President Donald Trump said on 24 July 2026 that the United States was considering “a massive attack” on Iran, following the breakdown of the ceasefire and of the memorandum of understanding between the two countries. The announcement came alongside an exchange of threats by American and Iranian leaders against targets that could include civilian infrastructure.
A day earlier, on 23 July, Trump set out the threat in specific terms: “From this point forward, any time the Islamic Republic of Iran shoots at a ship in the Strait of Hormuz, whether it be by Missile, Rocket, Drone, or any other device or weapon, the United States will bomb and destroy ONE BRIDGE OR POWER PLANT, including those located next to, or in, the Capital City of Tehran.”
On 22 July, Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, the speaker of Iran’s parliament, posted on X that “If our security is not ensured, no infrastructure will be safe.”
Why the wording matters legally
The laws of war prohibit deliberate attacks on civilian objects. They also prohibit attacks whose expected harm to civilians would be excessive in relation to the anticipated direct military advantage.
Individuals who commit serious violations of those rules with criminal intent — deliberately or recklessly — bear individual responsibility for war crimes. That responsibility attaches to the person who orders or carries out the attack, not only to the state.
Bridges and power plants in populated cities are the kind of objects the rules were written around: they carry traffic, electricity and, through pumping stations, water supply for civilians who have no part in the fighting.
The wider confrontation
The current escalation follows an earlier round of fighting between the two countries this year that reached residential districts of Tehran. In the Shahrak-e Gharb neighbourhood of the capital, apartments were left destroyed in March 2026.
The Strait of Hormuz, named in Trump’s threat, is the sea passage linking the Gulf to the Gulf of Oman and carrying the region’s oil exports. It has repeatedly become a point of friction between naval forces and commercial shipping during periods of tension.
Neither side’s public statements set out a timetable for an attack, or identified which targets would fall within the threats in practice.
This report was produced by the HuMedia newsroom.
