Aftershocks of Israel’s Aggression Against Iran: U.S. Intervention and European Alignment

Introduction

Geopolitical developments in the Middle East have long been significant drivers of global tension. This region not only plays a crucial role in the global economy due to its abundant energy resources but also serves as a crossroads for the interests of major regional and transregional powers. In this context, any military intervention—particularly by key actors such as the United States or its European allies—can have profound and far-reaching consequences for both the parties directly involved and the international system as a whole.

In support of Israel’s actions against Iran, the United States has engaged in direct military intervention, a move publicly endorsed by several European powers, including France, Germany, and the United Kingdom. From legal, security, political, economic, and humanitarian perspectives, this event marks one of the most critical turning points in international relations since World War II. Its significance stems not only from the apparent violation of the principles of the United Nations Charter and international norms concerning state sovereignty but also from its cascading effects on the structure of the global order, European security, Middle Eastern stability, and the global economy.

This report aims to conduct a comprehensive analysis of the issue and forecast its consequences. Within this framework, we first examine the political, security, and economic interests and losses for the countries involved. We then review the challenges posed to the legal order and international treaties by such actions. Additionally, we consider the geopolitical repercussions and internal impacts on both the United States and European governments and societies. By drawing on historical precedents such as the U.S. invasion of Iraq in 2003 and developments arising from the Syrian crisis—both rooted in similar interventions—this analysis provides valuable insights for a forward-looking assessment of the trajectory of international crises.

 

Implications for the Interests of the Involved Countries

1. A) Political and Security Interests

– Creation of Broader Regional Instability

The direct intervention of the United States in support of Israel’s actions, in conjunction with the alignment of certain European nations—particularly France, Germany, and the United Kingdom—has resulted in heightened tensions in the Middle East. This dynamic not only complicates and exacerbates the Iran–Israel crisis but also fosters an environment conducive to the rise and expansion of terrorist organizations, increased activities by proxy forces supported by foreign actors, and the growing influence of regional and transregional powers such as Russia and China. This instability presents a significant threat to collective security throughout the Middle East and entangles neighboring countries in both security and humanitarian crises.

– Threat to National Security

The escalating tensions and expansion of conflict in the Middle East may lead to an increase in terrorist attacks within European nations, particularly by extremist groups engaging in sabotage and violence. Furthermore, the intensification of insecurity may trigger a new wave of migration and asylum-seeking toward Europe, placing additional political and economic pressure on host countries and exacerbating issues such as social crises, racial tensions, and political discord.

Following the 2015 terrorist attacks in Paris and Brussels—events linked to the crises in Syria and Iraq—the European Union has become particularly vigilant regarding security threats emanating from the region (Council of the European Union, 2025, https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/policies/fight-against-terrorism/). Additionally, the influx of asylum seekers may heighten social discontent, similar to how the 2015 refugee crisis contributed to increased support for far-right populist parties.

– Erosion of Trust in International Relations

The explicit support of European nations for U.S. and Israeli actions against Iran undermines their credibility and trust on the global stage (The Guardian, 2025, https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/jun/03/public-support-for-israel-in-western-europe-lowest-ever-recorded-yougov). This development has particularly adverse implications for Islamic countries, members of the Non-Aligned Movement, and even certain Western allies that prioritize diplomacy and peaceful conflict resolution. A decline in diplomatic and security cooperation may exacerbate divisions and contribute to increased instability in international relations.

The overt alignment of European powers with the U.S. and Israel also diminishes the trust of Islamic nations and some non-Western allies, such as India and Japan. This erosion of trust could lead to decreased collaboration on critical issues, including counterterrorism, energy security, and trade agreements.

1. B) Economic Interests

– Negative Impact on the Global Energy Market

Iran is a pivotal oil and gas producer, significantly influencing the stability of the global energy market. Heightened tensions may disrupt the supply of oil and gas, resulting in a sharp increase in prices across international markets (Reuters, 2025, https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/an-overview-irans-energy-industry-infrastructure-2025-02-04/). European nations, heavily reliant on energy imports, would encounter rising costs and price volatility, potentially leading to economic recession, slower growth, and elevated inflation – exerting significant pressure on both consumers and industries.

Historical crises, such as the Gulf War (1990–1991) and the imposition of extensive sanctions against Iran, resulted in notable volatility within the oil market. Should the current conflict escalate, European countries, which import approximately 50% of their energy needs, are likely to experience shortages and surging energy prices. This scenario would further exacerbate economic stagnation and inflation (European Commission, 2025, https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php?title=Energy_statistics_-_an_overview).

