It’s possible that I shall make an ass of myself. But in that case one can always get out of it with a little dialectic. I have, of course, so worded my proposition as to be right either way (K.Marx, Letter to F.Engels on the Indian Mutiny)
Sunday, March 01, 2026
‘Reckless, Unconstitutional’: NYT Editorial Slams Trump’s Iran Strikes
The New York Times editorial board criticizes Trump’s Iran strikes as reckless, unconstitutional and strategically undefined.
Key Takeaways
The New York Times says Trump launched Iran attack without congressional authorization.
Editorial calls his justification of “imminent threats” “dubious.”
Board accuses Trump of contradicting his earlier claim that Iran’s nuclear program was “obliterated.”
Lawmakers in both parties move to restrict unilateral war powers.
Editorial warns of regional escalation and troop casualties.
‘Reckless’ War without Congress
In a sharply worded editorial, the board of The New York Times argues that President Donald Trump launched a new war against Iran without constitutional authority or a coherent strategy.
The paper notes that Trump promised in his 2024 campaign “that he would end wars, not start them,” yet has now ordered military strikes in seven countries over the past year.
The latest escalation — coordinated with Israel — was announced in a 2:30 AM video message shortly after bombing began. In that video, Trump claimed Iran posed “imminent threats” and called for the overthrow of its government.
The editorial describes his rationale as “dubious” and says “making his case by video in the middle of the night is unacceptable.”
It stresses that the Constitution grants Congress, not the president, the sole power to declare war, yet Trump “has not involved Congress.”
Contradictions, Nuclear Claims
Among Trump’s stated justifications is the elimination of Iran’s nuclear program. However, the editorial points to a glaring inconsistency: Trump had already declared Iran’s nuclear program “obliterated” during previous strikes in June.
That claim, the board writes, was “belied by both US intelligence and this new attack.”
“The contradiction underscores how little regard he has for his duty to tell the truth when committing American armed forces to battle,” the editorial states.
The board acknowledges that Iran’s government “deserves no sympathy,” citing repression, executions, regional proxy warfare and long-standing hostility toward the United States. It also recognizes that preventing Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons is a legitimate objective shared by presidents of both parties.
However, it argues that military action must be grounded in strategy, legal authorization and public accountability.
“A responsible American president could make a plausible argument for further action against Iran,” the editorial says. Such an argument would require “a clear explanation of the strategy” and justification for acting now, especially given that “Iran does not appear close to having a nuclear weapon.”
Instead, the board writes, Trump is “telling the American people and the world that he expects their blind trust. He has not earned that trust.”
Calls for Congressional Restraint
The editorial also highlights bipartisan efforts in Congress to reassert constitutional authority over war powers.
In the House, Representatives Ro Khanna and Thomas Massie have introduced a resolution aimed at preventing the president from initiating war without congressional approval.
In the Senate, similar measures are being sponsored by Tim Kaine and Rand Paul.
The editorial argues that “a robust assertion of authority by Congress is the best way to constrain the president.”
It further criticizes Trump for failing to publicly address the risks of escalation, including potential American casualties. While Trump acknowledged in his overnight video that “the lives of courageous American heroes may be lost,” the board says he should have addressed those risks openly, including in his State of the Union speech.
“When a president asks American troops and diplomats to risk their lives, he should not be coy about it,” the editorial states.
Uncertainty and Historical Parallels
The board warns that Trump’s call for regime change raises troubling parallels with Iraq and Afghanistan.
“He has called for regime change and offered no sense of why the world should expect this campaign to end better than the 21st-century attempts at regime change in Iraq and Afghanistan,” the editorial says.
Those wars, it notes, toppled governments but left lasting instability and “embittered the troops who loyally served in them.”
While expressing hope for the safety of American troops and concern for “the many innocent Iranians who have long suffered under their brutal government,” the editorial concludes with a stark assessment.
“We lament that Mr. Trump is not treating war as the grave matter that it is,” the editorial concludes.
(PC, NYT)
‘This Is Not Your War’ – Russia, China, World Respond to US–Israeli War on Iran
The joint US–Israeli aggression on Iran and Tehran’s retaliation, reaching US military bases in Arab states, have triggered sweeping international reactions.
Key Developments
Oman warns US strikes undermined nuclear negotiations and urges Washington not to deepen involvement.
Russia condemns the operation as “armed aggression” and demands an immediate halt.
China expresses deep concern and calls for the cessation of military action and renewed dialogue.
Gulf states and Jordan condemn Iranian missile attacks and affirm self-defense rights.
Palestinian, Iraqi, and Yemeni factions declare solidarity with Iran and threaten US bases.
European leaders call for restraint, emergency UN Security Council consultations, and protection of civilians.
Saudi Arabia condemns Iranian missile strikes on Riyadh and the Eastern Province.
International humanitarian officials warn of catastrophic regional consequences.
