Kuwaiti Academic Rejects Iranian Justifications for Civilian Site Attacks

Kuwaiti academic Dr. Saleh Al‑Mutairi said that justifying attacks on civilian sites due to their proximity to military installations is legally and morally unacceptable ^[1].

The statement addresses the ongoing tension between Iran and Gulf states, challenging the legal frameworks used to justify strikes on non-military targets. By questioning these rationales, Al‑Mutairi highlights a critical friction point in international humanitarian law regarding the protection of civilians during armed conflicts.

Al‑Mutairi, who serves as the head of the Al‑Madar Center for Political Studies, said Iranian justifications for attacks on Gulf states are condemned ^[1]. He said that the mere presence of military facilities nearby does not legitimize the targeting of civilian populations or infrastructure under international law and ethical standards ^[1].

"Justifying the targeting of civilian sites on the grounds of their proximity to military facilities is legally and morally unacceptable," Al‑Mutairi said ^[1].

His critique focuses on the principle of distinction, which requires combatants to distinguish between military objectives and civilian objects. Al‑Mutairi said that using proximity as a loophole undermines the core purpose of these protections, ensuring that non-combatants are not casualties of strategic military operations.

The academic's comments come amid a broader regional debate over the legality of precision strikes and the definition of legitimate military targets in densely populated or mixed-use areas ^[1].