Major Documented Incidents
Incidents investigated by international human rights organizations and verified journalists
Minab Girls' School Attack (Shajareh Tayyebeh Elementary)
Qeshm Island Desalination Plant Attack
War Initiated Without Congressional Authorization
Widespread Strikes on Civilian Areas Across Iran
Trump Threatens to Destroy Iran's Civilian Water and Power Infrastructure
Pentagon Accused of Covering Up U.S. Casualty Numbers
Legal Analysis & Expert Assessments
What international law experts and human rights organizations have said
On the Minab School Strike
Human Rights Watch called for the attack to be investigated as a war crime, noting that the U.S. had a duty to verify its targeting intelligence and take all feasible precautions to avoid civilian harm. Amnesty International found the school was struck with precision-guided munitions and that the U.S. appeared to have relied on outdated intelligence — a violation of the duty to verify military objectives. A Yale law professor noted, however, that an honest mistake might not necessarily constitute a war crime if there was not reckless disregard for civilian life.
On the War's Legality Under U.S. and International Law
Over 100 international law experts signed a letter stating the initiation of the war was a "clear violation of the United Nations Charter." The Brennan Center for Justice noted there was no imminent threat or unforeseen attack. The ACLU described it as an "unconstitutional war" launched without congressional authorization. Multiple constitutional law scholars across the political spectrum, including libertarian scholars at the Cato Institute, agreed that the conflict is obviously a war requiring congressional approval.
On Threats to Civilian Infrastructure
International law expert Gabor Rona told NPR that Trump's threats to target power and desalination plants constitute threats to commit war crimes under both international and U.S. law. The Geneva Conventions explicitly prohibit attacks on objects indispensable to civilian survival, including water and power installations. The Center for Civilians in Conflict described the threats as "appalling" and warned of devastating impacts on hospitals, water access, and communications.
On Dismantling Civilian Protection Safeguards
The Pentagon's Civilian Harm Mitigation and Response (CHMR) program was cut by approximately 90% under Secretary Hegseth, leaving CENTCOM with reportedly one staffer for civilian casualty mitigation. ProPublica documented how the initiative was gutted even as strikes escalated. A former Pentagon civilian protection expert warned the approach represents a departure from norms established since World War II, with "zero accountability."
Civilian Infrastructure Targeting
Documented or alleged strikes on civilian objects and infrastructure
Schools
Water Infrastructure
Bridges, Power, Energy Facilities
Residential Buildings
Systemic & Structural Concerns
Patterns and institutional failures that increase civilian harm
90% Reduction in Civilian Harm Mitigation
Termination of Senior Military Lawyers & Loosened Targeting
Internet Blackout Preventing Independent Documentation
Conflict Timeline
Key events in the 2025–2026 U.S. military campaign
Methodology & Editorial Standards
This tracker documents credible allegations of international humanitarian law (IHL) violations, constitutional concerns, and patterns of civilian harm during U.S. military operations in 2025–2026. It does not make independent legal determinations — only courts and tribunals can establish whether specific acts constitute war crimes.
Each entry is sourced from one or more of the following categories: investigations by international human rights organizations (Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International), U.N. bodies and experts, verified investigative journalism (NYT, NPR, BBC, Bellingcat, ProPublica, The Intercept), legal analysis by constitutional and international law scholars, and official government statements.
Where facts are disputed (such as the Qeshm Island desalination attack), both sides are noted. Casualty figures are attributed to their source and should be understood as estimates, especially given the internet blackout inside Iran that has hampered independent verification since February 28. This tracker covers U.S. actions specifically; Iranian, Israeli, and other parties' violations are documented by the same organizations linked here.
This is an independent civilian research project. It is not affiliated with any government, political party, or advocacy organization. Its purpose is to aggregate publicly available information from credible sources to support democratic accountability and informed public debate.
Note on "war crimes": This tracker uses terms like "alleged war crime," "investigated as war crime," and "IHL violation" based on the assessments of the cited organizations. A formal determination of war crimes requires adjudication by a competent court. The ICC, ICJ, and various national courts may ultimately make such determinations. This tracker documents the allegations and evidence as reported by credible sources.