Consider This from NPR

Episode: Iran War: Threats to Attack Civilian Targets Are Raising Concerns with Legal Experts

Date: April 2, 2026
Host: Scott Detrow
Guest: Gabor Rona, Director of the Law and Armed Conflict Project at Cardozo Law School

Overview

This episode delves into the legal and ethical questions raised by the United States' ongoing military campaign against Iran—specifically, President Trump's threats to target critical civilian infrastructure, such as electrical power and desalination plants. Host Scott Detrow and legal expert Gabor Rona examine the standards of international and U.S. law concerning war crimes, question the logic of retaliation, and reflect on the implications if the world's biggest superpower disregards these norms.

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Recent Developments and Presidential Rhetoric

• President Trump has threatened to destroy Iranian infrastructure if no peace settlement is reached, explicitly referencing power and desalination plants (00:53–01:19).
  • Quote: "If there is no deal, we are going to hit each and every one of their electric generating plants very hard and probably simultaneously." (Trump, paraphrased by Detrow, 01:11)
• Attacks on civilian targets, including reports of a fatal strike on a Kuwaiti desalination facility, have raised alarms (01:38–01:44).

2. Legal Boundaries for Warfare

• Under both U.S. and international law, targeting civilian infrastructure is unambiguously classified as a war crime (04:30–04:58).
  • Quote: "Absolutely, Scott, both under international law and US law. You know, we have a war crimes act that prohibits prosecution precisely this kind of thing. It would also be a violation of laws against terrorism." – Gabor Rona (04:30)
• Legal standards prohibit attacks primarily intended to spread terror among the civilian population, explicitly connecting these acts to definitions of terrorism (04:30–04:58).

3. Intent vs. Accident in Civilian Harm

• Distinction is made between accidental and intentional strikes, with Rona noting that under U.S. law, both can be prosecuted as war crimes if due diligence is not observed (05:16–05:33).
  • Quote: "Under U.S. law, both intentional and mistaken attacks that aren't pursuant to due diligence can be war crimes." – Gabor Rona (05:16)

4. "Whataboutism" and Moral Standards

• Retaliatory justification does not hold legal or moral water in international law; wrongdoing by one side does not excuse violations by another (05:40–06:18).
  • Quote: "A violation by one side does not justify a violation on the other side. ... Do we want to determine our moral standing according to the standards of those that routinely violate international law?" – Gabor Rona (05:50)

5. Arguments About Power and Accountability

• White House advisor Stephen Miller previously argued that international norms are subordinate to power ("the real world ... is governed by strength, ... by force, ... by power") (06:18–07:08).
  • Rona rebuts forcefully, invoking the lessons of WWII, Nuremberg, and the ongoing reality of international law (07:08–08:24):
    • Quote: "Stephen Miller doesn't know what he's talking about. He doesn't understand that the United States is merely one cog, albeit a very powerful cog ... states have worked hard ... to prevent and to punish war crimes. The United States cannot make them go away." – Gabor Rona (07:08–08:24)

6. Are We at Risk of Repeating History?

• Asked if the U.S. is veering toward the aggressive posture of WWII Germany, Rona draws distinctions and emphasizes postwar institutions and norms that now provide guardrails (08:48–09:33).
  • Quote: "The world is a very different place now than it was when Nazi Germany had its way." – Gabor Rona (09:20)

7. Potential Accountability and International Response

• Even if accountability is unlikely during this administration, Rona points out that U.S. law has no statute of limitations for war crimes resulting in death (09:54–10:30).
  • Other countries, like Spain and Italy, are actively refusing U.S. flyovers in response to concerns about legality (10:30–10:54).
    • Quote: "You will see other states finally lining up explicitly to draw that line in the sand and say, we will not tolerate this. ... Those countries could commence prosecutions for violations of the laws of armed conflict against Americans." – Gabor Rona (10:54–11:09)

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• On Legality and Terrorism – “If you're targeting a desalination plant, then that would be an act of terrorism.” – Gabor Rona (04:30)
• On Responsibility – “The moral reason why the US should not follow Iran's lead is simply: do we want to determine our moral standing according to the standards of those that routinely violate international law?” – Gabor Rona (05:50)
• On Power vs. Law – “The United States cannot make [war crimes] go away. ... It is false, and very dangerous for Americans’ own interests, to claim that the only thing that holds us back is the limits of our own power.” – Gabor Rona (07:46)
• On International Backlash – “States are in compliance with their obligations under the Geneva Conventions. ... Those countries could commence prosecutions for violations of the laws of armed conflict against Americans.” – Gabor Rona (10:54–11:09)

Timestamps for Key Segments

• Opening context, Presidential threats: 00:30–01:31
• Desalination plant attack and international law explained: 01:44–04:58
• Distinguishing accident vs. intent in attacks: 04:58–05:33
• Delegitimizing “retaliation” logic: 05:40–06:18
• “Might makes right” challenged: 06:18–08:24
• Postwar institutions as safeguards: 08:48–09:33
• Possibility of future accountability and international legal reactions: 09:54–11:09

Episode Takeaways

• International and U.S. law are clear—attacks on civilian infrastructure, even in war, are grave crimes.
• Current U.S. rhetoric and threats risk eroding crucial legal norms and could trigger significant blowback, both diplomatic and legal, from other nations.
• Historical lessons matter—accountability may occur after the fact, and global systems built post-WWII provide checks on “might makes right.”
• Allies are already responding by withholding cooperation, setting up the potential for broader consequences if norms are violated.

For listeners seeking clarity on the legal and moral stakes in the current Iran conflict, this episode offers expert insights, sharp historical perspective, and a clear-eyed warning about the risks of abandoning established laws of war.