NATO Chief: U.S. Strikes on Iran Are Legal Under International Law

In a strong statement that may shape global opinion, NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte declared that the recent U.S. airstrikes on Iranian nuclear sites did not violate international law, calling the operation legitimate under current legal and strategic frameworks. His remarks were delivered during a press conference ahead of the NATO Leaders Summit in The Hague on June 23, 2025.

🛡️ NATO’s Legal Position

Rutte asserted, “I would not agree that this is against international law, what the U.S. did.” He emphasized that the operation aligned with NATO’s long-standing position: Iran must never be allowed to obtain nuclear weapons, and any action that prevents this outcome could be considered defensive and preventative under international norms.

The NATO chief’s defense of the U.S. military action arrives at a critical moment, as global leaders debate whether the strikes were an overreach or a necessary deterrent in the face of Iran’s expanding nuclear capabilities.

🌍 Summit Agenda Overshadowed

Originally intended to focus on military readiness, cyber defense, and NATO modernization, the summit has been largely overtaken by the fallout from the Iran strikes. Rutte admitted that the situation in the Middle East is now a “top-priority discussion” among NATO members, who are closely monitoring the risk of escalation between Iran, the U.S., and Israel.

Despite the shift in focus, Rutte reiterated that the alliance remains unified in its broader goals—collective defense, deterrence, and strategic stability.

🇪🇺 Divided but Firm

Although NATO as an institution supports the legality of the strikes, European responses remain divided:

 

• France expressed concern, urging the U.S. to return to diplomatic engagement and multilateral negotiations.

 

• Germany offered conditional support, stating the strikes should be followed by transparent international dialogue.

 

• The U.K. backed the operation, calling it a “strategic necessity” and a clear message to Iran’s regime.

This internal divergence reflects broader tension within NATO—supporting collective defense and legal frameworks, while differing in diplomatic approach.

🔑 Key Takeaways

 

• NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte confirmed the U.S. strikes on Iran were legal under international law.

 

• The alliance views the action as justified self-defense aimed at preventing nuclear proliferation.

 

• The NATO Summit in The Hague has shifted focus to address the ongoing Iran crisis.

 

• European allies are split on the political and diplomatic consequences of the operation.

 

• NATO maintains unity in its strategic objective to deter Iran’s nuclear ambitions, even as members differ on tactics.