War Crimes?

Experts say that under the Geneva Convention such moves would likely be considered war crimes.

Note to my future self.

Today, Donald Trump is threatening to strike Iran’s civilian infrastructure to force an end to his war, targeting power plants and bridges, targets that legal experts warn could constitute war crimes.

How did it come to this?

On February 28, the United States launched strikes on Iran. By March 11, the president declared victory, saying: “You never like to say too early you won. We won. In the first hour it was over.”

Iran turned out to be no Venezuela. By March 23, he was saying: “We have major points of agreement” for a deal to end the war which was, obviously, not yet over.

Iran had responded completely predictably within days of the initial strikes, attacking US bases and airports across the region including drone attacks on Dubai and Kuwait — and of course shutting down the Strait of Hormuz except to friendly nations like China and Russia.

The U.S. then turned to allies, calling for other countries to help secure the Strait, but we have lost our friends. He later said we don’t need it to be open.

It was a march of moving deadlines.

On March 22, a 48-hour ultimatum: Reopen the Strait, or face attacks on energy infrastructure.

On March 26 as the markets tanked, Trump paused attacks.

On March 30 he touted both “great progress” and threatened the destruction of water infrastructure — which would be a clear war crime.

On April fools day, he said Iran had asked for a ceasefire.

By April 4 and 5, the message is now: “open the \[effing\] Strait”, or “you’ll be living in Hell.”

Negotiators are as we speak scrambling for a 45 day ceasefire to allow more time for talks — which, given Trump’s history of extending his own deadlines, may be in the cards.

But the fact remains that he has promised Tuesday as “Bridge Day” and “Power Plant Day.”

Experts say that under the Geneva Convention such moves would likely be considered war crimes.