Trump: Iranian bridges, power plants legitimate targets - report
The president cites missile, drone, and nuclear threats in response to mounting legal and humanitarian concerns, US officials tell The Washington Post
Top aides have privately argued to President Trump that Iran’s power plants and bridges are legitimate military targets, saying attacks on these sites could disrupt the country’s missile and nuclear programs, officials told The Washington Post. Trump embraced the rationale in a nationwide address Wednesday, vowing to bomb Iran “back to the stone ages.”
The president signaled on Truth Social that further strikes are imminent. “Our military hasn’t even started destroying what’s left in Iran. Bridges next, then electric power plants!” he wrote last week, while referencing a prior deadline he set for Iran to open the Strait of Hormuz. Israel is also prepared to expand its bank of targets in Iran, including energy facilities, once the green light is given by President Trump.
On Thursday, the US struck a bridge connecting Tehran to Karaj, which officials said could be used to transport missiles and drones. Iranian state media reported at least 13 deaths from the attack.
US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and other aides briefed Trump on the legal rationale for striking infrastructure, noting that roadways could be used to move military equipment and electric plants could foment unrest that might complicate Tehran’s nuclear ambitions. A White House official said these strikes are part of a broader effort to “eliminate this threat to our country and our allies.”
Current and former military lawyers caution that targeting civilian infrastructure solely to pressure Tehran or send political signals may violate international law. Past US operations against bridges and energy infrastructure were limited to sites that provided a clear military advantage and minimized civilian harm. Geoffrey Corn, a former Army lawyer, said, “Ultimately, such objects may or may not be lawful targets, but that must be based on the circumstances related to the military operation and civilian considerations for each object.”
Legal concerns are compounded by humanitarian and regional risks. Gulf state partners have expressed alarm that strikes on power plants could provoke retaliatory attacks on their energy facilities. Recent Iranian strikes on Qatar’s natural gas infrastructure and Kuwait’s desalination plant underscore the risks of escalation. Human Rights Watch’s Sarah Yager noted that power plants and desalination facilities are vital for civilian survival and require extreme caution under international law.
Trump’s strategy also faces scrutiny over its effectiveness in halting Iran’s nuclear program. US Secretary of State Marco Rubio acknowledged that Iran is not currently enriching uranium, and the International Atomic Energy Agency has reported no movement of highly enriched uranium in facilities recently attacked by US and Israeli forces. Historical precedents, such as targeting Iraq’s electrical infrastructure during the 1991 Gulf War, show that even selective strikes can have long-term civilian consequences.
Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell emphasized that the military provides the president with all possible options, while Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Gen. Dan Caine said, “We have numerous processes and systems to carefully consider the whole range of considerations, from civilian risk to legal considerations with any target.”