A UN-mandated fact-finding mission has found reasonable grounds to
believe that the United States committed serious violations of international
law during strikes on Iran, including attacks on a school and a sports complex
that killed dozens of children and civilians. The White House rejects the
findings, while Tehran says the US and Israeli strikes deliberately or
indiscriminately targeted civilians and civilian facilities.
An independent international fact-finding mission on Iran, mandated by
the United Nations, has concluded that there are reasonable grounds to believe
that the United States committed war crimes during two strikes it carried out
in Iran in February 2026.
The first strike hit a primary school in the city of Minab, while the
second struck a cultural and sports complex in Lamerd.
The strikes came at the beginning of the war launched by the United
States and Israel against Iran, amid stalled nuclear negotiations.
After months of investigation, the mission concluded that US forces
acted "recklessly", raising serious questions about Washington's
compliance with international humanitarian law and its obligation to protect
civilians.
The investigation relied on satellite imagery, verified video footage,
weapons-fragment analysis, witness testimony, and information provided by
Iranian sources and independent organizations.
Neither the United States nor Israel granted the mission access to their
personnel, and neither responded to requests for information.
The mission said the school in Minab was clearly civilian in nature and
that the United States failed to take all feasible measures to verify that it
was a military objective before attacking it.
The Minab School Strike
On February 28, during the opening hours of the US-Israeli assault on Iran,
missiles struck the Shajareh Tayyebeh Primary School in Minab, Hormozgan
Province, in southern Iran.
The strike occurred at approximately 10:30 a.m. local time.
The school was about 72 meters from an Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps
naval facility, but it was separated from the facility by a wall and had its
own entrance.
Satellite imagery also clearly showed that it was a functioning school,
including children's murals, a playground, and classrooms.
Investigators found that the school was struck twice.
The first strike hit the lower floor. As staff attempted to move
children to a prayer room on the upper floor, a second strike hit the upper
floor, causing a large number of casualties.
According to figures provided by local officials, 156 people were
killed, including 120 students and 26 female teachers.
Independent sources cited by the UN mission estimated the death toll at
157, including children as young as six.
More significantly, weapons analysis at the site indicated the use of a
US-made Tomahawk missile, a weapon Iran does not possess.
The Trump administration initially attempted to place responsibility on
Iranian forces, but evidence concerning the missile type strengthened the
account linking the strike to US forces.
Later, according to reports cited by US and international media, a
preliminary Pentagon investigation indicated that outdated intelligence had led
to the school being mistakenly identified as part of the adjacent military
facility.
This raises a central legal question: If the school was clearly
identifiable as a civilian facility, relying on outdated targeting information
without adequately verifying it could constitute a serious violation of the
laws of war.
The Lamerd Strike
Later that same day, at approximately 5:10 p.m., the Shahid Haj Khalil
Naimi Cultural and Sports Complex in Lamerd, Fars Province, was hit by an
airstrike.
The UN mission said the facility had no military use.
Verified video footage showed one missile exploding over a nearby
residential area, followed by a second missile directly over the complex.
Local officials reported 22 deaths, including four children, and more
than 100 injuries.
A nearby school was also damaged.
In this case as well, there was a sharp dispute between the US account
and the evidence presented by the UN mission.
US Central Command said the damage was consistent with the use of an
Iranian Hoveyzeh cruise missile.
However, the UN mission said weapons experts had ruled out that
possibility because of differences in the weapon's design and instead pointed
to a US-made Precision Strike Missile.
What Does Washington Say?
After evidence emerged concerning the Tomahawk missile used in the Minab
school strike, the United States no longer categorically denied responsibility
for the attack.
In May, US Central Command commander Admiral Brad Cooper said
preliminary investigation findings were consistent with the strike having been
carried out by US forces.
In June, President Donald Trump said "nobody" deliberately
targeted the school.
However, that defense does not resolve the legal dispute. The issue
raised by the UN mission is not simply whether the school was deliberately
targeted, but whether US forces took the legally required precautions before
launching the attack.
