**
In a dramatic escalation of hostilities, recent US-Israeli strikes have devastated a residential building in Tehran, reflecting a profound shift in the conduct of international conflicts. This military engagement not only underscores the volatility of the region but also raises critical questions about the evolving norms of warfare. With threats of overwhelming force from Washington and retaliatory strikes from Tehran, the global order is facing unprecedented challenges.
The Nature of Modern Warfare
The current conflict between the US, Israel, and Iran marks a significant departure from established international protocols governing the initiation and escalation of warfare. US President Donald Trump has issued stark warnings, asserting that he would take extreme measures against Iranian energy installations if Tehran continued its aggression towards Qatari assets. Last week, he stated his intention to “massively blow up” Iran’s South Pars gas field and later declared that the US would “obliterate” Iranian power plants unless the Strait of Hormuz was reopened.
Luis Moreno Ocampo, the founding chief prosecutor of the International Criminal Court (ICC), has voiced grave concerns regarding these developments. He described the actions against Iran as a potential crime of aggression under international law, designed to protect civilian lives and prevent unwarranted military action. Ocampo emphasised that such strikes on non-combatant targets, akin to Russia’s actions in Ukraine, undermine the principles that have traditionally governed state conduct in conflict.
International Reactions and Implications
The White House has dismissed Ocampo’s assertions as “ridiculous,” maintaining that the administration is merely taking decisive steps to counter a “rogue, terrorist regime.” Officials argue that Iran’s actions, including attacks on civilian populations in the region, warrant a robust military response. US Ambassador to the United Nations Mike Waltz defended the strikes, suggesting that they target critical infrastructure used for repression and aggression, thus justifying their classification as legitimate military objectives.
However, Ocampo countered that Iran’s retaliatory strikes against its Gulf neighbours, which have not engaged in hostilities against Iran, would also constitute a violation of international law. With neither the US, Israel, nor Iran being parties to the ICC, the implications of these conflicts may evade formal legal accountability.
The Humanitarian Crisis
The escalating conflict poses a dire threat to civilian life, particularly as Iran grapples with chronic energy shortages and inadequate access to essential resources. Rights organisations warn that targeting Iranian power plants could exacerbate already existing humanitarian crises. Iran has vowed to retaliate against the energy and water systems of its Gulf neighbours should its infrastructure come under attack.
On Monday, Trump announced a temporary reprieve on his threats, citing ongoing negotiations—a claim Iranian officials promptly denied. Meanwhile, missile strikes have increasingly approached sensitive nuclear facilities, heightening fears of a broader regional conflict. The World Health Organisation has expressed alarm at the current state of affairs, calling for diplomacy and restraint as the situation deteriorates.
The Erosion of International Norms
Critics of the US’s aggressive posture argue that the abandonment of established norms regarding the use of military force signals a troubling trend in global governance. Brian Katulis, a former national security official, remarked that Trump’s threats represent a precarious moment for international order, suggesting that the current climate encourages a “jungle” mentality where might supersedes right.
The ramifications of this shift extend beyond Iran and Israel, as allies and adversaries alike reassess the reliability of US commitments. The Trump administration’s approach, often characterised as “thugboat diplomacy,” raises concerns about the long-term stability of alliances and the broader global security landscape.
Why it Matters
The ongoing conflict between the US and Iran not only threatens regional stability but also challenges the very foundations of the international order that seeks to regulate state behaviour in times of war. As military actions increasingly target civilian infrastructure and the norms of engagement dissolve, the potential for a humanitarian catastrophe escalates. The world watches closely, as the outcomes of these confrontations could redefine the parameters of international relations for years to come, leaving a legacy of instability and uncertainty in their wake.
