Can Trump, like Netanyahu, be charged for war crimes?

US President Donald Trump has threatened to bomb Iran's civilian infrastructure and send the country back to the Stone Age. Experts say the US's strikes on schools, bridges and universities are war crimes. Can Trump be tried in a court of law for war crimes?

In Short

• US targetting Iran's bridges, colleges; Trump threatens more such strikes
• Strikes on Iran's civilian sites violate the laws of war, amount to war crimes
• While Trump's prosecution is unlikely in the ICC, he can be tried in the US

When asked if bombing Iranian civilian infrastructure could amount to war crimes, US President Donald Trump brushed aside the criticism being labelled at him and his administration amid the war in the Middle East. The real criminals are Iran's rulers, Trump said. "They're animals." Targeting a country's leadership is one thing, bombing civilian infrastructure is another. Can Trump be tried for war crimes?

Trump, as the president, is the Commander-in-Chief of the American forces. But before getting to the question of his trial, it has to be determined if the actions of American forces in Iran constitute war crimes.

The war in the Middle East isn't looking to end soon. In fact, it escalated dangerously on Tuesday as the US targeted Kharg island, Trump issued a threat and the IRGC said Gulf Cooperation Countries were at risk.

The Iranian regime, which Trump vowed to overthrow, is very much in place in Tehran. Now, while the Trump administration is desperately looking for an off-ramp, its rhetoric and military actions towards Iran are increasingly targeting civilian infrastructure. Universities and transport links in Iran have come under attack.

Meanwhile, a belligerent Trump has also threatened to send Iran "back to the Stone Age", a phrase which US War Secretary Pete Hegseth happened to cheer about. Hegseth has promised the "largest volume of strikes" on Iran, using highly aggressive rhetoric to describe the US campaign. Trump, the embodiment of a "madman", as critics say, has been no less. The President of the democratic superpower is openly threatening to hit Iran's civilian infrastructure, which many experts say amounts to war crime.

Threatening Iran to ink a deal on his terms, Trump warned on Tuesday, saying, "A whole civilisation will die tonight, never to be brought back again. I don't want that to happen, but it probably will".

That has raised a serious question. If the US is hitting universities, bridges and civilian infrastructure, can those actions amount to war crimes under international law? Legal experts say the answer depends on whether the targets had a clear military purpose and whether civilian harm was disproportionate.

If a college, bridge or public building was not being used for military operations, then intentionally targeting it could amount to a war crime. Experts argue that the growing desperation of the US campaign is leading it towards strikes that are increasingly difficult for Washington DC to justify.

Could Trump himself be tried? In theory, yes.

Over 100 international law experts in a letter last Thursday warned that the US's conduct in the Middle East war and the statements of its officials "raise serious concerns about violations of international humanitarian law, including potential war crimes", the New York Times reported.

International tribunals have prosecuted world leaders before. Prime Minister of Israel, Benjamin Netanyahu, the US's ally in the Middle East war, was accused of war crimes in 2024. He also faces an arrest warrant from the International Criminal Court over the Gaza war. But he's not the first. There's former Serbian leader Slobodan Milosevic, who was tried for war crimes and crimes against humanity during the Balkan wars.

But in Trump's case and in practice, prosecuting a sitting or former US president would be extraordinarily difficult because the US does not recognise the jurisdiction of the ICC over its citizens, say experts.

US ATTACKS ON IRAN WHICH EXPERTS SAY ARE WAR CRIMES

The most controversial attack so far has been the strike on the girls' school in Iran's Minab, where 165-170 individuals (mostly girls aged 7-12) were killed. If the investigation finds that the US failed to properly verify the target or ignored clear signs that it was a civilian site, the act could be counted as a war crime. However, preliminary US findings suggest the attack was likely the result of outdated intelligence that wrongly identified the school, located near an IRGC facility, as a military target.

To be clear that it is not just the US or the Israeli forces that have attacked civilian infrastructure. Iran has done the same with the Gulf states since the beginning of the war, which is also what experts call a war crime.