– Reciprocal Sanctions and Increased Trade Risk

In response to military interventions and support from Western nations, Iran is expected to impose reciprocal restrictions on companies and industries from those countries. Such measures would disrupt economic relations, diminish foreign investment, and elevate the overall risk of conducting business in the region. European companies – particularly those engaged in the Iranian market – would encounter substantial financial losses and significant operational constraints.

Historically, Iran has limited the activities of foreign companies in reaction to Western sanctions. This time, with increased intensity, European investments in Iran are at considerable risk, and major economic projects in sectors such as oil, gas, and other industries may be suspended.

– Disruption of Critical Global Trade Routes

The Strait of Hormuz and other maritime chokepoints in the Middle East serve as essential corridors for the transportation of energy and critical goods to global markets. Any conflict or insecurity affecting these routes could result in their partial or complete closure, thereby directly impacting global trade and the economies of energy-importing nations, particularly in Europe (Euronews, 2025, https://www.euronews.com/my-europe/2025/06/22/whats-at-stake-for-europe-if-strait-of-hormuz-is-blocked).

The Strait of Hormuz, through which approximately 20% of the world’s crude oil is transported, has historically encountered restrictions due to regional tensions. Such developments would significantly disrupt global trade and lead to a marked increase in transportation costs.

 

Implications for International Treaties and International Law

1. A) Violation of International Law and National Sovereignty

– Clear Violation of the United Nations Charter

A military assault conducted without the approval of the United Nations Security Council constitutes a blatant violation of fundamental principles of international law and the UN Charter. Article 2, Paragraph 4 of the Charter explicitly states that all member states shall refrain from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state. Consequently, the aggression exhibited by Israel and the intervention by the United States represent a clear breach of this provision. Furthermore, Article 51 stipulates that the use of force is permissible only in cases of legitimate self-defense in response to an armed attack (United Nations, 2025, https://www.un.org/en/about-us/un-charter/full-text). Accordingly, this article also justifies Iran’s right to respond lawfully in self-defense.

Such actions not only undermine the credibility and effectiveness of the United Nations as a guardian of global peace and security but also create a legal vacuum in addressing similar acts of aggression in the future.

Military intervention without Security Council authorization violates UN Charter and undermines the legitimacy of this vital international institution. A comparable precedent can be observed in the 2003 Iraq War, which lacked the Security Council approval and resulted in the weakening of the international legal order.

– The Geneva Conventions (1949) and Additional Protocols

The Geneva Conventions establish a legal framework for the protection of civilians during armed conflict. Military attacks or intelligence operations that result in harm to civilians or civilian property are considered violations of these conventions. The civilian casualties in Iran resulting from Israeli military actions and U.S. intervention represent breaches of the Geneva Conventions (EBSCO Research Starters, 2023, https://www.ebsco.com/research-starters/history/geneva-conventions-establish-norms-conduct-war).

– The Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT)

As a signatory to the NPT, Iran is committed to refraining from the development of nuclear weapons. Covert operations and military threats directed at Iran’s peaceful nuclear program violate the obligations outlined in the NPT, which include the right of member states to the peaceful use of nuclear energy (United Nations Office for Disarmament Affairs, 2025, https://disarmament.unoda.org/wmd/nuclear/npt/).

– International Conventions against Terrorism and Fundamental Human Rights Principles

The assassinations of Iranian nuclear scientists, including Abbasi, Tehranchi, and others, are regarded by numerous legal scholars as acts of state-sponsored terrorism. Such actions are inconsistent with various international conventions that prohibit assassination and uphold human rights (IRNA, 2022, https://en.irna.ir/news/84611006/Assassination-of-Iranian-nuclear-scientists-vivid-example-of).

– Undermining the Credibility of International Treaties

The support of the United States and European nations for Israeli aggression conveys a detrimental message to the international community: that international laws and norms can be disregarded. This undermines the credibility of global legal frameworks and may encourage other states to commit similar violations of international law. Ultimately, this trend contributes to increased chaos and instability within the international system.

