Following the recent developments and the hostile stance expressed by the French President, Dr. Haqqani, faculty member at the School of Law, has published the following note:
In a tweet following Israel’s act of aggression against Iran, French President Emmanuel Macron wrote: "France has repeatedly condemned Iran’s current nuclear program and has taken appropriate diplomatic action in response. In this context, France reaffirms Israel’s right to defend itself and ensure its own security."
Exactly one week prior, the School of Law at Shahid Beheshti University had hosted three French professors specializing in international law, international relations, and geopolitics. They had joined us from the Paris Institute of Geopolitics and Sorbonne University. Upon hearing President Macron’s unfortunate remarks, I was reminded of a portion of Professor Christophe Réveillard’s comments during that session, offered in response to a question posed by Dr. Ghanbari Jahromi. I have translated that part here for our audience, as it powerfully illustrates the current state of affairs in France and among its political leadership:
“We are all legal scholars here, and unfortunately, we are also all aware of the existence of a discipline beyond law: politics and geopolitics. As jurists, we have great respect for natural law and do not believe in law merely for law’s sake. This is the first time I wish to speak favorably of the European Union. We have followed negotiations between the West and Iran (specifically those involving European foreign ministers) for many years.
U.S. policy has consistently followed a pincer strategy: one arm being hard power, and the other—the diplomatic front—ostensibly handled by the European Union, though both strategies have essentially served U.S. interests. In other words, there have been two faces to American negotiation: one overt and forceful, managed directly by the U.S., and one softer, carried out by Europeans, but both ultimately driven by American strategy.
Nevertheless, the good news was that the 2015 JCPOA (Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action) was a significant achievement, in which the Iranian nuclear issue was finally addressed and resolved through a legal and reasoned framework.
Alongside the European Commission, the European External Action Service, which was effectively established for JCPOA negotiations, played a key role. This revealed the true nature of the United States. In his first term, President Trump was extremely pro-Israel and anti-Iran, and he unilaterally and illegally withdrew from the JCPOA. I strongly agree with the statement that Trump's withdrawal from the deal was completely illegal—just as the extraterritorial application of U.S. law is illegal.
In truth, the American decision to exit the JCPOA was based on geopolitical (not legal) considerations. And because the European Union remains heavily influenced by Atlanticist thinking, it took no action in response. This withdrawal had a serious impact on regional stability. As a side note, this is one of the extreme consequences of the so-called military-industrial complex, which has long influenced U.S. politics—especially around elections and budget approvals.
In summary, although the American actions were unlawful and a violation of international law, they succeeded in shifting the broader political environment against negotiations. The key issue is that the solution is no longer in European hands. In my view, resolving this matter depends on the courage of future European representatives—courage which is, unfortunately, lacking at present. These representatives must show the resolve to resume negotiations with Iran on the basis of the JCPOA (and subsequent agreements), and under rational, fair conditions.