What began with surprise US and Israeli strikes on Iran one month ago has hardened into a grinding stand-off, with no clear way out.
The conflict鈥檚 opening blows on killed senior leaders in Tehran, 鈥� prompting on Israel, US bases and Gulf infrastructure.
Years of tension over and its regional influence have now boiled over into open warfare, with diplomacy faltering as both sides entrench their positions.
On the ground in Iran, the violence is worsening what was already a strained . News reporting from within the country carries daily images of damaged neighbourhoods, overwhelmed hospitals and families fleeing tit-for-tat strikes.
One incident in particular 鈥� the in southern Iran that left dozens of girls dead 鈥� highlights the scale of the devastation, as well as the war鈥檚 murky legal context.
Future war crimes investigators will need to ask some obvious questions. Was the school a civilian site, was it used for military purposes, what precautions were taken and was the civilian harm excessive relative to any military advantage?
Only then will responsibility be able to be determined 鈥� but such clarity is likely to be a long way off.
When the law is clear, but accountability is not
Many observers have the shaky legal basis for the conflict.
Some have described the US position 鈥� as set out in to the United Nations invoking self-defence and the protection of Israel against an alleged imminent threat from Iran and its allied groups 鈥� as thin.
Others that strikes supporting the stated goal of regime change were unlawful, citing the UN Charter鈥檚 prohibition on the use of force against the political independence of a state and the principle of non-intervention.
At this point, it is safe to assume that accountability for alleged international crimes by all sides to this ongoing conflict will remain elusive.
The has no automatic jurisdiction because the United States, Israel and Iran are not parties to the , the treaty that established the court and defines its powers.
A of the situation to the court for investigation and possible prosecution is also unlikely, given the high potential for any such move to be blocked by veto-wielding permanent members.
Is any accountability likely to come through internal investigations by the states involved? This too is uncertain, as such investigations are often classified or by military and legal authorities.
This means independent investigators are often left to piece together their cases from , authenticated videos, mass graves, weapon remnants and medical and mortuary records.
While this can establish what happened and where, to identifiable decision-makers and proving intent is far harder while the conflict continues and key military records remain sealed.
This is not to say the laws of war themselves are ambiguous. They require forces to between civilians and fighters, and take practical precautions.
International criminal cases turn on attribution and intent, meaning investigators must show who authorised an attack and what they knew. But without insider witnesses or key evidence, that is difficult, and proper accountability for war crimes often fall short.
A pattern of impunity?
We have seen this pattern before, where efforts to secure accountability are blocked or weakened by international deadlocks.
In 2014, the UN Security Council to refer alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity against civilians in Syria鈥檚 civil war to the ICC. The effort failed after Russia and China vetoed it, citing concerns about sovereignty and the impact on a political settlement.
In 2021, the UN Human Rights Council of the Group of Eminent Experts on Yemen 鈥� an independent body tasked with investigating and reporting on violations by all parties 鈥� after some member states voted against renewing it. This removed one of the international community鈥檚 few mechanisms for documenting human rights abuses.
The ongoing crisis in Gaza has also proved a defining test of whether international law can be enforced.
The ICC has opened an investigation and issued arrest warrants for senior Israeli and Hamas officials over alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity.
But such warrants depend on states to enforce them, and cooperation has been limited. A parallel UN inquiry Israel has committed genocide, yet the path to legal accountability remains contested.
In Iran, a similar outcome 鈥� or lack of one 鈥� now appears sadly likely.
, Senior Lecturer in Law,
This article is republished from under a Creative Commons license. Read the .