A Diplomatic Breakpoint
The US–Israeli war on Iran has fractured the international landscape, drawing sharp condemnations, urgent diplomatic appeals, and open threats of regional escalation. What began as a joint military operation described by Israel as “preemptive” and by Washington as necessary to eliminate “imminent threats” has rapidly evolved into a geopolitical crisis.
Governments worldwide have responded within hours of the strikes, revealing deep divisions over legitimacy, strategy, and the future of regional stability.
Oman: Mediation Undermined
Oman, which has long served as a discreet mediator between Washington and Tehran, reacted with visible dismay.
Foreign Minister Badr Albusaidi said the strikes had undermined “active and serious negotiations” that were ongoing over Iran’s nuclear program. Just hours before the military operation, Albusaidi had met senior US officials and expressed optimism that “peace is within our reach.”
In a pointed message directed at Washington, he urged the United States “not to get sucked in further,” adding: “This is not your war.”
Muscat’s warning underscores the diplomatic cost of the strikes. The latest round of nuclear negotiations in Geneva had concluded only days earlier, with Oman playing a central facilitating role.
Russia: “Unprovoked Armed Aggression”
Moscow issued one of the strongest condemnations.
Russia’s Foreign Ministry described the US–Israeli operation as a “preplanned and unprovoked act of armed aggression against a sovereign and independent UN member state.” It demanded an immediate cessation of hostilities and a return to diplomacy.
The ministry warned of the risk of a “humanitarian, economic and possibly radiological catastrophe,” particularly given reported strikes on nuclear facilities under International Atomic Energy Agency safeguards.
Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov spoke with his Iranian counterpart Abbas Araghchi, reiterating Moscow’s condemnation and expressing readiness to help broker a peaceful resolution.
The Kremlin also convened its Security Council, signaling the seriousness with which Moscow views the escalation.
China: Deep Concern, Call for Restraint
Beijing adopted a more measured tone but made its position clear.
China’s Foreign Ministry said it was “deeply concerned” about the strikes and called for “an immediate cessation of military action.” It emphasized respect for Iran’s sovereignty, security, and territorial integrity, urging all sides to resume dialogue.
While stopping short of outright condemnation, China’s statement reflects unease over instability in a region critical to global energy markets and Belt and Road investments.
Beijing warned that further escalation could destabilize the entire Middle East.
Europe: Alarm and Calls for Emergency Diplomacy
European reactions were cautious but urgent.
French President Emmanuel Macron called for good-faith negotiations to halt Iran’s nuclear and ballistic programs and urged an emergency UN Security Council meeting.
European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and European Council President Antonio Costa described developments as “deeply alarming,” calling for maximum restraint and full respect for international law.
Germany confirmed close coordination with European partners and embassies in the region.
The United Kingdom urged its citizens in Bahrain, Kuwait, Qatar, and the UAE to shelter in place, warning of heightened risks.
Britain, France, and Germany also condemned Iranian retaliatory missile attacks, urging Tehran to avoid indiscriminate strikes and return to talks.
Gulf States and Jordan: Condemnation of Iranian Missiles
Saudi Arabia condemned what it described as “blatant Iranian aggression” targeting Riyadh and the Eastern Province, stating its air defenses intercepted incoming projectiles. The kingdom warned it would take “all necessary measures” to safeguard its security.
Qatar condemned ballistic missile targeting of its territory as a “flagrant violation” of sovereignty and reserved the right to respond proportionately under international law.
Kuwait similarly described attacks on its territory as violations of sovereignty and affirmed its inherent right to self-defense under Article 51 of the UN Charter.
The United Arab Emirates expressed full solidarity with affected states and warned that continued violations threaten global economic and energy stability.
Jordan condemned missile attacks on its territory and reaffirmed support for diplomatic solutions.
These statements reveal a widening regional dimension, with Gulf capitals balancing condemnation of Iranian retaliation while avoiding explicit endorsement of the original US–Israeli strikes.
Iraqi and Yemeni Factions: Threats Against US Bases
Beyond official state reactions, non-state actors aligned with Iran signaled escalation.
In Iraq, Kataib Hezbollah threatened to “soon begin attacking US bases” following airstrikes in Babil province. The Iraqi army confirmed casualties from strikes in Jurf al-Nasr, a sensitive security zone associated with armed factions.
In Yemen, the Ansarallah movement warned that “the coming hours carry more surprises,” framing Iran’s response as legitimate self-defense. The group warned that US military bases across the region were potential targets.
Ansarallah’s political bureau declared that “whoever believes the targeting concerns Iran alone is mistaken,” signaling the possibility of a broader confrontation.
Palestinian Factions: Solidarity with Iran
Palestinian resistance movements strongly condemned what they termed US–Israeli aggression.
Hamas described the operation as a “dangerous escalation” targeting regional stability and sovereignty. It expressed solidarity with Iran’s right to self-defense and called on Arab and Muslim states to unite.
Islamic Jihad similarly condemned the strikes as part of a broader agenda to reshape the region and weaken the Palestinian cause.
