Text of a Letter from the President to the Speaker of the House of Representatives and the President Pro Tempore of the Senate

Vital National Security Interests and Self-Defense: The President claims the strike was necessary to eliminate Iran's nuclear weapons program, protecting US interests and those of its ally, Israel. This is supported by the stated aim of preventing a potential nuclear threat. The action is framed as a preemptive strike, minimizing potential future harm.

Limited Scope and Proportionate Response: The report emphasizes the limited nature of the strike, targeting only three nuclear facilities and avoiding civilian casualties or attacks on other military targets. This is presented as mitigating potential escalation.

Constitutional Authority: The President asserts the action was consistent with his constitutional roles as Commander in Chief and Chief Executive, including authority to conduct foreign relations. This is a reference to inherent executive powers in times of national security crisis.

Compliance with International Law: The claim is made that the action complied with international law. However, the specific aspects are not detailed in the provided letter.

Congressional Notification: The President's letter explicitly states the report is issued as part of compliance with the War Powers Resolution, indicating an effort toward transparency and engagement with the legislative branch.

Violation of International Law: The unilateral military action could be considered a violation of international law, potentially leading to international condemnation and strained relations with other countries. The lack of explicit legal justification within the document is a point of contention.

Escalation of Conflict: The military strike could escalate tensions in the region and spur further retaliation by Iran or its allies, potentially leading to a larger-scale conflict.

Lack of Transparency: The limited information provided within the letter raises questions about the full picture of the situation, the decision-making process, and potential intelligence failures or miscalculations that could have contributed to the necessity to use military force.

Political Ramifications: The actions could be seen as a significant political gambit impacting the future of diplomacy with Iran, the reputation of the United States, and domestic support for the administration's foreign policy. The letter itself focuses heavily on national security and doesn't directly address the potential for political fallout.

Alternative Approaches: The document doesn't explain why other approaches (sanctions, diplomacy, etc.) were deemed ineffective or insufficient before resorting to military force. The unilateral nature of the action contrasts with potentially more cooperative alternatives.