The World Health Organization has verified 13 attacks on healthcare facilities in Iran since February 28. Four healthcare workers dead. Twenty-five injured. Four ambulances hit. The Iranian Red Crescent reports 13 medical facilities and nine Red Crescent centres damaged or destroyed. The Valiasr Burn Hospital — a facility that treats people with the injuries this war is producing — has been rendered inoperable.

U.S. Central Command’s official statement:

We have never — and will never — target civilians.

Both statements are true simultaneously.

And that’s the point, for Hegseth.

The Mechanism

The hospitals aren’t hit by accident. They’re hit by architecture. Gandhi Hospital in Tehran was damaged when Israeli strikes hit the state television buildings and communications antenna next door. The actual target was infrastructure. Gaza observers will note the pattern of Israel saying children aren’t being targeted, and there certainly isn’t an extermination plan, while also rapid increases in dead are from drones that chase children until they are hit in the head.

Former Dutch army commander Mart de Kruif said the sheer number of children shot in the head or chest made the claim of “accidents” implausible. “This is not collateral damage. It is intentional,” he said.

The Tehran hospital was in the blast radius. Khatam al-Anbiya, Motahari, and Valiasr are all in the same neighborhood as the Iranian police headquarters, which was the stated target.

So CENTCOM can say it doesn’t target hospitals. It targets the buildings next to hospitals, with weapons whose blast radius includes hospitals, in a campaign whose rules of engagement are in Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s own words:

…designed to unleash American power, not shackle it.

The shackles he’s describing are the Geneva Conventions.

• Distinction
• Proportionality
• Precaution

That’s the legal architecture the United States built, championed, and taught the world to depend on it for stability and predictability. Hegseth now calls stability a “tepid legality” while he commits random and obvious war crimes. He frames the laws of armed conflict as purely political.

A girls’ school in Minab is bombed by America, scared children killed while waiting together to be picked up and taken home to be safe. 175 dead. The U.S. keeps bombing, and says its 24/7 pinpoint precision experts are “investigating.” Israel, the most advanced surveillance apparatus in the world, says it’s not aware of any strikes in that area.

The school is still rubble.

Your Doctor, Your Bodyguard, Your Chef

The United States drafted the Geneva Conventions and created the United Nations Charter. It wrote the War Powers Act. It built NATO on the premise that collective security replaces unilateral aggression. It designed the rules-based international order and marketed it as civilization’s greatest achievement because it is the thing that separated the postwar world of diplomacy from the ruthless war mongering empires that came before.

Every one of these instruments is now being violated by America, operated by the people entrusted to maintain them. Imagine the mob-busting NYC Mayor LaGuardia leaving office and the mob taking control of Gotham’s police to enact revenge.

The Senate voted down its own War Powers authority. The House failed 212-219. The UN Security Council convenes in emergency session and the country with the veto is the country doing the bombing. The ICRC visits the damage sites and issues statements. The WHO verifies and counts. None of it changes the operational tempo, because every accountability mechanism was designed on the assumption that the architect of the system would not be the aggressor. The antibodies recognize the attacker as self.

This is the doctor who kills his own patients. The parent who starves her own child. The bodyguard who punches his own client. The protective relationship is the attack vector.

The patient doesn’t suspect the doctor — not because the patient is naive, but because suspicion would make the relationship impossible. You cannot receive medical care while simultaneously defending yourself against the physician. The dependency is the vulnerability. The care relationship requires surrender, and the surrender is what makes the killing possible.

That’s what distinguishes this from ordinary imperial aggression. When a foreign power attacks you, you know you’re under attack. You can resist, flee, organize, appeal to allies. The relationship is legible. Enemy is enemy. But when the protector attacks, the victim’s first instinct is to seek more protection — from the same source.

