, the White House announced that the US would no longer participate in the UNHRC, mirroring the stance taken during Trump's first term in office. Today I am imposing sanctions on UN Human Rights Council Special Rapporteur Francesca Albanese for her illegitimate and shameful efforts to prompt @IntlCrimCourt action against U.S. and Israeli officials, companies, and executives. Albanese's campaign of political and economic… Albanese has repeatedly labeled Israel's war in Gaza a 'genocide' and urged countries to arrest Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on the 2024 warrant issued by the Hague-based International Criminal Court (ICC). 'I stand firmly and convincingly on the side of justice, as I have always done,' Albanese wrote on X shortly after the sanctions announcement. Both the US and Israel are not members of the ICC and have firmly rejected the warrants against Netanyahu and former Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant. Last month, the US imposed sanctions on four ICC judges, including those who authorized the court to investigate the conduct of American troops in Afghanistan. UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Volker Turk condemned the move as 'deeply corrosive of good governance and the due administration of justice.'
Russia Today
8 hours ago
- Russia Today
Trump ready to back new Russia sanctions bill
US President Donald Trump is ready to sign a bill aimed at eliminating Russia's trade under certain conditions, Politico reported on Wednesday, citing a senior administration official. If adopted, the 'bone-crushing' legislation spearheaded by hawkish Senator Lindsey Graham would impose a 500% tariff on countries buying oil, gas, uranium, and other goods from Russia. Although the bill grants the president the power to exempt nations from the tariff for up to 180 days, Trump reportedly wants Congress to give him sole authority to decide on the sanctions. 'The administration is not going to be micromanaged by the Congress on the president's foreign policy. The bill needs a waiver authority that is complete,' an official told Politico. The source added that otherwise, 'conceptually there's an openness' to signing the legislation. Graham said on Tuesday that the Senate would soon vote on the draft. 'The Senate bill has a presidential waiver to give President Trump maximum leverage,' he wrote on X. According to The New York Times, the vote could take place as soon as this month. The push for tougher sanctions has gained momentum after Trump stepped up criticism of Russian President Vladimir Putin, as restarted negotiations between Moscow and Kiev have so far failed to produce a ceasefire. Moscow has insisted that any lasting settlement must address the 'root causes' of the conflict, including NATO's eastward expansion and Ukraine's aspirations to join the US-led alliance, which Russia views as a threat to its national security. 'We don't need a pause, which the regime in Kiev and its foreign handlers would like to use to regroup their forces, continue mobilization, and strengthen their military potential,' Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov told Hungarian newspaper Magyar Nemzet on Monday. Putin has demanded that Ukraine recognize Russia's new borders and adopt permanent neutrality with a legally limited army. Lavrov said this week that Moscow is working to arrange a third round of direct talks with Ukraine in Türkiye.
Russia Today
11 hours ago
- Russia Today
Dmitry Trenin: The West's war on Russia will go beyond Ukraine
The trademark style of the current US president, Donald Trump, is verbal spectacle. His statements – brash, contradictory, sometimes theatrical – should be monitored, but not overestimated. They are not inherently favorable or hostile to Russia. And we must remember: Trump is not the 'king' of America. The 'Trump revolution' that many anticipated at the beginning of the year appears to have given way to Trump's own evolution – a drift toward accommodation with the American establishment. In that light, it's time to assess the interim results of our 'special diplomatic operation'. There have now been six presidential phone calls, several rounds of talks between foreign ministers and national security aides, and sustained contact at other levels. The most obvious positive outcome is the restoration of dialogue between Russia and the United States – a process that had been severed under the Biden administration. Crucially, this revived dialogue extends beyond Ukraine. A range of potential areas for cooperation have been mapped out, from geopolitical stability to transportation and sport. These may not carry immediate strategic weight, but they lay the groundwork for future engagement. Under Trump, the dialogue is unlikely to break off again – though its tone and pace may shift. One visible result of this diplomacy was the resumption of talks with the Ukrainian side in Istanbul. While these negotiations currently hold little political substance – and the recent prisoner exchanges occurred independently of them – they nonetheless reaffirm a core tenet of Russian diplomacy: we are ready for a political resolution to the conflict. Still, these are technical and tactical achievements. The strategic reality remains unchanged. It was never realistic to expect Trump to offer Russia a deal on Ukraine that met our security requirements. Nor for that matter would Russia accept one that compromised its long-term security interests. Likewise, any notion that Trump would 'deliver' Ukraine to the Kremlin, join Moscow in undermining the EU, or push for a new Yalta agreement with Russia and China was always fantasy. So the page has turned. What comes next? Trump will almost certainly sign the new US sanctions bill into law – but he'll try to preserve discretion in how those measures are applied. The sanctions will add friction to global trade, but they will not derail Russian policy. On the military front, Trump will deliver the remaining aid packages approved under Biden, and perhaps supplement them with modest contributions of his own. But going forward, it will be Western Europe – especially Germany – that supplies Ukraine, often by buying US-made systems and re-exporting them. Meanwhile, the United States will continue to furnish Kiev with battlefield intelligence – particularly for deep strikes inside Russian territory. None of this suggests the conflict will end in 2025. Nor will it end when hostilities in Ukraine eventually wind down. That's because the fight is not fundamentally about Ukraine. What we are witnessing is an indirect war between the West and Russia – part of a much broader global confrontation. The West is fighting to preserve its dominance. And Russia, in defending itself, is asserting its sovereign right to exist on its own terms. This war will be long. And the United States – with Trump or without him – will remain our adversary. The outcome will shape not just the fate of Ukraine, but the future of Russia itself. This article was first published in Kommersant, and was translated and edited by the RT team.