But the US's and its leader's rhetoric about targetting Iran's civilian infrastructure in recent days has increased alarmingly.

While Trump escalated threats of attacking Iranian infrastructure, US forces in an overnight attack struck the Sharif University of Technology in Tehran, one of Iran's most prestigious universities. Founded in 1966, the university is Iran's premier institution for science and engineering and is often described as the country's equivalent of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT).

Iranian-American analyst Trita Parsi criticised the attack on Sharif University. "The US/Israel just bombed Sharif University in Tehran. This is not only Iran's best university, but also a top 100 global university in the field of Civil Engineering. It has also been a centre of student opposition to the Iranian government. And Trump just bombed it," Parsi wrote on X.

Analysts have also pointed to US attacks on Iranian bridges, roads and public infrastructure that appear to have no immediate military value and could amount to war crimes.

Hours after the US struck an Iranian bridge connecting Tehran to the city of Karaj last Thursday, Trump threatened to bomb Iran "back to the stone ages" if a deal was not reached soon. He even threatened an all-out attack on Iran's power plants and bridges.

ARE US STRIKES ON IRAN AND THREATS TARGETTING CIVILIAN INFRASTRUCTURE WAR CRIMES?

Under the Geneva Conventions and the Rome Statute of the ICC, intentionally targeting civilians or civilian objects can amount to a war crime. Schools, universities, hospitals and bridges are considered civilian infrastructure unless they are being used for military purposes.

There are two major legal tests here.

First, was the target being used by the military? Second, was the civilian harm excessive compared to the military gain? If the answer to either question is unfavourable, then the strike could be unlawful.

Trump has argued that Iran's rulers are "animals" and that they are the real war criminals. But such language and name-calling does not change the laws of war, Trump has been told by his advisors. Conventionally, civilian targets must remain protected even in the middle of a brutal war.

Hegseth's rhetoric has also added to concerns.

He has repeatedly promised heavier strikes and echoed Trump's threat to send Iran "back to the Stone Age". Experts say that kind of language suggests an intention to devastate civilian infrastructure, not just military sites.

West Asia expert Waiel Awwad, speaking to India Today TV, asked, "How can you attack a bridge that was under construction? That is not a military target. As the US War Secretary, he [Pete Hegseth, the US Secretary of War] is fit to go to The Hague to be tried there like another criminal. This is a war crime."

SO, CAN TRUMP BE TRIED AS A WAR CRIMINAL?

In theory, yes. Heads of state are not immune from war crimes charges forever.

Serbian leader Milosevic was prosecuted after leaving office. Former Liberian President Charles Taylor was convicted by an international tribunal. In India's neighbourhood, ousted Bangladesh PM Sheikh Hasina was also given a death sentence in absentia last year by a domestic war crimes tribunal for use of fatal force against protesters.

While experts view US military actions as war crimes, would Trump, the Commander-in-Chief of the American forces, be held accountable for the action of his forces?

Raed Jarrar, the advocacy director at the American non-profit rights group DAWN, said Trump's threats represent "clear, public evidence of criminal intent"

"Threatening to obliterate a nation's power grid, oil infrastructure and water supply to coerce its government is not a negotiating tactic; it is textbook collective punishment and a war crime," Jarrar told Qatari broadcaster Al Jazeera.

But the chances of Trump facing trial are slim. The US is not a member of the ICC and has historically rejected its authority over Americans. Any attempt to prosecute Trump would require a major political shift inside the US or cooperation from allied nations on multilateral bodies.

Can Trump be tried for war crimes in the US?

International law expert Gabor Rona told American broadcaster National Public Radio (NPR) that "the US War Crimes Act has no statute of limitations for crimes that result in death".

"Now, obviously, there's not going to be any accountability during this administration, but there could very well be accountability, even under US law, in the next administration or sometime in the future," Rona told NPR.

It might be near possible to try Trump for the alleged war crimes right now. But if there were a possibility, it could shape how future generations judge the American President. Even if Trump never stands in a courtroom, the question of whether bombing colleges and bridges amounts to war crimes is unlikely to go away soon.

- Ends