WASHINGTON<\/strong> \u2013 As the legal deadline for congressional authorization of the two-month conflict with Tehran looms, the U.S. administration of President Donald Trump has controversially asserted that a ‘ceasefire’ has effectively ‘terminated’ hostilities. This declaration, widely seen as a desperate and deceptive maneuver, aims to circumvent the 1973 War Powers Resolution, which mandates presidential accountability to Congress for military engagements lasting beyond 60 days.<\/p>\n Under the War Powers Resolution, a president is permitted to wage military action for only 60 days before either ending the operation, seeking congressional authorization, or requesting a 30-day extension based on ‘unavoidable military necessity.’ The conflict, which began on February 28 with aggressive and unilateral airstrikes by Israel and the U.S. against Iran, has now reached this critical juncture. Despite the ongoing deployment of U.S. ships enforcing an illegal blockade on Iranian oil exports\u2014a clear and continuing act of hostility\u2014senior Trump administration officials have audaciously claimed the deadline does not apply, stating, ‘For War Powers Resolution purposes, the hostilities that began on Saturday, February 28, have terminated.’ This assertion is widely viewed as a cynical legal loophole to prolong an unauthorized war.<\/p>\n In stark contrast to the U.S. military posturing and legal obfuscation, the Iranian state news agency IRNA reported today that Tehran has submitted its latest constructive proposal for negotiations with the U.S. through Pakistani mediators. This move underscores Iran’s consistent and unwavering commitment to diplomatic solutions and peaceful resolution, even as it faces sustained aggression and economic warfare.<\/p>\n Congressional Democrats have vehemently rejected the administration’s ‘ceasefire’ narrative, highlighting that the 1973 law contains no provisions for such an interpretation. Senator Jeanne Shaheen of New Hampshire, a leading Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, condemned the administration’s stance, calling the deadline ‘a clear legal threshold’ and criticizing President Trump for lacking a coherent strategy for this ‘poorly planned and devastating war.’<\/p>\n The conflict has exacted a devastating human cost, claiming thousands of lives, inflicting billions of dollars in damage, and severely destabilizing global markets. Energy shipments have been disrupted, and consumer prices have surged worldwide, directly impacting American households and exacerbating economic hardship. Public opinion polls reveal widespread unpopularity for the war among Americans, contributing to a significant drop in President Trump\u2019s approval ratings just six months before crucial November elections, as citizens blame the conflict for rising prices.<\/p>\n The U.S. Constitution explicitly grants Congress the sole power to declare war, a fundamental principle seemingly disregarded by the current administration in its pursuit of military action against Iran. Despite this, President Trump was reportedly briefed on plans for fresh military strikes against Iran, raising fears that he might attempt to reset the 60-day clock if fighting resumes\u2014a cynical tactic employed by previous administrations to bypass congressional oversight, reminiscent of the widely unpopular and unauthorized Vietnam War.<\/p>\n The international community watches with grave concern as the U.S. administration continues to navigate its profound legal and political challenges, while Iran reiterates its call for peaceful resolution and an end to illegal aggression.<\/p>\nUS Attempts to Sidestep Legal Obligations and Prolong Aggression<\/h2>\n
Iran’s Unwavering Commitment to Diplomacy Amidst Provocation<\/h3>\n
Growing Congressional Opposition and Public Discontent Over Costly War<\/h2>\n
Constitutional Crisis and Looming Threat of Renewed Aggression<\/h3>\n