As for the Lamerd strike, Washington continues to deny responsibility.
What Does the UN Say About Legal Responsibility?
International humanitarian law requires parties to armed conflicts to
distinguish between military and civilian targets and to take all feasible
precautions to avoid civilian casualties.
Legal experts emphasize that not every violation of the laws of war automatically
constitutes a war crime, because additional legal elements must be established.
However, human rights lawyer Reed Brody said the standard of
"recklessness" could be significant in this case.
Recklessness, in this context, means acting while being aware of a
substantial risk that an unlawful result could occur, yet proceeding
regardless.
The mission's report described this using the legal term "dolus
eventualis", referring to a mental state in which a person recognizes the
possibility of an unlawful outcome and accepts the risk that it may occur.
The mission identified three key factors supporting its conclusion:
- Reliance on outdated
targeting data.
- The fact that the building was readily identifiable as a school.
- The failure to take sufficient measures to reduce the risk to
civilians.
The mission concluded that the US failure to update its targeting
information went beyond mere negligence, and that the circumstances could meet
the legal threshold for the war crime of launching an indiscriminate attack.
What About Israel?
The findings come within the broader context of the US-Israeli military
campaign against Iran.
The UN fact-finding mission had previously described the US and Israeli
air campaign as causing extensive harm to civilians and civilian
infrastructure, including schools, residential areas, and vital facilities.
In March, the head of the fact-finding mission said that the United
States and Israel had launched a broad aerial campaign against Iran on February
28, with initial reports indicating a growing number of civilian casualties,
including children.
The legal responsibility for individual Israeli strikes remains a
separate matter requiring evidence and investigation on a case-by-case basis.
Therefore, findings concerning US strikes do not automatically establish that
Israel committed a war crime in every military operation.
How Did the White House Respond?
The Trump administration rejected the findings of the UN mission.
White House Deputy Press Secretary Anna Kelly said that the UN Human
Rights Council had "accomplished nothing" on human rights and accused
it of issuing what she described as unserious claims.
She also said that Iran was the only party in the conflict that had
committed war crimes, according to the US administration.
Washington therefore rejects the mission's conclusions, while the
mission says there is sufficient evidence to raise the possibility of US war
crimes in the Minab and Lamerd strikes.
What Does Iran Say?
Iran rejects the US account of the Lamerd strike and insists that the
missile that hit the complex was American rather than Iranian.
Tehran also regards the Minab and Lamerd strikes as evidence of what it
describes as indiscriminate US and Israeli attacks against civilians and
civilian facilities.
Iran has previously accused the United States and Israel of committing
crimes against humanity during the war and has called for international
accountability for the attacks.
Will the United States Face Consequences?
A UN fact-finding report does not automatically result in punishment or
prosecution.
UN fact-finding missions are investigative bodies rather than courts and
cannot, by themselves, issue criminal convictions.
However, their findings can become evidence or a basis for future legal
investigations and proceedings before national courts or international bodies.
Previous UN reports have been used in cases before international courts,
including cases involving Myanmar and Israel.
According to legal experts, the impact of the report will ultimately
depend to a significant extent on the political and legal will of states and
institutions involved.
Conclusion
The UN mission's findings place the United States under serious legal
scrutiny over two military operations in Iran.
In Minab, the investigation points to a US strike that hit a school
whose civilian character was clearly identifiable, killing more than 150
people, including a large number of children.
In Lamerd, the mission points to evidence indicating the use of a
US-made weapon, despite Washington's denial of responsibility for the strike.
The report does not mean that an international court has issued a final
judgment convicting the United States. However, it represents official UN
documentation of reasonable grounds to believe that war crimes may have been
committed, and it could provide a basis for future legal or political
proceedings.
At the same time, the UN maintains that alleged violations should be
investigated and those responsible held accountable, regardless of which party
committed them, and that protecting civilians must remain a fundamental
obligation for all sides in the conflict.