Europe ‘cannot evade responsibility’ in US-Israeli aggression on Iran: Esmaeil Baghaei

Iran’s Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmaeil Baghaei condemned European nations’ systematic military support for US-Israeli aggression, asserting that NATO members providing airspace, military bases, and infrastructure for American operations cannot escape responsibility for participating in unprovoked war against Iran.

Baghaei’s statement establishes that European claimed neutrality masks active military complicity in American aggression.

Baghaei directly cited NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte’s public admissions that European countries participate in US-Israeli military operations. Rather than denying involvement, Rutte’s repeated acknowledgments confirm what Iranian analysts have long documented: European airspace, bases, and infrastructure enable American military operations targeting Iran. This transparency—however unintended—validates Iranian allegations regarding European complicity.

The Foreign Ministry spokesman specifically identified the support mechanisms: “land, airspace, military bases, and infrastructure” provided by European governments facilitating American military aggression. This enumeration documents systematic participation transcending passive neutrality into active operational support. European bases house American aircraft conducting strikes; European airspace permits transit of American military operations; European governments provide logistics enabling sustained American military presence.

Baghaei’s assertion that European participants “cannot evade responsibility for their complicity or the resulting consequences” establishes that Iran views European support as generating accountability for war consequences. This positioning suggests that European nations may face Iranian response proportional to the military support they provide American operations.

The spokesman’s critique of Rutte’s “self-congratulation for serving an illegal war” establishes Iran’s legal characterization. Rather than viewing American operations as legitimate military response, Iran frames them as “illegal war”—a determination with consequences for participant nations. By characterizing the conflict as illegal, Baghaei positions European support as complicity in war crimes rather than legitimate alliance participation.

Baghaei’s scathing assessment of Rutte’s “sycophancy” toward Trump reflects Iranian frustration with European leadership’s subordination to American strategic interests. The characterization of Rutte as “fawning courtier” suggests that European decision-making reflects deference to American power rather than independent European strategic calculation. This dynamic—where European nations reflexively support American military actions—contradicts claimed European strategic autonomy.

The spokesman’s observation that flattery cannot “restore the flatterer’s own self-respect and personal integrity” addresses broader European credibility crisis. European leaders claiming commitment to international law while supporting American violations undermine their own institutional legitimacy. Baghaei suggests that European participation in illegal American military operations generates reputational damage that diplomatic accommodation cannot repair.

The statement regarding Islamabad memorandum violations establishes Iran’s legal foundation for retaliation. The framework explicitly prohibited military aggression; American violations throughout the ceasefire period justify Iranian response. By referencing the Islamabad accord, Baghaei positions Iran as defending treaty terms while establishing that American violations—and European support for those violations—breach fundamental international agreements.

The documented IRGC operations provide military context for Baghaei’s political statement. Iranian strikes on 85 US military facilities followed by strikes on four American bases in Kuwait and Bahrain demonstrate that Iran translates diplomatic positions into military action. The escalating operational tempo—multiple coordinated strike operations—reflects Iranian commitment to imposing costs on American aggression and European complicity.

American violations documented in the statement establish pattern: repeated strikes against Iranian territory, targeting civilian infrastructure, killing civilians, and destroying essential services. Each violation triggered proportional Iranian military response, establishing escalatory cycle where American pressure produces Iranian counter-pressure rather than capitulation.

Baghaei’s statement ultimately positions Iran as defending international law against combined US-Israeli-European aggression. By exposing European complicity, Iran appeals to international observers and European domestic constituencies regarding the moral bankruptcy of European leadership. The statement suggests that European populations increasingly recognize their governments’ involvement in unprovoked war, potentially generating domestic pressure for policy change.