A 'reckless' act or a 'courageous' decision? Papers divided over US strikes on Iran

The news that the US has struck Iran 's nuclear sites is making front pages worldwide. Spanish daily La Vanguardia headlines with " Trump goes to war". British paper The Financial Times writes that "Trump declares victory with massive air strikes". It then quotes Trump, who says that the US is "not at war with Iran but with its nuclear programme". "The gamble of the bombs", reads the headline in French conservative newspaper La Croix. The paper says that the attack marks a new phase in the ongoing conflict. Israeli right-wing daily The Jerusalem Post writes that "History remembers those who stand tall". The paper says that Israel and the US stand "shoulder to shoulder in defence of the free world". French left-wing paper L'Humanité takes the opposing view, with an apocalyptic front page of the bombings entitled "Peace according to Trump". The paper says that the latest actions are plunging the Middle East into chaos.
Inside, papers are also reacting differently to Trump's decision to intervene. An editorial in the British daily t he Guardian says that Trump's bombing is "an illegal and reckless act" and that "the world is likely to pay a steep price". The paper says that Trump's move is "handy for leaders like Vladimir Putin and Xi Jinping" who might want to carry out similar attacks. And although an immediate crisis in the Middle East "can be contained", the cost of his reckless act may not be fully felt and understood "for decades". Belgian left-wing paper Le Soir writes "Here lies the international order, blown up by the law of the strongest", adding that it isn't clear at all what's next. A column in Politico says that the strikes are showing us what kind of president Trump actually is. Politico says it's "hard to define Trump's foreign policy" because he has made many "contradictory moves". The paper says his latest decision shows that he is in a phase where he's willing to take "enormous risks with little concern about the blowback".
However, some analysis pieces are defending and praising Trump's move. The New York Times has an opinion piece entitled "Trump's courageous and correct decision". The article says that many US presidents have promised they will stop Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons, but it was Trump who demonstrated that "those pledges were not hollow". The columnist writes calls it "a courageous and correct decision that deserves respect, no matter how one feels about the president". The Wall Street Journal has a similar opinion piece entitled "Trump meets the moment on Iran". It says that his actions "spare the world from an intolerable risk", adding that it creates "an opportunity for a more peaceful Middle East".
The US intervention is of course the major story in the Iranian press, with all the papers condemning the move. "You will pay" writes the state-controlled Tehran Times – that's what Iran vowed after the US officially entered the war. According to the paper, Trump is wrong about the effectiveness of his attack. Iranian state-owned channel Press TV quotes the country's foreign minister, who says that the US attacks "mark an unprecedented collapse in international relations", warning that this could have "disastrous consequences". The opposition website Iran Wire reports on a division that's forming in Iran – hardline Iranian officials are calling for retaliation against the US, while many citizens blame their own government and its nuclear ambitions for bringing the war to Iran.
Finally, we look at illustrators and their cartoons in Cartoon Movement following the US strikes on Iran.

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

France 24

29 minutes ago

• France 24

Did US strikes 'finish the job' of destroying Fordow plant?

08:58 23/06/2025 Turkey braces for refugees as Iranian flock to borders 23/06/2025 EU urges 'all sides to step back' after US strikes Iran, but can bloc find unified response? 23/06/2025 US warns against Iran retaliation as Trump raises 'regime change' 23/06/2025 Will US strikes be enough to derail Iran's nuclear programme? 23/06/2025 Residents shelter in Tel Aviv as Israel, Iran trade strikes 23/06/2025 How successful were US strikes on Iran? 23/06/2025 'I never expected he would be freed', wife of Belarus opposition leader tells FRANCE 24 23/06/2025 US reveals details of 'Operation Midnight Hammer' 22/06/2025 Iran: How is the war with Israel affecting civil society? Middle East