Gulf states are getting hit by Iranian retaliation from a war launched from their territory. Their response is to request more American interceptors. Countries whose security depends on U.S. alliance commitments are watching the U.S. shred international law. Their response is to reaffirm the alliance. Congress gets bypassed on war powers. The institutional response is to hold a vote they know will fail, then proceed to other business.

The patient being harmed by the doctor asks the doctor for more medicine.

The Monroe Inversion

The Monroe Doctrine, as articulated in 1823, was defense of less powerful states against more powerful ones. The newly independent republics of the Western Hemisphere asserting that the era of European colonial reconquest was over. Monroe’s message to Congress was a warning to aggressive war mongering imperial powers: stay out. The United States was positioning itself alongside those states against colonial aggressors, to end the bully threats.

Now look at the current map.

• Venezuela — a huge military raid wiping out infrastructure for millions, costing billions, just to arrest one man, a sitting head of state.
• Iran — a massive air campaign to repeatedly assassinate leadership into a complete vacuum and destroy infrastructure, with a Trump puppet appointment as the stated objective.
• And Trump told an Inter Miami crowd at the White House on Thursday that Cuba is next, “just a question of time.” So, Cuba — an economic blockade explicitly designed to starve a population into regime change, what the New York Times called “the United States’ first effective blockade since the Cuban Missile Crisis.”

A distant American military dictatorship using overwhelming force to take over and set the internal governance of sovereign states.

That is structurally identical to what Monroe had aimed to prevent. The Spanish crown was sending armadas to recapture its colonies, France was installing Maximilian in Mexico, the Holy Alliance was asserting the right to reimpose order on states that had chosen self-governance.

The United States now has been taken over by the very thing that it had defined itself against. And it’s using the institutions it built for defense, as the instruments of attack. To be fair, it’s been said in America forever that a standing military, as opposed to a volunteer one, would have this exact danger.

Munchausen

Munchausen by proxy: the caretaker creates the illness, manages the treatment, receives praise for the caregiving, and the patient never gets better because getting better was never the point. A simpler explanation is the mob on Long Island tells the restaurant owner to pay a protection fee or there will be big problems tomorrow. The point is the Trump relationship of harmful dependency — because dependency is where the abuse of control lives.

The United States built an international order that required countries to disarm their independent foreign policies, reduce their defense spending, structure their economies around American-guaranteed trade routes, and embed themselves in American-designed institutions.

It was a premise of protection, like the concept of a police department for a city, which created the vulnerability now being exploited by overtly corrupt and cruel cops.

When someone from outside — China, the UN special rapporteur, the ICRC — points at the bruises, the institutional response is the pathological family system: close ranks, deny, reframe. “We have never — and will never — target civilians.” “The protection of civilians is of utmost importance.” The language of care delivered in the act of harm. The doctor’s bedside manner while adjusting the dosage upward.

Hegseth said this week:

This was never meant to be a fair fight, and it is not a fair fight. We are punching them when they’re down, which is exactly how it should be.

The Valiasr Burn Hospital is inoperable.

The school in Minab is rubble.

Hundreds of children dead.

The WHO is counting. The world is watching patients killed by their own doctor after asking for more medicine.

CNN reported this week that the CIA is arming Iranian Kurdish forces to destabilize Iran further. The White House called it “completely false,” while it confirmed Trump had spoken to Kurdish leaders, an intentional contradiction.

A former military intelligence specialist told AFP the strategy is for Kurds to trigger a “cascading effect” of ethnic violence that overwhelms the Iranian state, destabilizes it and increases mass suffering. At the same time, Trump is backing Reza Pahlavi as the son of the Shah toppled in 1979, to be the presumptive dictator dependent on American aid to violently suppress ethnic divisions forced by Trump. No armed forces, no domestic base, no democratic mandate. Just a puppet, an empty vessel willing to sign whatever contracts keep him in “power” to serve Trump.

It’s already starting. When five Iranian Kurdish groups announced a coalition for self-determination, Pahlavi immediately attacked the concept, calling a sense of territorial integrity “the ultimate red line.”

