Donald Trump He left a message on his Truth Social network on Sunday that will go down in history. “Tuesday will be Power Plant Dayand the Bridges Day, all together in one, in Iran. There will never be anything like it!!! Open the fucking tight [de Ormuz], crazy bastards, or you are going to be living in Hell. Just look! Praise Allah. President DONALD J. TRUMP,” he wrote.
If these attacks were carried out systematically, they would be violating the international conventions on the war signed by Washington, and the US legislation itself, according to experts in international law.
Las Civil buildings cannot be targeted in a war unless an attack is being perpetrated from them at that precise moment, and even in that case with nuances. It is one of the basic pillars of international law on war conflicts, supported by half a dozen texts.
“Los civil property will not be subject to attacks or reprisals,” reads the Geneva Conventions1949. “It is prohibited to attack or bombard, by any means, cities, villages, homes or buildings that they are not defended”he says Hague Convention IV, 1907. It is considered a war crime “the arbitrary destruction of cities, towns or villages or devastation not justified by military needs”, according to the formulation of the Nuremberg Principlesadopted by the UN following the ruling of the Nuremberg Tribunal after the Second World War.
“The bombing of power plants in the framework of an armed conflict constitutes a war crime in accordance with international law, to the extent that it represents a serious violation of international humanitarian law,” he explains to EL PERIÓDICO Amparo Alcoceba, professor of International Law at the Carlos III University of Madrid.
The expert points out that the destruction of these infrastructures would violate, in particular, article 54 of Protocol I, added in 1977 to the Geneva Conventions of 1949, relating to the protection of victims of international armed conflicts. It expressly prohibits “destroying, removing or disabling property that is essential for the survival of the civilian population” and even that may be subject to reprisals. “To the extent that these power plants provide, for example, drinking water, heating to the civilian population, and especially to hospitals and medical centersthis article is breaking. It would not even be possible in those cases in which the adversary is using it for military action if the ‘foreseeable result is to leave the civilian population so deprived of food or water that it is reduced to suffering from hunger or forced to move.'”
The United States is a party to the Geneva Conventions of 1949 and the Hague Convention IV of 1907. It also signed the Protocol in 1977, although it did not ultimately consent to be bound by it. However, for the expert, this is irrelevant for the purposes of international law because the content of this Protocol “is considered customary law” and, consequently, the United States is obliged to comply with it.
Attacks on bridges in Iran
Regarding bridges, article 42 of the same Protocol states that “civilian objects will not be the object of attacks or reprisals (…) With regard to property, military objectives are limited to those objects that, due to their nature, location, purpose or use contribute effectively to military action or whose total or partial destruction, capture or neutralization offers in the circumstances of the case a defined military advantage”.
“It does not seem, therefore, that deliberately blowing up ‘all bridges’“As President Trump has expressed, respect the content of this article,” Alcoceba concludes. “It is evident that in both cases disproportionate damage would be caused to the civilian population.”
Prohibition of “looting”
The same war initiated unilaterally and preventively by the United States and Israel falls within illegality, in view of the international consensus in force until now. There is no the events of war.
One hundred experts and jurists have expressed their concerns in an open letter published last week by Just Security. In it they stated that the conduct of the war and the rhetoric of US officials “raise serious doubts about possible violations of international humanitarian lawincluding potential war crimes”. For the signatories, “the same attack constituted a clear violation of the Charter of the United Nations.”
Attempts to keep the country’s resources attacked, which are considered pillage. Trump launched an operation to capture the de facto president of Venezuela, Nicolás Maduro, and in exchange for allowing his number two to remain in command of the regime, he demanded the control of the country’s oilwhich he exercises. It now threatens to keep Iran’s black gold.
The Hague Convention reads: “Pillage is formally prohibited“. In Geneva:”“Pilling is prohibited”.
