Emerging Claim That Targeting Civilian Infrastructure Is a War Crime Proves a Bridge Too Far

The push is on to cast America and Israel as the villains of the Iran War, with attacks on infrastructure like bridges now being declared criminal. It’s a narrative that denies basic military doctrine — one that, if it takes hold, can only cripple the ability of free nations to defend their interests while protecting regimes like Tehran’s. On Monday, President Trump said that “every bridge in Iran will be decimated” along with “every power plant” if what’s left of Tehran’s government didn’t reopen the Strait of Hormuz. Many commentators, members of Congress, and observers feigned shock as if this was unprecedented. Tuesday’s Washington Post cited “experts” who said that targeting “‘every’ Iranian bridge and power plant” was a “blanket action” that “violates international law.” The Guardian also quoted self-proclaimed “experts” to say that this “appears to constitute serious war crimes under international law.” In a post on X, New York Magazine’s Intelligencer alleged that Mr. Trump “admitted to an apparent war crime when he said he targeted” the unfinished B1 bridge near Tehran, “one of the country’s largest pieces of civilian infrastructure, as a negotiating tactic.” The threats forced a ceasefire but didn’t silence the clucking. The fact that tanks, missile launchers, and other military vehicles traverse bridges alongside wood-paneled family station wagons was ignored. Another inconvenient truth — that electricity both microwaves Hot Pockets and spins uranium-enriching centrifuges — was likewise overlooked. The span in the film ‘The Bridge On The River Kwai,’ 1957. Columbia Pictures via Wikimedia CommonsThis rewriting of history recalls the Ministry of Truth’s Memory Hole in Orwell’s “1984.” The protagonist, Winston Smith — tasked with burning old newspapers in favor of the Party’s new narratives — sees how false versions of the past are accepted and wonders if he’s “alone in the possession of a memory.” The same question arises from the assertion that bridges have always been held sacrosanct. In the Civil War, hundreds to thousands were destroyed, including nine across East Tennessee in a single night — a secret mission ordered by President Lincoln. As North Korea, aided by Communist China, flooded south in 1950, Seoul began blowing bridges like the Hangang, which killed refugees crossing it as well as soldiers. During the Battle of Chosin Reservoir, Beijing’s soldiers destroyed Koto-ri Road Bridge to trap withdrawing American Marines. In 1972, American F-105 fighter-bombers sent the Long Bien Bridge into Hanoi’s Red River during the Vietnam War. Each time the Viet Cong repaired it, the Americans hit it again. World War II’s Operation Market Garden, dramatized in the 1977 film “A Bridge Too Far,” saw the Allies trying to capture upwards of 20 Dutch bridges before the Germans could blow them. The Long Bien bridge at Hanoi, Vietnam. Linh Pham/Getty ImagesThe 1957 epic “The Bridge on the River Kwai” tells of British POWs forced to build a span in Japanese-occupied Burma that the Allies soon targeted. In occupied Norway, the Nazis seized the Vemork hydroelectric power plant at Rjukan for their nuclear program. As shown in 1965’s “The Heroes of Telemark,” Norwegian commandos put it out of commission. In 1999, the NATO-led campaign against Serbia was an air-only campaign like Iran. Under the rules now being invented, participating heads of state like President Clinton might worry about indictments at the Hague for smashing between 55 and 82 bridges. “Citizens of Novi Sad,” the New York Times News Service reported on April 20, 1999, “view the destruction of” Belgrade’s “bridges as the beginning of NATO targeting of the civilian infrastructure.” All spans across the Danube, some carrying water pipes to suburbs, were soon severed. On May 4, Los Angeles Times reported on NATO “knocking out about 70 percent of power” across Serbia. Mr. Clinton said that the nation’s president, Slobodan Milosevic, “could end it now,” meaning the rain of fire, by acceding to NATO’s demands. In the two Iraq Wars, hundreds of bridges were destroyed or rendered useless. When the EU chose to put bridges on their currency, it illustrated the affection felt for these feats of architecture. Yet they’ve long been prime targets in wartime. The insistence that America and Israel would now be war criminals for targeting Iran’s spans is — for anyone possessing a memory — a bridge too far from reality to cross.

Emerging Claim That Targeting Civilian Infrastructure Is a War Crime Proves a Bridge Too Far

Emerging Claim That Targeting Civilian Infrastructure Is a War Crime Proves a Bridge Too Far

More from the New York Sun

Netanyahu Reveals He Personally Called Syria’s President After Israeli Airstrikes on Damascus To Stop Druze Massacre

UN Security Council Condemns Houthi Attacks on Saudi Arabia as Riyadh Airport Comes Under Fire 20 Times

Trump Already Blaming Cornyn, Rove for Potential Paxton Loss in Texas

Troy Jackson Tries To Paint Susan Collins as Trump’s ‘Rubber Stamp’ in Last Bitter Debate

Britain’s Tilt Toward Antisemitism Faces Critical Vote in Coming Weeks

Harry and Meghan Win Rapturous Welcome in Britain, but No Forgiveness Forthcoming From Royals

The Plot To Bankrupt Medicare

The Anguish of Central Banking

More from the New York Sun

Netanyahu Reveals He Personally Called Syria’s President After Israeli Airstrikes on Damascus To Stop Druze Massacre

UN Security Council Condemns Houthi Attacks on Saudi Arabia as Riyadh Airport Comes Under Fire 20 Times

Trump Already Blaming Cornyn, Rove for Potential Paxton Loss in Texas

Troy Jackson Tries To Paint Susan Collins as Trump’s ‘Rubber Stamp’ in Last Bitter Debate

Britain’s Tilt Toward Antisemitism Faces Critical Vote in Coming Weeks

Harry and Meghan Win Rapturous Welcome in Britain, but No Forgiveness Forthcoming From Royals

The Plot To Bankrupt Medicare

The Anguish of Central Banking