1. B) Damage to the Multilateral System

– Undermining International Organizations and the Global Cooperation Framework

Unilateral interventions and support for military actions lacking global consensus diminish the credibility and authority of international organizations, including the United Nations and the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe, as well as other multilateral institutions. This erosion compromises cooperation and coordination among states, jeopardizing the resolution of significant global challenges. A decline in trust in international organizations drives various countries toward unilateral approaches and fosters extreme forms of nationalism. Consequently, global cooperation in critical areas such as arms control, climate change, and humanitarian crisis management is adversely affected.

– Decline in International Cooperation on Key Issues

Countries facing aggression or external pressure may, due to prevailing distrust and hostility, abstain from participating in global initiatives related to counter-terrorism, arms control, climate change mitigation, and migration management. This trend has far-reaching negative implications for global security, environmental protection, and sustainable development.

 

Geopolitical and Regional Consequences

Increase in the Influence of Rival Actors

The instability in the Middle East presents a significant opportunity for competing Western powers to enhance their influence and presence in Iran and its neighboring countries. This trend diminishes Western influence and alters the regional balance of power. Rival actors, such as Russia and China, are capitalizing on crises to expand their economic and military ties with Iran and other regional nations. For instance, China is engaged in substantial projects under the “Belt and Road Initiative” in Iran, which could either be jeopardized by unrest or provide China with an opportunity to strengthen its presence in the country. Western actions against Iran inadvertently facilitate the entry and establishment of Western rivals within the nation; recent Israeli aggression and U.S. intervention underscore this issue more than ever before (Special Eurasia, 2025, https://www.specialeurasia.com/2025/06/24/china-bri-israel-iran-conflict/).

Strengthening Anti-Western Tendencies

The Western endorsement of Israeli aggression is perceived by many regional populations and governments as a manifestation of interventionism and neo-colonialism. This perception fosters the growth of political, social, and cultural movements that are anti-Western and anti-imperialist throughout the region and the wider Islamic world, leading to heightened tensions and the emergence of new crises. Anti-Western sentiments are particularly pronounced in countries such as Iraq, Lebanon, and Yemen, complicating regional dynamics and contributing to a more insecure environment.

Intensification of Regional Rivalries and Arms Race

Western support for Israel raises security concerns among regional nations, prompting them to increase military expenditures and seek more advanced weaponry to ensure their security. This trend contributes to the formation of new regional alliances and elevates the likelihood of proxy wars and direct confrontations.

 

Domestic Consequences for the United States and European Countries

Increased Domestic Political Pressure

Aggressive foreign policies and support for military actions encounter significant opposition from public opinion, human rights advocates, opposition parties, and civil society. These pressures can lead to political crises, weaken governments, and prompt shifts in foreign policy.

Growth of Anti-War Political Movements

Various factions, parties, and anti-war and human rights movements are leveraging these conditions to enhance their influence within political and social spheres. This trend may result in a change in foreign policy direction and heightened demands for a reduction in military interventions.

There is a notable rise in opposition from left-wing political parties, human rights movements, and segments of civil society against the militaristic policies of governments. Instances such as anti-war protests in the United States, France, Germany, and the United Kingdom illustrate how this issue can significantly amplify internal pressures (News Nation Now, 2025, https://www.newsnationnow.com/politics/anti-war-protests-us-strikes-iran/).

Social and Security Crises

There is a potential escalation of street protests, social tensions, and unrest, particularly among immigrant and Muslim communities in the United States and European countries. These issues may lead to internal security crises, a rise in hate speech, and even inter-communal violence, posing a serious threat to social stability and cohesion (Hoover, 2024, https://www.hoover.org/research/islamism-and-immigration-germany-and-european-context). The social tensions between immigrant and native communities, coupled with an increase in anti-Muslim hate speech in the U.S. and Europe, may result in violence and social instability.

 

Conclusion

The comprehensive analysis and data presented in this report indicate that U.S. military aggression against Iran, supported by European countries, is unlikely to produce sustainable or profitable outcomes for the involved parties. Instead, it is expected to trigger a series of multifaceted destructive consequences and cascading crises at both regional and global levels.

From a security and political standpoint, this action marks the beginning of a new phase of instability in the Middle East. A region already facing complex challenges, including proxy wars, sectarian rivalries, and the increasing influence of extra-regional actors such as Russia and China, will likely enter a period of heightened conflict and insecurity due to further military aggression. This environment is conducive to the resurgence and expansion of extremist groups like ISIS and Al-Qaeda, which pose a direct threat to global security, particularly in Europe.