Get it?

Trump is arming the people that his chosen dictator calls an existential threat. That contradiction is not incoherence. That is a repeat of colonial-era history, slaves with any power forced to fight for the master’s pleasure, and to degrade themselves while all their resources are extracted from under them.

My own graduate degree research on disinformation and the origins of special operations, at the London School of Economics, documented this pattern in the British occupation of Ethiopia.

An intervention to “establish stability” was followed by revolution, territorial war, and decades of anti-Western blowback. The Horn of Africa is still a disaster living with the consequences.

Iran is being set up for the same.

The Method Has a Name

Mahmood Mamdani at Columbia published Define and Rule in 2012 documenting how British colonial administrators invented a system after the Indian Rebellion of 1857: define populations by ethnic categories, codify those categories into law, govern through the resulting divisions.

In Sudan, after crushing a revolutionary movement that had united populations across tribal lines (the Mahdiyya) the British parceled Darfur into tribal homelands called “dars.” Rights to land and governance became exclusive, confrontational to those classified as native to a particular dar. What had been a multi-ethnic society with fluid identities became a set of contested legally enforced ethnic containers.

The Mahdiyya was a translocal anti-colonial resistance which “shook the foundations of the Empire to the core.” After it was brutally defeated, Darfurian society was effectively tribalized.

And today Darfur is known for being a humanitarian disaster of constant warfare fueled by foreign extraction.

The mechanism is not to divide and rule, because define and rule is sufficient. You do not need to exploit existing divisions. You create the administrative categories that make ethnicity the only politically meaningful identity. Once that is done, ethnic conflict becomes structurally inevitable and an unavoidable tool of control.

Trump’s Iran strategy follows the British Darfur logic, to weaken Iran and dramatically reduce stability, force confrontations that lower quality of life.

Arm the Kurds as Kurds. Activate Baluchi militants as Baluchis. Court Pahlavi as the Persian restorationist. Everyone is pushed into groups defined by contradicting roles that make national cooperation impossible and intense self-destructive conflict inevitable.

Follow the Oil

Philippe Le Billon at UBC has spent two decades mapping how resource geography shapes armed conflict. His framework: point-source resources like oil, concentrated in specific locations, produce a specific kind of violence. Control of the production site becomes the strategic objective. The populations living near those sites become either assets to recruit or obstacles to remove.

Iran’s resource geography is a textbook case.

Khuzestan province generates roughly 90 percent of Iran’s oil revenue. Its population is predominantly Arab. The International Crisis Group documented in 2023 that Khuzestan’s Arab minority views the central government’s chronic underinvestment not as mismanagement but as systematic discrimination. The New Lines Institute confirmed in February 2026 that local Arabs are denied employment in the oil and petrochemical industries, with jobs reserved for ethnic Persians who receive economic incentives to resettle on confiscated Arab farmlands. As a Khuzestani activist, quoted in the ICG report, puts it:

We live on one of the wealthiest lands on earth.

The Baluchis sit in the southeast along the strategic corridor to the Indian Ocean. The Kurds are in the northwest on pipeline routes and border crossings to Iraq. The Azeris are in the north near Azerbaijan.

Fragment Iran along these ethnic lines and you have erased humanity, replacing it with desperation. You have created a cage match of competing entities, each sitting on resources they lack the sovereign capacity to negotiate collectively.

Chaos is the Extraction Discount Trick

Michael Ross at UCLA looked into data from 170 countries in The Oil Curse and found petroleum-rich countries are 50 percent more likely to be ruled by autocrats and twice as likely to descend into civil war. Just look at Texas. Oil concentrates power, eliminates the need to tax citizens, removes the incentive for accountability. Oil states become rentier states — authoritarian by structural necessity.

But the Iran strategy is something worse than the oil curse operating organically.

