Skip to content
Welcome, thoughtbot's Giant Robots listeners!Start here
International humanitarian law
AI-generated illustration
Concept

International humanitarian law

Rules governing armed conflict that both sides in the Iran-Israel war are alleged to be violating.

On 7 March, confirmation that a US weapon struck a school in Minab put International humanitarian law at the centre of scrutiny over civilian protection in the Iran-Israel war.

Last refreshed: 22 September 2026 · Appears in 1 active topic

Key Question

Who enforces the rules of war when both sides are breaking them?

Timeline for International humanitarian law

View full timeline →
Follow Iran Conflict 2026 →

Background

International humanitarian law governs Conduct during armed conflict. Its central protections require parties to distinguish military objectives from civilians and civilian objects, to take feasible precautions, and to avoid attacks expected to cause excessive civilian harm.

The law applies to all parties to an armed conflict. The rules govern wartime Conduct; other law addresses the legal grounds for war. Its rules therefore remain relevant when forces attack from the air, use missiles, hold territory or operate among civilian populations.

Its practical force depends on evidence, investigation and political will. The Minab school strike reported on 7 March and the movement of Iranian forces into schools, dormitories and mosques reported on 16 March show why factual records matter: the legal assessment turns on what was targeted, what precautions were taken and how civilians were exposed.

Key Issues
Civilian protection

Minab tests distinction

On 7 March, Independent analysis confirmed that a US weapon had struck a school in Minab. The episode made the rule of distinction, which requires parties to distinguish military targets from civilians and civilian objects, a live question in the war.

By 18 March, only 58 victims had been identified after the school strike, including 48 children and 10 adults. The slow identification process limited the evidence available for any prompt assessment of responsibility.

Cluster munitions

Cluster fire broadens civilian risk

Iranian missile fire brought cluster munitions into the conflict on 14 and 15 March, when bomblets fell in the Tel Aviv area after missile barrages breached Israeli defences. Their use sharpened the legal focus on weapons whose submunitions can endanger civilians beyond the intended point of impact.

On 25 March, Iran resumed attacks after an 11-hour pause and cluster munitions struck Bnei Brak, wounding 12 people, including six children. For International humanitarian law, the incident renewed questions about precaution and the foreseeable civilian effects of area weapons in populated places.

Common Questions
What is international humanitarian law?
International humanitarian law (IHL), also known as the laws of war, limits the effects of armed conflict. Codified in the 1949 Geneva Conventions, it requires parties to distinguish combatants from civilians, act proportionately, and take precautions. Both Iran and Israel are parties to the Geneva Conventions, making their actions in the 2026 war subject to its rules.Source: ICRC
Did the US violate international law in the Minab school strike?
Three Independent investigations by The Washington Post, CNN, and CBC concluded the strike on Shajareh Tayyebeh girls' school in Minab was 'targeted and deliberate, possibly based on faulty IRGC intelligence', using a US weapon. 168 children were killed. The Pentagon has neither confirmed nor denied; 46 senators wrote to Hegseth demanding an investigation.Source: Washington Post / CNN / CBC
Are cluster munitions illegal under international law?
Cluster munitions are banned by the 2008 Convention on Cluster Munitions, but neither Iran nor Israel has signed it. Iran used cluster munitions in multiple barrages against Israeli residential areas including Bnei Brak and Ramat Gan, scattering submunitions across civilian districts.Source: Convention on Cluster Munitions
What does the Arms Trade Treaty require in wartime?
The Arms Trade Treaty obliges signatory states to suspend weapons transfers when there is a credible risk they will be used to commit grave crimes. Human Rights Watch formally invoked this in 2026, calling on the US, UK, and Germany to suspend military assistance to Israel. The UK set a precedent by suspending some transfers over Gaza in September 2024.Source: Human Rights Watch
How does IHL differ from war crimes law?
IHL sets the rules, principally distinction, proportionality, and precaution. war crimes law criminalises serious IHL violations committed with intent. Striking a school on a misidentified target may breach IHL without constituting a war crime if intent cannot be proven. That gap between rule and accountability defines where both sides in the 2026 conflict currently sit.