As the third week of the war in Iran came to an end, Donald Trump published a remarkable threat to his social media platform: If Iran failed to fully open the Strait of Hormuz within 48 hours, the American president wrote, the United States would start destroying civilian power plants in the country.

Trump ended up backing off, but the significance of the threat lingered. It suggested that the Republican administration was prepared to target civilian energy supply, which many observers recognized as a possible war crime.

Subsequent comments from the president culminated in a follow-up threat on Monday morning. “Great progress has been made but, if for any reason a deal is not shortly reached, which it probably will be, and if the Hormuz Strait is not immediately ‘Open for Business,’ we will conclude our lovely ‘stay’ in Iran by blowing up and completely obliterating all of their Electric Generating Plants, Oil Wells and Kharg Island (and possibly all desalinization plants!), which we have purposefully not yet ‘touched,’” the Republican wrote.

In other words, as far as the American president is concerned, if Iran fails to meet his demands, the U.S. will start taking out civilian infrastructure to punish the nation’s political leaders.

A few hours later, NBC News’ senior White House correspondent Garrett Haake asked press secretary Karoline Leavitt a very good question.

“Under international law, striking civilian infrastructure like that is generally prohibited,” Haake noted, after summarizing the details of the presidential statement. “Why is the president threatening what would amount to potentially a war crime with the U.S. military? And how do you square that with the administration repeatedly saying that the U.S. does not target civilians?”

Leavitt replied, “Look, the president has made it quite clear to the Iranian regime at this moment in time, as evidenced by the statement that you just read, that their best move is to make a deal, or else the United States armed forces has capabilities beyond their wildest imagination, and the president is not afraid to use them.”

That wasn’t much of a response. On the contrary, it seemed to leave the door open to the same problem that sparked the underlying question in the first place.

As the back-and-forth continued, the White House press secretary claimed that “some experts” had likely pressed Haake to ask his question (Republican disdain for expertise remains a bizarre problem) before concluding, “Of course, this administration and the United States armed forces will always act within the confines of the law, but with respect to achieving the objectives of Operation Epic Fury, President Trump is going to move forward unabated.”

Focusing on Leavitt’s own phrasing, Haake added, “Which objectives would destroying a desalination plant help?”

The White House press secretary refused to acknowledge the question and moved on.

That wasn’t too surprising — Leavitt was dealing with a line of inquiry for which there are no good answers — but the exchange didn’t exactly ease concerns about the administration’s willingness to consider war crimes in pursuit of Trump’s ill-defined goals.

The post Pressed on possible war crimes in Iran, White House’s Leavitt offers the wrong answer appeared first on MS NOW.

Author: Source Author

From MS Now.