Lawless times
Trump’s rhetoric is consistent with his disparagement of global institutions and international law. And it constitutes a paradigm shift that has already been reflected in the total wars of Ukraine, Sudan or Gazain which the limit of what is tolerable has been exceeded, with the use of hunger as a weapon of war, the systematic bombing of hospitals or attacks against the energy system.
During the Israel’s war against Hamas in Gazathe bulk of the hospitals, universities, bakeries, schools and religious centers in the Strip were destroyed. In the most notable cases, Tel Aviv claimed that it was attacked from these positions. There is overwhelming evidence to the contrary: Israel Defense Forces They have dynamited thousands of empty buildingssuch as universities or housing. There are hundreds of documented cases that have been taken into account by the judges of the International Criminal Court to call for the arrest of the Israeli prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahufor alleged war crimes, or for the International Court of Justice He studies it as alleged genocide.
Israel continues to perpetrate these alleged war crimes in Iran. Bombing four oil tanks and a logistics site for petroleum products in Tehrancausing a toxic cloud of black smoke over the capital of nine million inhabitants.
Iran also launches attacks that They apparently violate international law. He has launched drones against a desalination plant in Kuwait. These water processing plants are vital for the desert countries of the Persian Gulf, such as Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates or the aforementioned Kuwait. Furthermore, he has used cluster munition on Israeli cities, according to Tel Aviv.
Trump’s rhetoric against Iran
But that the president of the country who is leading the call free world threatening to commit these crimes represents a qualitative leap in recent history. Some maintain that it is nothing more than a rhetorical escalation to reach an agreement with Tehran. Trump has given an ultimatum to the ayatollah regime to reopen the Strait of Hormuz before this Tuesday, or he will carry out some unprecedented attacks.
But the truth is that the United States has already attacked civilian targets in Iran. It destroyed the B1 bridge, located in Karaj, according to President Trump himself. A US Tomahawk missile also destroyed the Minab Iranian Girls’ Schoolkilling nearly 200 people, mostly children between the ages of seven and 12, according to an internal Pentagon investigation.
The Secretary of War, Pete Hegsethhas also raised the bellicose tone. He has echoed the president’s words about “return Iran to the Stone Age”. It imposes an aggressive and unlimited doctrine on the Pentagon. He himself has dismissed military lawyerswhich is the body within modern armies in charge of validating attacks in accordance with national and international legislation. He has also ordered the dismantling of many of the offices created to prevent attacks against civilians and facilities linked to them, according to the NYT.
Infrastructure Attack Exceptions
During its war in Gaza, Israel used the term “strength objectives” of Hamas to expand the limit of what could be bombed. The phrase summarized the idea that a power plant, a desalination plant, or a hospital could be legitimate targets because their destruction weakened the enemy.
The United States has not yet used this linguistic distortion. But the tone of the president and his military leader suggest that he could begin to justify the attacks in this way. Trump himself said in an interview with the NYT that does not need the limits of international law of war and who only feels constrained by his own blackberryl.
If Trump finally orders the bombing power plants and bridgesthe Army must protect itself legally. US military regulations (the Uniform Code of Military Justicer) forces military commanders or soldiers to disobey and report clearly illegal orders.
Civilian targets lose their status as protected places in some circumstances. In case of doubt as to whether a house, school or building is civilian or used for military purposes, “It will be presumed that it is not used for that purpose.” And even when an asset becomes a military objective, the prohibition of launching attacks with incidental civilian damage continues to apply.excessive in relation to military advantage concrete and direct foreseen”.
In the Hague definition of 1907, the attack of “cities, towns, buildings that are not defended”. The Nuremberg Principles consider arbitrary destruction and, therefore, illegal, those attacks “not justified by military necessity”. In the United Nations Charter it is considered that a civil infrastructure It loses that status when it has become a military objective, for example because attacks are perpetrated from there, and even in that case the limits of “necessity, distinction, proportionality and precaution”.
That is, the arbitrary and large-scale destruction of civil infrastructure is not permitted, as US President Donald Trump has threatened to do since this very Tuesday.
Subscribe to continue reading
