Iranian officials, legal scholars, and human rights organizations are warning that President Donald Trump’s escalating threats to strike Iran’s civilian infrastructure could constitute war crimes under international law, as the conflict intensifies and diplomatic efforts struggle to prevent further escalation.
The warnings followed a series of statements in which Trump threatened to target critical infrastructure if Iran does not comply with demands related to the Strait of Hormuz, a strategic shipping corridor central to global energy markets. In an interview with Fox News, Trump said that if Iran does not reach an agreement quickly, he is “considering blowing everything up and taking the oil.” He added, “You’re going to see bridges and power plants dropping all over their country,” while setting an 8 pm ET deadline tied to reopening the waterway.
Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister Kazem Gharibabadi responded that such threats would violate international humanitarian law protecting civilian infrastructure. Gharibabadi wrote that “threats to attack power plants and bridges (civilian infrastructure) constitute war crimes under Article 8(2)(b) of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court and Protocol I to the Geneva Conventions of 1977 (Article 52).” He further stated that “the president of the United States, in his capacity as the highest-ranking official of his country, has openly threatened to commit war crimes—an act that entails his individual criminal responsibility before the International Criminal Court and any competent national court,” adding that Iran “will deliver a decisive, immediate, and regret-inducing response” to any attack.
Esmail Baghaei, spokesperson for Iran’s Foreign Ministry, described Trump’s rhetoric as “an indication of a criminal mindset.” In an interview, Baghaei said, “This is an express public incitement for war crimes and crimes against humanity—and, I would say, for genocide,” adding that targeting energy infrastructure “would mean that you want to put at risk the whole population.”
Human rights organizations warned that attacks on energy and water systems could have catastrophic humanitarian consequences. Amnesty International said strikes on power plants “could amount to a war crime” because such facilities are “essential for meeting the basic needs and livelihoods of tens of millions of civilians.”
Erika Guevara-Rosas, Amnesty International’s senior director of research, advocacy, policy, and campaigns, explained the potential impact of losing electrical infrastructure: “Water pumping stations would stop functioning, clean water would become scarce, and preventable diseases would spread. Hospitals would lose electricity and fuel, forcing surgeries to be canceled and life-support machines to shut down. Food production and distribution networks would collapse, deepening hunger and causing widespread food scarcity. Many businesses would also shut down with devastating economic consequences including mass unemployment.”
Amnesty Secretary General Agnes Callamard condemned the threats, saying she was “running out of language to denounce and condemn” Trump’s statements and describing one post as a “revolting statement.” Callamard warned that “Iranian civilians will be the first to suffer from the destruction of power plants and bridges,” adding that the consequences would include “No heat, no electricity, no water, no capacity to move or to flee, and all that it means for their right to life.”
Damage to civilian infrastructure has already been reported since the bombing campaign began on February 28. Iran’s deputy health minister said more than 360 healthcare, education, and research centers have been struck by U.S. and Israeli attacks, and dozens of medics have been killed.
Among the sites affected was a petrochemical hub in Mahshahr, where at least five people were killed and 170 were injured. The complex helps provide electricity to approximately 500,000 people and produces chemicals and polymers used across industrial sectors. Reports from the area described environmental fallout, with one person stating that “chemical pollution from the petrochemical explosions has spread through the city in such a way that breathing is impossible.”
Additional strikes targeted the B1 bridge in Karaj, where eight people were killed and nearly 100 were injured. Analysts have noted that such infrastructure is commonly used by civilian populations, raising concerns about proportionality and legality under international humanitarian law.
The conflict has also disrupted global shipping routes, with approximately 3,000 vessels stranded in the Strait of Hormuz after Iranian authorities imposed restrictions in response to the invasion. The waterway is one of the world’s most important oil transit chokepoints, and disruptions have raised concerns about broader economic effects.
Diplomatic efforts mediated in part by Pakistan have sought to establish a 45 day ceasefire intended to create space for negotiations. According to reporting cited in the source material, the talks are viewed as “the only chance to prevent a dramatic escalation in the war that will include massive strikes on Iranian civilian infrastructure and a retaliation against energy and water facilities in the Gulf states.”
Members of the U.S. Congress and policy analysts have expressed alarm about the legality and potential consequences of targeting civilian infrastructure.
Sen. Chris Murphy wrote that “Trump’s advisers are telling him to hit civilian sites because it will cause unrest and potentially topple the regime. But just think about the insanity of this plan: kill tens of thousands of civilians in order to cause a national panic.” Murphy added, “Bombing to induce political panic IS A WAR CRIME.”
Murphy also criticized Trump’s rhetoric as “completely, utterly unhinged,” stating that the president “has already killed thousands” and “is going to kill thousands more.”
Sen. Bernie Sanders also called for intervention, saying Trump’s remarks reflected “the ravings of a dangerous and mentally unbalanced individual.”
The Council on American Islamic Relations urged lawmakers to assert congressional authority over military action, stating that Congress should “reconvene and to reassert their authority over matters of war and peace and to ensure that no president can unilaterally drag our nation into war.” The organization warned that “Congress must not remain on vacation while the president openly promises to commit war crimes that could trigger even more regional and global conflict.”
Dylan Williams of the Center for International Policy warned that lawmakers who support continued funding for the conflict risk responsibility for violations of international law. Williams said that “any lawmaker who votes for supplemental funding for the war on Iran or against war powers resolutions to end it will be fully complicit in the war crimes threatened here, as well as those already committed by this unhinged and unfit Commander in Chief.”
Military developments have further complicated the situation. Iranian forces reportedly shot down a U.S. F 15E fighter jet using air defense systems, with one crew member rescued while search efforts continued for another missing airman. Analysts cited in the source material reported that Iran is rebuilding missile bunker capabilities and deploying decoys that complicate targeting assessments.
Trump has repeatedly issued deadlines tied to reopening the Strait of Hormuz, including a demand giving Iran “48 hours before all Hell will reign down on them.” Legal experts have warned that such statements signal potential escalation. New York University law professor Ryan Goodman described the rhetoric as “a countdown to massive war crimes.”
Observers have also debated how the conflict is framed internationally, particularly regarding claims of self defense. Commentator Hasan Piker asked, “Does Iran have a right to defend itself? Does Palestine? Does Lebanon?” referencing debate over whether only certain countries are permitted to justify military actions as defensive.
Political analyst Omar Baddar warned that “Iranian civilians will pay the biggest and most immediate price of his madness, but the ripple effect will not spare much of the world.”
Despite signals that negotiations could still occur, Trump warned that “Time is running out.”
COMMENTS