UN Says Iran School Strike May Constitute US War Crime

Published: 17 September 2026. The English Chronicle Desk. The English Chronicle Online

A United Nations fact-finding mission has said there are reasonable grounds to believe that US forces were responsible for two military strikes in Iran in February that killed or injured civilians and damaged civilian facilities. The mission concluded that the attacks on a primary school in Minab and a sports facility in Lamerd were indiscriminate and amounted to war crimes under international law.

The findings, presented as part of an independent investigation into the situation in Iran, come as the conflict between the United States and Iran continues to generate international concern over civilian casualties and the conduct of military operations. The UN mission also concluded that Iranian authorities committed crimes against humanity during a separate crackdown on nationwide anti-government protests that began in late December.

The report is expected to be submitted to the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva. Its conclusions do not represent a criminal conviction by a court, but they reflect the fact-finding mission’s assessment of available evidence and its application of international law.

One of the central cases examined by investigators was the February strike on Shajareh Tayyebeh primary school in the southern Iranian city of Minab. Iranian officials said more than 150 people were killed, including about 120 schoolchildren. Reuters has previously reported that an initial US military investigation indicated US forces were probably responsible for the strike, while the Pentagon subsequently elevated its inquiry. The US has not publicly released preliminary findings from that investigation.

According to the UN mission, investigators found the school to be a clearly identifiable civilian object and found no evidence that it was being used for military purposes. The investigators said the US had relied on intelligence indicating that a senior Iranian military commander could be present at the location, but that the information had not been adequately verified before the attack.

The mission said the failure went beyond what could simply be described as negligence. Investigators concluded that US forces directed the strike at the school while aware of a substantial risk that a civilian object could be hit.

That assessment is significant because international humanitarian law requires parties to an armed conflict to distinguish between military objectives and civilian objects. Attacks directed against civilians or civilian objects, as well as indiscriminate attacks that cannot adequately distinguish between military and civilian targets, can constitute violations of international humanitarian law.

The US government has previously maintained that its military operations comply with the law of armed conflict. President Donald Trump also said in June that nobody had intentionally attacked a girls’ school in Iran and referred to an investigation into the incident. The Pentagon has not yet published its own findings, leaving the UN mission’s conclusions as a major independent assessment of the episode.

The second case examined by the investigators involved a sports centre in Lamerd. The UN mission said the strike damaged nearby residential buildings and a school and resulted in 22 civilian casualties.

Investigators reached a similar conclusion, describing the attack as indiscriminate and therefore constituting a war crime. However, the US Central Command said in March that US forces had not launched strikes into Lamerd on the day in question.

That difference in accounts illustrates the challenges involved in establishing responsibility for individual attacks during an active conflict. The UN mission based its conclusions on evidence it considered sufficient to establish reasonable grounds, while US military authorities have disputed responsibility for the Lamerd incident.

The findings concerning US military conduct form only one part of the wider report. The UN mission also examined the response of Iranian authorities to the nationwide protests that began in late December.

Investigators concluded that Iranian authorities carried out a widespread and systematic attack against civilians during the crackdown. The report cited allegations and findings involving unlawful killings, torture, arbitrary detention, enforced disappearances and severe restrictions on freedom of expression.

The mission said the response represented a significant escalation compared with earlier patterns of suppressing dissent. It pointed to the use of deadly force, restrictions on internet access and the use of the death penalty among the measures employed by authorities.

Human rights organisations have previously reported large-scale arrests and serious abuses during the protests. The UN human rights system has also documented allegations involving arbitrary detention, disappearances, restrictions on freedom of expression and torture in connection with the unrest.

Iranian authorities have rejected allegations of systematic human rights violations. Tehran has blamed what it describes as terrorists and rioters supported by foreign opponents, including the United States and Israel, for violence associated with the unrest.

The UN mission said it could not independently verify the total number of people killed or injured during the crackdown. Official Iranian figures cited in the report put the death toll at 3,038, with about 25,000 people injured. The investigators said the actual number of deaths and injuries was probably considerably higher, although they did not provide an independently verified final figure.

The issue of casualty figures is particularly sensitive because access to reliable information has been restricted during periods of internet disruption and heightened security measures. Independent verification can therefore be difficult, especially when authorities, opposition groups and international organisations have access to different sets of information.

The findings come against the backdrop of an increasingly prolonged US-Iran conflict. Reuters reported this week that the war, which began with US and Israeli attacks on Iran in February, had entered its seventh month, with President Trump saying he hoped the conflict might be approaching an end. The fighting has nevertheless continued to affect civilians, regional security and international energy markets.

The UN report adds another layer to an already complicated international debate over accountability during the conflict. For Iran, the findings highlight allegations of serious abuses against civilians during the domestic crackdown. For the United States, they raise questions about the process used to identify military targets and assess the risk to civilians.

The mission’s use of the phrase “reasonable grounds to believe” is also important. Fact-finding bodies generally use evidentiary standards that differ from those applied in criminal courts. The findings therefore do not themselves determine criminal liability or impose punishment. Any future legal proceedings would require separate processes, evidence and jurisdiction.

Nevertheless, the report is likely to increase international scrutiny of the conduct of all parties involved in the conflict. International humanitarian law places obligations on states and armed groups regardless of the wider political circumstances of a war. Civilian protection is a central principle of those rules.

The Minab school attack has become one of the most closely watched incidents of the conflict because of the large number of children reported killed. The UN mission’s conclusion that the school was a civilian facility means that the circumstances surrounding the targeting decision are likely to remain a central issue in discussions about accountability.

At the same time, the mission’s findings on Iran’s domestic crackdown underline that civilian protection concerns are not limited to foreign military operations. The report describes a pattern of state actions that investigators say affected civilians through killings, detention, alleged torture, disappearances and restrictions on basic freedoms.

With the UN Human Rights Council expected to consider the findings, attention will now turn to how governments and international institutions respond. The report provides an independent assessment, but questions of accountability, compensation and possible legal action remain separate matters.

For families affected by the violence, however, the central issue is more immediate: establishing what happened and who was responsible. The UN mission’s conclusions add substantial international scrutiny to two disputed military strikes and to the Iranian government’s response to the protests, while also leaving open the possibility of further investigations and legal processes.

The report therefore presents a dual picture of the conflict: allegations of unlawful military attacks affecting civilians and, separately, allegations of systematic abuses by Iranian authorities against people involved in domestic unrest. Its findings reinforce the continuing importance of independent investigation, transparent evidence and adherence to international law as the conflict moves into another uncertain phase.