Are statements about targeting “power plants” and “bridges” just political rhetoric—or do they implicate the law of armed conflict?
In this explainer, I break down what actually constitutes a war crime under international humanitarian law, including the core principles of distinction, proportionality, and military necessity.
I explain when civilian infrastructure—like bridges and power plants—can lawfully be targeted, and when those same attacks become illegal. I also analyze recent rhetoric suggesting the categorical targeting of infrastructure in Iran, and why that framing is legally significant.
Finally, I draw a critical parallel: just as civilian infrastructure can lose protection if used for military purposes, civilians themselves can temporarily lose protection if they directly participate in hostilities—but only for as long as that participation continues.
The bottom line is simple and often ignored:You don’t get to erase civilian status by category—either for buildings or for people.
Are Trump’s statements about targeting infrastructure just rhetoric—or something more serious? Here’s what the law of war actually says.
