More than 100 international law experts have issued a strongly worded open letter voicing “profound concern” over what they describe as serious violations of international law by the United States, Israel, and Iran amid the ongoing conflict in the Middle East. The signatories argue that recent military actions and public statements by key leaders risk undermining long-established legal norms designed to protect civilians during wartime.
According to the letter, the decision by the United States and Israel to carry out strikes against Iran constitutes a clear breach of the United Nations Charter, which prohibits the use of force except in cases of self-defence or when explicitly authorised by the United Nations Security Council. The experts further highlighted what they termed “alarming rhetoric” from senior officials, including remarks by US President Donald Trump, who reportedly threatened to “obliterate” Iran’s power infrastructure.
The White House, however, rejected the criticism, asserting that Trump’s actions were aimed at enhancing regional security and stability. It dismissed the signatories as “so-called experts” and defended the administration’s approach as necessary to counter what it described as longstanding threats posed by Iran. In a statement, US officials accused Iranian authorities of supporting terrorism, targeting Americans, and suppressing dissent within their own population for decades.
The open letter also raised concerns about comments attributed to US Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth, who reportedly stated that “no quarter” should be given to enemies. Legal experts emphasised that such a stance—denying mercy even to surrendering or wounded combatants—is explicitly prohibited under international humanitarian law and is also banned under the US Department of Defense’s own law of war guidelines.
Among the prominent signatories are Jonathan Tracy, a former US Army judge advocate, Harold Hongju Koh, a former legal adviser to the US State Department, and Oona A. Hathaway, a professor of international law at Yale Law School. They warned that both the conduct of the war and the rhetoric surrounding it risk eroding fundamental principles that safeguard civilians and military personnel alike. The letter cautioned that such developments could weaken the global legal framework that governs armed conflict.
The humanitarian toll of the conflict has been severe, with thousands of casualties reported across the region. A US-based monitoring group, the Human Rights Activists News Agency, has reported that at least 1,606 civilians, including 244 children, have been killed in Iran since the outbreak of hostilities. In Lebanon, health authorities have said that 1,345 people have died in Israeli strikes since early March. Meanwhile, missile attacks launched at Israel from Iran and Lebanon have resulted in the deaths of 19 civilians, according to Israeli emergency services.
The violence has also spread to Gulf countries, where Iranian attacks have reportedly killed at least 24 individuals, most of them security personnel or foreign workers. Casualties have been reported in Kuwait, Oman, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, and the United Arab Emirates.
Adding to concerns, the experts highlighted a strike on a primary school in the Iranian town of Minab on the first day of the conflict, which reportedly killed at least 168 people, including 110 children. The US Department of Defense has acknowledged that it is investigating the incident, amid growing indications that it may have resulted from a US strike. Preliminary assessments suggest the possibility that outdated intelligence may have led to the targeting error, as the school was located near a base belonging to Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps.
The letter stated that the attack likely violates international humanitarian law and warned that, if evidence shows recklessness, those responsible could face accusations of committing a war crime.
Speaking to a radio programme, United Nations humanitarian chief Tom Fletcher said the conflict reflects a broader failure to uphold international legal standards. He noted that while the rules governing armed conflict are clear, enforcement remains a major challenge. Describing the war as “reckless,” he stressed that the erosion of legal norms could have far-reaching consequences for civilian protection in conflicts worldwide.