Euronews

an hour ago

• Euronews

Oil rises and Europe's markets open lower after US strikes on Iran

Investors reacted to US strikes on Iran over the weekend as Iran and Israel continued to trade missile fire on Monday morning. The price of Brent crude oil rose around 1.53% to $78.19 a barrel as of around 7.15 CEST, while WTI rose 1.48% to $74.93 a barrel. On Sunday, US forces attacked three Iranian nuclear and military sites, stating that Tehran must not be allowed to possess a nuclear weapon. President of Iran Masoud Pezeshkian said that the country "will never surrender to bullying and oppression", while Iranian foreign minister Abbas Araghchi has arrived in Moscow for talks with Russian president Vladimir Putin. European markets opened in the red on Monday as investors digested the news. The FTSE 100 was down 0.28% to 8,749.98, the CAC 40 fell 0.66% to 7,539.68, the DAX slipped 0.55% to 23,222.90, while the FTSE MIB dropped 0.97% to 38,852.55. The STOXX 600 fell 0.28% to 535.03 while the EURO STOXX 50 dropped 0.26% to 5,220.02. Over in the US, futures for the S&P 500 slipped 0.13% to 6,010.25 and Dow Jones Industrial Average futures dropped 0.2% to 42,431.00. Nasdaq futures fell 0.18% to 21,804.50 on Monday morning. In Asian trading, Tokyo's Nikkei 225 index fell 0.19% to 38,331.12, the Kospi in Seoul dropped 0.3% to 3,012.88, and Australia's S&P/ASX 200 declined 0.37% to 8,474.40. Hong Kong's Hang Seng and the Shanghai Composite Index were in positive territory, with respective gains of 0.35% to 23,611.68 and 0.13% to 3,364.29. The conflict, which flared up after an Israeli attack against Iran on 13 June, has sent oil prices higher linked to Iran's status as a major oil producer. The nation is also located on the narrow Strait of Hormuz, through which much of the world's crude oil passes. Investors are concerned that Tehran might decide to bomb oil infrastructure in neighbouring countries or block tankers from travelling through the Strait of Hormuz. Shipping company Maersk said on Sunday that it was continuing to operate through the strait, adding: "We will continuously monitor the security risk to our specific vessels in the region and are ready to take operational actions as needed." According to vessel tracking data compiled by Bloomberg, two supertankers Coswisdom Lake and South Loyalty U-turned in the Strait of Hormuz on Sunday. The situation now hinges on whether Tehran decides to opt for aggression or a more diplomatic response to US and Israeli strikes. Iran could attempt to close the waterway by setting mines across the Strait or striking and seizing vessels. Even so, this would likely be met by a forceful response from the US navy, meaning the oil price spike may not be sustained. Some analysts also think Iran is unlikely to close down the waterway because the country uses it to transport its own crude, mostly to China, and oil is a major revenue source for the regime. If Tehran did successfully close the Strait, this would cause a wider price spike for transported goods and complicate the deflationary process in the US, potentially keeping interest rates higher for longer. On Monday morning, Trump also floated the possibility of regime change in Iran. "If the current Iranian regime is unable to make Iran great again, why wouldn't there be regime change?" said the US president on Truth Social. Vice president J.D. Vance had commented earlier that the administration did not seek regime change in Iran.

LeMonde

an hour ago

• LeMonde

Does Iran still have the means to retaliate against the US and Israel?

With Iran pushed into a corner on the military front, a shroud of uncertainty surrounds the Islamic Republic's intentions and capacity to respond to American airstrikes on Monday, June 23. Also unclear was the future of its nuclear program, which is likely intended for military purposes, after key sites suffered heavy blows overnight from Saturday to Sunday. "Monumental damage was done to all Nuclear sites in Iran, as shown by satellite images. Obliteration is an accurate term," United States President Donald Trump declared on social media on Sunday, referring to the previous day's American airstrikes on the Fordo, Natanz and Isfahan sites. "The biggest damage took place far below ground level. Bullseye!!!" Trump added. Showing more caution, General Dan Caine, chairman of the Joints Chiefs of Staff, said the sites had suffered "extremely severe damage and destruction." Experts, however, said it was impossible at this point to determine the precise extent of the damage the bombings inflicted underground. Nor was it yet possible to know what had become of the stockpile of enriched uranium that Tehran has accumulated: 408 kilograms enriched to 60% in isotope 235, which if further enriched to 90% would be sufficient to produce several nuclear weapons. Iran claims to have placed its stockpile in a secure location.