For European and Western interests, involvement in this aggression entails, at least in the short term, substantial economic and security costs. The experiences of the migration crises of 2015 and subsequent years have demonstrated how insecurity in the Middle East can rapidly affect Europe’s borders. The resulting waves of refugees, terrorist threats, and the rise of far-right extremism could once again challenge the social and political fabric of European nations. Additionally, instability in the global energy market, particularly in the event of disruptions to the Strait of Hormuz and Iran’s energy infrastructure, poses a significant threat to Europe’s energy-dependent economy. Such a scenario would inevitably lead to inflation, recession, and rising living costs.

From a legal and international perspective, military aggression conducted without the authorization of the Security Council constitutes a clear violation of the United Nations Charter and the principles of state sovereignty. Such actions not only undermine the legitimacy of the United Nations but also weaken the multilateral system that has been a cornerstone of the post-World War II global order. The proliferation of these approaches creates dangerous precedents in international relations, where states may resort to power dynamics and intervention without regard for legal norms. This situation could precipitate a wave of similar conflicts and acts of aggression in various regions, including Asia, Africa, and Latin America.

From a geopolitical standpoint, one strategic consequence of this action will be a diminishing of Western influence and an enhanced role for rival powers such as Russia and China. The Islamic Republic of Iran, which has been fortifying its strategic ties with these nations, is likely to gravitate towards new regional and economic alliances. Initiatives such as China’s “Belt and Road Initiative” may evolve within a more security-oriented framework, potentially threatening Western strategic dominance.

Ultimately, in European countries and the United States, governments engaging in this conflict are likely to face a surge of civil protests, political opposition, and crises of legitimacy. The rise of anti-war parties, the weakening of incumbent administrations, the intensification of critical discourse in media and civil society, and unrest among Muslim and immigrant communities are among the domestic repercussions of these aggressive policies. Concurrently, global public sentiment is increasingly attuned to Western aggression and unilateralism, with growing rejection of support for such interventions.

In summary, military aggression against Iran is unlikely to resolve bilateral issues or yield positive outcomes; rather, it will catalyze new and broader crises with repercussions for all nations, both those directly involved in the aggression and those affected from a distance. The pathway to peace, sustainable security, and development can only be achieved through diplomacy, adherence to international law, and multilateral cooperation, not through war and aggression.

 

Resources

1. Council of the European Union (2025), The EU’s Response to Terrorism, Accessible at: https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/policies/fight-against-terrorism/
2. Guardian (2025), Public Support for Israel in Western Europe at Lowest Ever Recorded by YouGov, Accessible at: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/jun/03/public-support-for-israel-in-western-europe-lowest-ever-recorded-yougov
3. Reuters (2025), An Overview of Iran’s Main Gas Field and Oil Infrastructure, Accessible at: https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/an-overview-irans-energy-industry-infrastructure-2025-02-04/
4. European Commission (2025), Energy Statistics – An Overview, Accessible at: https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php?title=Energy_statistics_-_an_overview
5. Euronews (2025), What’s at Stake for Europe if the Strait of Hormuz is Blocked?, Accessible at: https://www.euronews.com/my-europe/2025/06/22/whats-at-stake-for-europe-if-strait-of-hormuz-is-blocked
6. United Nations (2025), United Nations Charter (Full Text), Accessible at: https://www.un.org/en/about-us/un-charter/full-text
7. EBSCO Research Starters (2023), Geneva Conventions Establish Norms of Conduct in War, Accessible at: https://www.ebsco.com/research-starters/history/geneva-conventions-establish-norms-conduct-war
8. United Nations Office for Disarmament Affairs (2025), Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), Accessible at: https://disarmament.unoda.org/wmd/nuclear/npt/
9. IRNA (2022), Assassination of Iranian Nuclear Scientists: A Vivid Example of Israel’s State Terrorism, Accessible at: https://en.irna.ir/news/84611006/Assassination-of-Iranian-nuclear-scientists-vivid-example-of
10. Special Eurasia (2025), Assessing the Impact of the Israel–Iran Conflict on China’s Belt and Road Initiative, Accessible at: https://www.specialeurasia.com/2025/06/24/china-bri-israel-iran-conflict/
11. News Nation Now (2025), Anti-War Protesters Rally in Major Cities After US Strikes Iran, Accessible at: https://www.newsnationnow.com/politics/anti-war-protests-us-strikes-iran/
12. Hoover (2024), Islamism and Immigration in Germany and the European Context, Accessible at: https://www.hoover.org/research/islamism-and-immigration-germany-and-european-context