USA in authoritarianism: Daase warns of danger for NATO!

USA in authoritarianism: Daase warns of danger for NATO!

In the midst of high international tensions and upcoming NATO meetings, conflict researcher Christopher Daase from Frankfurt is pushing for a closer look at the international legal implications of the recent US military strikes against Iran. According to Daase, these attacks can be interpreted not only as a violent escalation, but also as an “additional burden” for NATO. The scientist says that Europe needs to seriously ask itself to what extent the USA actually represents European interests, especially under the Trump administration, which he describes as authoritarian. Daase warns urgently about the long-term consequences of preventive wars and sees a growing gap between the values ​​of Americans and Europeans.

As [Tagesschau.de](https://www.tagesschau.de/ausland/ Amerika/us-attack-voelkerrecht-100.html) reports, the US attacks were explicitly aimed at Iranian nuclear facilities. US President Trump and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth described the operations as “very successful” and an “overwhelming success”. However, there is clear criticism from international law experts: The attacks can hardly be justified under international law, as the UN Charter prohibits military attacks without an immediate threat. Jochen von Bernstorff, a renowned international law expert, described the US attacks as “clearly unlawful”. It is also interesting that the majority of international lawyers do not see Israel's right to self-defense against Iran, even though the Americans often use this argument.

NATO and international law in focus

The debate about NATO is not new. Historically, member states have repeatedly had to deal with the issue of military interventions and their legal basis. bpb.de describes the challenges that have arisen for NATO since the end of the Cold War. During this time, the framework conditions have changed fundamentally and many of the traditional conflicts have been replaced by new, more complex issues. The need for a clear international legal basis for military engagements is now more explosive than ever and could endanger the international order if it is not maintained.

Daase expresses low expectations for the upcoming NATO summit in The Hague and does not believe that the US will reaffirm its NATO commitments. For him it would be a success if no scandal broke out at the meeting. His assessment is also reflected in the broader discussion about the role of the USA within NATO, which he believes wants to be reduced in the long term. Europe therefore faces the challenge of strengthening its own defense capabilities.

Another aspect that cannot be missing from the current discussion is the threatened erosion of the USA's soft power. As the global community continues to grapple with the consequences of US policy, a picture is emerging that not only affects relations between NATO partners, but also calls into question the global security architecture. Daase warns that Trump's policies could accelerate the US's global political decline, which is being closely watched in other parts of the world, particularly in Moscow.

Overall, it is clear that the conflict over Iran could have far-reaching effects on international relations and stability in Europe. It remains to be seen how NATO and its members will respond to the developments and whether they will be able to defend their common values ​​and interests.