Â鶹app

Jeannie Sowers, professor of political science and international affairs

In the U.S. war with Iran, infrastructures important to civilian life have become targets, not only in Iran but also in Lebanon, Israel and the Arab Gulf countries. Targeting infrastructures can have profound consequences for civilians and the environment. , professor of political science and international affairs, studies political and environmental change in the Middle East and North Africa, with a recent focus on protracted conflicts and environmental infrastructures. She shares insight into the current war’s impact on civilian infrastructure.

Can you give an overview of the ways infrastructure is under attack throughout the Persian Gulf conflict right now?

First, any assessment of infrastructure damage is just preliminary because the bombing has been so intense and so widespread. With an internet shutdown in Iran and the U.S. and Israeli militaries limiting their own reporting we really don’t know the scale and scope yet. 

Still, the Trump administration has explicitly ratcheted up threats to civilian infrastructure, including power plants. Targeting civilian infrastructure is not permissible under international humanitarian law unless there is a compelling military necessity to do so. Militaries on all sides are supposed to carefully weigh the military advantages of bombing targets that may harm civilians and civilian infrastructures. This principle of proportionality in the conduct of war is central to international humanitarian law. 

Using explosive weapons in densely populated areas and cities often leads to civilian death, injuries, and displacement of families and neighborhoods. Even precision munitions, used in enough quantity and frequency, can lead to significant urban damage. Most cities in the Middle East have many multi-story, poorly built concrete apartment buildings, often located within close proximity to military and internal security facilities. As a result, residential buildings are often the single biggest category of civilian infrastructure damaged in these types of airwars. 

Targeting energy infrastructures such as oil depots or refineries near cities can create significant risk and adverse urban health impacts. U.S. strikes on several fuel depots near Tehran, which covered the entire city in thick black smoke and oily rain, affected everyone, not just those affiliated with the Iranian regime. 

Lastly, the U.S. and Israel have been targeting civilian sites that they claim are dual use, meaning that civilian uses are co-located with, or repurposed for, military uses. The problem is that civilians and civilian infrastructures are in the same places. For instance, the US and Israel have also been bombing sections of universities and technical institutes in Iran. 

How unusual (or not) are such attacks on civilian infrastructure?

My colleague Erika Weinthal (Duke University) and I have been tracking the targeting of civilian and environmental infrastructures across recent wars in the Middle East and North Africa for the past several years. Our publications show significant patterns of deliberate as well as unintentional targeting of civilian infrastructures by states, domestic non-state actors, and foreign actors.  

We focus particularly on the targeting of water and energy infrastructures, as these are often interdependent in the Middle East. Access to electricity underpins modern life and economic activity; this is why the threshold of targeting civilian infrastructures in war needs to be very high and undertaken only after other options are exhausted. 

Another very troubling aspect of these recent wars is that both state and non-state armed actors have been attacking schools, health clinics and hospitals, and cultural heritage sites. This has happened in Yemen, Syria, Sudan, Gaza, and now Iran and Lebanon.

What are the wider implications of attacks on infrastructure?

In our research, we have seen that the negative cumulative, interactive impacts of wars on people always far exceed the immediate numbers of deaths or casualties from direct violence. This is seen in excess mortality rates in children and the elderly, who as groups are particularly vulnerable to disease and displacement. It is seen in the economic contraction and rapid increases in poverty that accompany armed conflict. Moreover, the psychological effects of fear and trauma on the civilian population of bombing in cities far exceeds the physical damages. 

Is there a global policy or international law solution?

International humanitarian law provides clear guidelines against targeting infrastructures essential to the survival of the civilian population. However, international law depends upon powerful states to put these principles into practice and to support them. The U.S. military was long been recognized as a leader in seeking to uphold these norms and international law in its military doctrines and operations. What is striking at present is that President Trump has declared he has no respect for the rules of war designed to protect civilians or the infrastructures that they depend upon.