This is the oil curse being engineered from the outside to ruin a country. Pick the autocrat first — Pahlavi. Engineer the ethnic fragmentation that will make his authoritarian consolidation appear necessary. The resource trap is the objective, for manipulation.

Paul Collier at Oxford coined the “conflict trap” phrase: civil war, low income, and dependence on primary commodity exports form a self-reinforcing cycle. Once you break a resource-rich country, it tends to stay broken. Resources continue to flow out at discounted rates because armed factions need weapons more than they need fair market value.

That is the business model, which obviously fits the Trump brand of hyper aggressive smash and grab.

Congo has more cobalt than anywhere on earth. It has been in continuous conflict since the 1990s. Jason Stearns, who led the UN investigation into the violence, documented in Dancing in the Glory of Monsters how the political system consistently produced leaders without vision, sustained by mineral extraction that financed all sides simultaneously. 5.4 million dead. The minerals kept flowing.

Sudan fractured and the oil fields became the contested border. Libya fragmented and the oil concessions got carved up among militias. Venezuela — same administration, same playbook, same prize — destabilize, sanction, back an exile figurehead, write the intervention around energy concessions.

Yugoslavia Isn’t Forgotten

Susan Woodward — senior advisor to the top UN official in the former Yugoslavia, special representative of the Secretary-General — wrote in Balkan Tragedy:

To explain the Yugoslav crisis as a result of ethnic hatred is to turn the story upside down and begin at its end.

The real cause was disintegration of governmental authority. Outside powers recognized breakaway republics, armed specific factions, imposed economic conditions that accelerated collapse, then characterized the resulting violence as “ancient ethnic hatreds.”

The hatreds were the output, not the input. They were produced by political and economic disintegration, not the cause of it. And Western intervention, Woodward documented, exacerbated the conflict.

Iran maps onto this with uncomfortable precision. Multi-ethnic state with geographically concentrated populations. Economic pressure from sanctions. External powers arming specific ethnic factions while claiming to support territorial integrity. Diaspora figurehead with foreign backing but no domestic base.

Pahlavi is Tudjman. The Kurdish coalition is the Croatian Defense Council. The “cascading effect” the administration’s own analysts describe is what Woodward spent 556 pages documenting: the mechanism by which a multi-ethnic state dissolves into ethnic war when outside powers pick favorites.

In Yugoslavia, that cascading effect produced Srebrenica.

Name It

Francesco Caselli and Wilbur John Coleman formalized the economics in their NBER paper “On the Theory of Ethnic Conflict“: the probability of ethnic conflict rises with the proportion of expropriable assets in a country’s wealth. Oil is inherently expropriable. Ethnic boundaries serve as enforcement mechanisms — they reduce the cost of determining who is in the winning coalition and who is not.

Ethnicity makes resource expropriation cheaper. That is why resource conflicts so consistently follow ethnic lines.

Berman, Couttenier, and Girard confirmed in The Economic Journal (2023) that mineral extraction increases the salience of ethnic identity over national identity. Mining does not create unity. It creates ethnic grievance, by making ethnicity the category that determines who benefits and who does not.

The Trump administration is selecting a dictator, injecting an unelected exile, to ensure extraction continues on favorable terms. To prevent him from facing actual power, they are engineering ethnic conflict across a country of 90 million sitting on the world’s fourth-largest oil reserves. Ethnic minorities concentrated directly on top of those resources are being primed to kill each other.

The scholarly literature has a name for Trump deliberately triggering ethnic violence to prevent a population from achieving political representation.

The scholarly literature has a name for Trump intentionally engineering state collapse to break apart Iran for access to resources at below-market rates.

A failed Iranian state proves that Islamic civilization is incapable of self-governance. The forced vacuum doesn’t just serve the ideology, it validates it retroactively, as a self-sealing mechanism of apartheid and Robert Moses parallels.

Will anyone use the right words before another “cascading effect” of genocide reaches its known conclusion?