Analysis | Why U.S.- Israeli war crimes have gone unpunished

Pars Today – Iran’s Foreign Ministry has stated that “the international community must not simply overlook the war crimes committed by the United States and Israel.”

The warning was issued by Iran’s Foreign Ministry on the 77th anniversary of the adoption of the four Geneva Conventions, citing extensive legal and field evidence. The statement comes as international reports and field investigations have shed further light on the devastating scale of military attacks against Iran, raising serious questions about the commitment of global powers to international humanitarian law.

Recalling Article 1 common to the Geneva Conventions, the Iranian Foreign Ministry statement stressed that states are obligated to “ensure respect” for the provisions of these instruments under all circumstances. However, it argued that U.S. and Israeli military attacks against Iran over the past year and a half constitute clear violations of the fundamental principles of distinction between military and civilian targets and proportionality in the use of force.

The statement cited specific cases, including a Tomahawk missile strike on a school in Minab, a cluster-munition attack on a stadium in Lamerd on March 9, 2026, and the bombing of residential homes in Qeshm with one-ton bombs on July 30, 2026. It described these as only a few examples among thousands of alleged war crimes.

According to multiple reports, the attack on the Shajareh Tayyebeh girls’ school in Minab on February 28, 2026 became one of the deadliest humanitarian tragedies in recent decades. The attack, carried out with Tomahawk missiles, martyred at least 175 people, including 168 students and several teachers. The use of such a precision weapon against a school constitutes a blatant violation of the Geneva Conventions, and responsibility lies with the U.S. military and political officials who ordered and carried out the attack.

On July 30, 2026, an attack on Qeshm Island involving one-ton Mark 84 bombs, among the heaviest bombs used by the U.S. military, revealed further dimensions of violations of international humanitarian law. The bomb struck a residential home in a densely populated area, martyring a couple and their two-year-old child and displacing around 20 families.

Former U.S. military analysts have emphasized that the use of such munitions in urban areas—particularly when there is no evidence of a military target nearby—is in clear conflict with the principles of “military necessity” and the prohibition against causing “unnecessary suffering,” and should be prosecuted as a war crime.

The Iranian Foreign Ministry’s statement cited explicit remarks by U.S. officials, including Secretary of War Pete Hegseth, who reportedly said, “We will show no mercy and give no quarter,” and threatened to “send Iran back to the Stone Age,” as evidence of an intentional pattern behind the alleged commission of these crimes. These remarks have also been criticized by U.S. military and legal experts as clear violations of the laws of war. They have argued that such an approach could endanger not only the lives of Iranian civilians but also U.S. military personnel if captured, as it could create grounds for retaliation under the same logic.

The key point of the Iranian Foreign Ministry’s statement is its call for legal and judicial action, rather than merely a political response. Citing Article 146 of the Fourth Geneva Convention, Iran stresses that the prosecution of those who commit or order such crimes is a “binding and universal legal obligation” for all states party to the convention and is not limited to the countries directly involved in the conflict.

Human rights organizations such as Amnesty International have also emphasized the need for accountability for these attacks. Therefore, the Iranian Foreign Ministry’s statement should be viewed as a serious warning to the international community against simply turning a blind eye to apparent violations. Such indifference, it argues, could endanger not only an entire nation but also the future of the international legal system designed to restrain violence during armed conflicts.