Both groups voiced confidence in Iran’s capacity to respond.
Pakistan and South Asia: Calls for De-Escalation
Pakistan condemned the strikes as “unjustified” and called for an immediate resumption of diplomacy. Islamabad advised its citizens to avoid non-essential travel to Iran.
South Korea ordered safety checks for troops deployed abroad, particularly in Lebanon and Somalia.
Taiwan urged its citizens to avoid non-essential travel to parts of the Middle East, maintaining Iran at the highest travel alert level.
These measures reflect fears of spillover instability.
Humanitarian Concerns
The International Committee of the Red Cross warned that military escalation could trigger a “series of dangerous consequences” with devastating implications for civilians.
ICRC President Mirjana Spoljaric cautioned that the region risks spiraling into humanitarian fallout if hostilities continue.
Warnings of broader catastrophe—humanitarian, economic, and even radiological—have become central to international discourse.
A Sharply Divided World
While Russia and Pakistan issued direct condemnations, China expressed concern, and European leaders urged restraint, Western allies such as Australia signaled support for the US-Israeli war.
Meanwhile, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy also voiced support for the strikes, citing Iran’s military cooperation with Russia.
(The Palestine Chronicle)
Death toll from US-Israel massacre in southern Iran girls' school rises to 115
The death toll in a US-Israeli strike on a girls school in southern Iran has risen to 115, Iran's state-run FARSNA has reported
Videos circulating online showed extensive destruction to the school building
The death toll from an attack Saturday on a school in Iran's south has risen to 115, according to state-affiliated Farsna, after the US and Israel launched strikes on the Islamic republic.
Previously, the Iranian Red Crescent said the death toll from a strike on Saturday that hit a school in the country's south had risen to 108.
"The number of student martyrs at Minab School has reached 108, and relief and debris removal operations are still ongoing," a spokesperson for the organisation said.
The Pentagon did not immediately respond to a request for comment, but a CENTCOM spokesperson was quoted by The New York Times as saying: "We are aware of reports concerning civilian harm resulting from ongoing military operations. We take these reports seriously and are looking into them.
"The protection of civilians is of utmost importance, and we will continue to take all precautions available to minimise the risk of unintended harm."
Iran's President Masoud Pezeshkian said "this barbaric act is another black page in the record of countless crimes committed by the aggressors".
The Iranian Red Crescent said on Saturday evening that at least 201 people had been killed and 747 injured in the attacks.
Iran’s Tasnim News Agency had earlier reported that a girls' primary school in the province was attacked, while videos circulating online showed extensive destruction to the school building.
Reports indicated that approximately 170 students were inside the school at the time of the strike.
Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Esmail Baghaei also spoke about the deadly attack on the school.
Hormozgan Province hosts several Iranian naval bases.
US missiles kill 108 children in strike on school in Iran
Bodybags of Iranian children in Minab, southern Iran following US strike on girls school. / CC: Eghtesad Online
The death toll from the US missile strike on Shajareh Tayyebeh girls' school in Minab, southern Iran, has risen to 108, the Minab prosecutor confirmed on February 28, according to Eghtesad Online.
The confirmation by a judicial official represents the first formal legal authority to put a figure on the casualties, upgrading the earlier toll of at least 80 reported by IRNA and verified by IntelliNews and Persian fact-checking service Factnameh.
Dozens more children remained unaccounted for at the time of the earlier reports, suggesting the final toll could rise further.
According to a video released earlier in the day, showing the immediate aftermath of the strike, smoke rises from the burnt-out walls, and debris lies spread across the road. Families can be seen screaming for their children, in what could be potentially classed as a war crime, hitting a primary school.
The school is located adjacent to a Revolutionary Guards barracks in Minab, a city in Hormozgan province in southern Iran, with the US missiles likely hitting the wrong target.
Iran's Supreme National Security Council had ordered all schools and universities closed until further notice earlier in the day, as US and Israeli strikes continued across Tehran, Isfahan, Qom and other cities.
At least 85 killed in Israeli strike on girls’ school in southern Iran
Iran termed the strikes a violation of sovereignty, vowed to respond and launched retaliatory strikes.
At least 85 people, including students, were killed after Israeli strikes targeted a girls’ primary school in the city of Minab in southern Iran’s Hormozgan province on Saturday, Feb. 28, according to Iranian officials.
Footage from the aftermath of the attack was released by the Iran Ministry of Culture and Islamic Guidance, showing the destroyed school building and smoke rising at the site.
The US and Israel launched a joint attack on Iran early Saturday, claiming it was meant to remove “threats” posed by the Iranian “regime.” Separate video statements were released by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and US President Donald Trump, which also hinted at supporting efforts for a change in government in Tehran.
Iran termed the strikes a violation of sovereignty, vowed to respond and launched retaliatory strikes.
The developments came as Oman was mediating talks between Washington and Tehran on Iran’s nuclear program, and the latest round was held in Geneva on Thursday.
