Iran war: Israel says ceasefire is 'not end of campaign' | DW News

Key Concepts

• Strait of Hormuz: A vital international shipping waterway currently subject to closure and threats by Iran.
• Ceasefire Fragility: The breakdown of a two-week halt in hostilities due to conflicting interpretations regarding the inclusion of Lebanon.
• Expeditionary Naval Combat Power: The strategic use of aircraft carriers, surface warships, and submarines to project force.
• International Humanitarian Law (IHL): The legal framework governing the conduct of war, specifically regarding civilian infrastructure and proportionality.
• Dual-Use Infrastructure: Facilities (like power plants) that serve both civilian and military purposes, complicating their status as legal military targets.
• UNCLOS (United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea): The framework defining "innocent passage" in international waters, which Iran is accused of violating.

1. The Status of the Ceasefire and Military Operations

The two-week ceasefire between the U.S., Israel, and Iran, brokered by Pakistan, is effectively unraveling.

• Conflicting Terms: While Pakistan and initial reports suggested the ceasefire included Lebanon, the U.S. and Israel maintain that operations in Lebanon were never part of the agreement.
• Military Status: U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth declared a "capital V military victory," claiming that over 800 strikes have decimated Iran’s defense industrial base, including factories for missiles, rockets, and UAVs.
• Current Reality: Despite the ceasefire announcement, Iran has reportedly closed the Strait of Hormuz again in retaliation for Israeli airstrikes in Lebanon. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu stated that Israel remains prepared to resume combat at any moment.

2. Strategic Analysis: Naval Power and Conflict Dynamics

Dr. Steven Wills (Center for Maritime Strategy) provided a technical assessment of the conflict:

• Scale of Deployment: The current U.S. military footprint is significantly smaller than the 1990-1991 Desert Storm or 2003 Operation Iraqi Freedom. The reduced naval presence (fewer aircraft carriers) necessitates more time to service targets.
• The "Hollow Victory": While Iran remains in power, they have suffered extreme losses in military equipment and depleted their stockpiles. Replacing these assets will be difficult due to the destruction of their domestic production capabilities.
• The Strait of Hormuz: Dr. Wills noted that while Iran possesses thousands of mines (ranging from WWII-era contact mines to modern bottom-influence mines), they currently prefer using missiles and drones to threaten shipping. Closing the strait acts as a "criminal shakedown" that violates international norms of "innocent passage."

3. Legal and Human Rights Perspectives

Gissou Nia (Atlantic Council) addressed the legality of the conflict:

• War Crimes Rhetoric: Regarding threats to destroy Iranian civilization, Nia argued that targeting civilian infrastructure—even if "dual-use"—is a potential war crime if it causes humanitarian catastrophe and lacks proportionality.
• Accountability Gaps: The U.S. and Iran are not members of the International Criminal Court (ICC). Furthermore, the Trump administration’s history of sanctioning ICC prosecutors highlights a disregard for the international legal order.
• Standardization: Nia emphasized that the "justness" of a war does not exempt combatants from legal accountability for civilian casualties, such as the reported incident involving the bombing of an Iranian girls' school.

4. The Impact on Lebanon

Fadi Nicholas Nassar (Middle East Institute) highlighted the plight of Lebanon:

• Sidelined Sovereignty: Lebanon is being used as a "forward base" for Iran’s conflict with Israel. The Lebanese state has no control over the decision to enter or exit the war.
• Humanitarian Cost: Over one million people have been displaced. Nassar argued that Israel’s campaign, while aimed at Hezbollah, is causing catastrophic damage to civilian areas, and that military force alone is not a sustainable solution for regional stability.

Synthesis and Conclusion

The conflict is characterized by a "ragged" ceasefire where communication breakdowns and conflicting objectives have rendered the agreement largely ineffective. While the U.S. and Israel have achieved significant tactical success in degrading Iran’s military-industrial capacity, the regional situation remains volatile. The closure of the Strait of Hormuz poses a severe threat to international commerce, and the ongoing destruction in Lebanon underscores the human cost of a conflict where the state is sidelined. The primary takeaway is that without a clear, unified agreement on the scope of the ceasefire—specifically regarding Lebanon—and a return to international legal norms, the risk of renewed, full-scale escalation remains high.