World3 min(s) read
Published 16:19 07 Apr 2026 GMT
Donald Trump may already have committed a war crime following latest threats against Iran
Comments made by Donald Trump when threatening Iran could ultimately amount to proof of war crimes - and he could be set to escalate things even further.
The way things have been going today, it will be a relief if words are the worst thing we see happen.
Donald Trump’s war of words with Iran is ramping up
Trump has been turning up the heat on Iran in recent times, threatening them with all sorts of punishment from - allegedly - nuclear war and full-scale invasion to total obliteration.
Iran has responded, and issued its own threats to the nations in the area that are friendly to the USA.
To be fair, they could be set to catch some of the fallout - figuratively and actually - if the US does carry out a nuclear strike.
We all have to hope that doesn’t happen, and that everyone steers clear of the obvious war crimes that can happen in times such as these.
However, Trump may already have committed a crime in one of his latest threats.
Interestingly, he was being asked about whether he was concerned he might commit war crimes during this conflict with Iran.
Trump’s threats might constitute an admission of guilt
After ordering his Iranian opponents to ‘open the f***ing [Hormuz] strait’ over the weekend, Trump threatened to destroy bridges and power plants in the country, which could be interpreted as collective punishment of the people for actions of the controlling regime - which is a war crime.
When pressed on that, Trump called the Iranian leaders ‘animals’, which could be construed as dehumanizing language, which could also be considered in violation of the rules of war.
Targeting infrastructure responsible for power or water is against the rules of war, as - under US and international law - the target must ‘make an effective contribution to military action’ and/or ‘offer a definite military advantage’.
Sure, a power plant could fit that bill, but destroying them en masse probably wouldn't.
‘Indiscriminate attacks’ could be considered war crimes, according to Michael Schmitt, a former US Air Force judge advocate who now teaches at the University of Reading in the UK.
What’s more, calling the Iranians ‘animals’ is similar in tone to other instances of genocide and war crimes that have been committed around the world.
A statement from the president of the International Committee of the Red Cross called on governments - not just Trump - to respect the rules of war in things they both say and do, particularly after Trump said he would bring ‘hell’ to Tehran.
Mirjana Spoljaric said: "States must respect and ensure respect for the rules of war in both what they say and what they do,
"The world cannot succumb to a political culture that prioritises death over life."
We’d all better hope that cooler heads - and words - prevail and nothing horrific happens this evening as Trump’s ultimatum approaches.