
Iranian President: Targeting energy infrastructure is a war crime
A direct Iranian message to the American people
Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian addressed the American people directly and publicly, declaring that US and Israeli attacks targeting vital infrastructure, particularly energy facilities, constitute a clear “war crime.” These remarks come at a highly sensitive time, ahead of a highly anticipated speech by US President Donald Trump, amidst unprecedented escalation of tensions in the Middle East.
War of words and refusal to cease fire
More than a month after the outbreak of direct confrontations in the Middle East, Trump stated that Tehran was calling for a ceasefire, a claim the Iranian regime quickly and categorically denied. This crisis escalated significantly after the joint Israeli-American attack on Tehran on February 28, with strikes heavily targeting energy facilities and vital industrial infrastructure.
Human and economic losses
In his message, published on his official website, Pezeshkian emphasized that “attacking Iran’s vital infrastructure, including energy and industrial facilities, is a direct attack on the Iranian people.” He added, warning of catastrophic consequences: “Besides constituting a war crime, these actions have repercussions far beyond Iran’s borders. They generate regional instability, increase human casualties and economic costs, and sow seeds of resentment that will persist for years to come.” He argued that this military escalation is not a show of force, but rather “evidence of strategic confusion and an inability to find a lasting solution to the successive crises.”.
Historical context and international law
Historically, energy infrastructure has been a strategic bargaining chip in armed conflicts. Under international humanitarian law and the Geneva Conventions, targeting civilian facilities that do not provide a direct military contribution is strictly prohibited. The destruction of power, water, and oil facilities leads to humanitarian disasters affecting innocent civilians. Targeting Iran's energy sector not only impacts the domestic economy, which has already suffered under decades of harsh international sanctions, but also creates a severe economic crisis for the population, exacerbating the humanitarian crisis.
Accusations of manipulation and influencing public opinion
In a related development, the Iranian president accused Israel of “manipulating” the United States and dragging it into a full-blown regional war, an accusation Trump denied. Pezeshkian asked in his letter: “Isn’t it true that Israel, by fabricating an Iranian threat, is trying to divert the world’s attention from its crimes against the Palestinians? Is the ‘America First’ slogan truly among the priorities of the US government today?” This question reflects a clear Iranian attempt to influence American public opinion and highlight the exorbitant costs of foreign military interventions that could ultimately harm US interests.
The Strait of Hormuz: The artery of the global economy
On the other hand, the Strait of Hormuz crisis stands out as one of the most serious repercussions of this conflict. The US president has ruled out any ceasefire agreement without a guarantee of the full reopening of the Strait of Hormuz. This strait is a vital and strategic artery for the global economy, through which approximately 20% of the world's daily oil consumption passes. Any blockade or closure of the strait by Iran would inevitably lead to a severe shock in global energy markets and a dramatic surge in oil prices, threatening to destabilize the entire global economy and push it toward stagflation.
International anticipation for the American speech
Trump is scheduled to deliver a speech at 9:00 PM (01:00 GMT Thursday), his first address to the nation since the start of hostilities. The international community is watching this speech with great concern, as the current course of events places the Middle East and the world at a dangerous crossroads, where geopolitical interests are intertwined with global energy security, making a diplomatic settlement extremely complex but essential to avoid sliding into a devastating regional war.



