00:00Why is attacking civilian infrastructure a war crime?
00:03Why is it different from attacking other targets?
00:06Let me explain.
00:07Trump has threatened to take out Iran's bridges, power plants,
00:10and other aspects of the country that are essential,
00:13non-military assets that people rely on to live,
00:17aka civilian infrastructure.
00:19But critics say those kinds of attacks could cross a legal line under international law.
00:25Here's why.
00:26Under the Geneva Conventions, which set the basic rules for warfare,
00:30there's a key principle called distinction.
00:32That means militaries are supposed to separate military targets from civilian ones.
00:37Civilian infrastructure, like bridges, power grids, and water systems,
00:42are generally protected because they're essential for everyday life
00:45for people who aren't part of the fight.
00:48Intentionally attacking civilian infrastructure,
00:52especially when it doesn't offer a clear military advantage,
00:55can be considered a war crime under the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court.
01:01Military targets, like weapons facilities, bases, or troops,
01:05are considered legitimate because they directly contribute to a country's ability to fight a war.
01:12Civilian infrastructure doesn't.
01:14Or at least not directly.
01:15There is a gray area, though.
01:16If a bridge or power plant is being used for military purposes,
01:20like transporting troops or powering weapons,
01:22it can become a lawful target.
01:25But even then, the attacking side is still supposed to weigh
01:29whether the civilian harm would be too high compared to the military benefit.
01:33Want to read the rules for yourself?
01:35Here's my receipts.
01:37More at SIN.com
Comments