160 Dead Schoolgirls. Now Look Them in the Eyes, Mr. Trump.

America's double standards sometimes reach a truly appalling level. The US constantly presents itself as the world's defender of human rights — yet when the bodies pile up, human lives don’t seem to count.

On February 28 — the first day of joint US-Israel strikes on Iran — a girls' elementary school in Minab, in southern Iran, was hit. Local officials reported at least 175 deaths. More than 160 of the dead were female pupils.

Washington's first move was to dodge responsibility entirely. Trump suggested the school had been struck by inaccurate Iranian munitions. On March 7, aboard Air Force One, he told reporters: "In my opinion, based on what I've seen, that was done by Iran."

As the controversy grew, Trump changed his tune and claimed ignorance. Then Iran released images of missile debris recovered from the scene — clearly showing a US-made Tomahawk cruise missile, with the words "Made in USA" visibly inscribed on it.

Evidence Written on the Missile

Trump still dug in on March 9. At a press conference in Miami, asked directly whether it was a Tomahawk cruise missile that struck the girls' school, he insisted: "A Tomahawk is very generic. It's sold to other countries. Iran has some Tomahawks, and they want more. But whether it's Iran or somebody else, a Tomahawk is very commonly used." He added that the matter was under investigation.

Those claims were clearly baseless. Neither Iran nor Israel possesses Tomahawk missiles — the United States is effectively the sole operator. Tomahawk exports are strictly controlled; aside from the US, reportedly only Australia and the United Kingdom field these missiles, and there is absolutely no possibility either would sell them to Iran.

In the end, The New York Times — citing a preliminary US military investigation — reported that the girls' school was indeed struck by US forces. Military intelligence personnel had relied on outdated targeting data, mistaking the school for an Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps facility. Tomahawk cruise missiles finished the job, causing devastating casualties.

What makes it worse: the US military carried out a double-tap strike. A second attack arrived just minutes after the first hit on the school — a tactic classically associated with killing first responders. With the evidence overwhelming and the truth impossible to conceal, the US appears to have pre-emptively leaked the findings, acknowledging responsibility in hopes of containing the fallout.

A Front Page the World Won't Forget

The damage is done regardless. Striking an elementary school with cruise missiles has outraged people around the world. Iran's English-language newspaper, the Tehran Times, ran portraits of the more than 160 dead schoolgirls across its entire front page, under the headline: "Trump, Look Them in the Eyes."

Whether intentional or the result of faulty intelligence, this attack may well constitute a war crime under the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. Article 8 of the Rome Statute lays out the key conditions clearly.

I. Existence of Armed Conflict

There must be an international armed conflict, and the act must be closely related to that conflict. Ordinary domestic disturbances do not qualify.

II. Victims Must Be Protected Persons

The targets must not be persons directly participating in hostilities — such as civilians, the wounded, and prisoners of war. Protected civilian property, including hospitals and schools, falls under the same prohibition.

III. Serious Violation of International Law

The act must constitute a grave breach of international humanitarian law. It must also have been criminalised under treaty or customary law.

The United States launched a war without UN authorisation — a serious violation of international law — and then missile-struck children who should be protected under the laws of armed conflict. That conduct is potentially criminal as a war crime. Washington readily intervenes in the affairs of other nations for all manner of reasons, yet brushes its own crimes aside with barely a word.

Make no mistake: no US military personnel will be held accountable for this massacre of Iranian schoolchildren. Not the intelligence officers who gathered the faulty data. Not the heads of the relevant intelligence agencies. Not the generals who ordered strikes in that area. Not the Secretary of Defense. Not the President himself. 

This episode carries a pointed message for Hong Kong. When those who have fled abroad continue to eagerly seek meetings with senior US government officials, urging them to keep sanctioning Hong Kong officials or demanding the release of Jimmy Lai, they would do well to remember: these American officials have blood on their hands. They start wars against other countries without justification.

Lo Wing-hung

Bastille Commentary

** The blog article is the sole responsibility of the author and does not represent the position of our company. **

Washington is at war with Iran, and the ripple effects are already hitting Beijing. The immediate question is whether this sudden US military action will derail President Donald Trump’s highly anticipated trip to China.

The White House circled the dates weeks ago. On February 21, a spokesperson announced Trump would touch down in China from March 31 to April 2. But Beijing has kept the official schedule deliberately blank. The open secret in diplomatic circles: China wants concrete concessions on US arms sales to Taiwan before rolling out the red carpet.

The tension spilled into the open at Foreign Minister Wang Yi’s March 8 press conference. A CNN reporter lobbed a sprawling question at the veteran diplomat, asking how the joint US-Israeli strikes on Iran would warp the upcoming visit. The reporter pointed out that Trump suddenly seems eager to play nice—even keeping China entirely out of his latest State of the Union address. The underlying fear in Washington is that Trump might trade away American leverage on Taiwan just to ink a headline-grabbing trade deal.

Wang brushed off the premise with a quick jab at the reporter's long-winded setup. But the real issue is how these two giants manage their collision course. Wang made it clear that a complete freeze in relations only breeds dangerous miscalculations, while outright confrontation threatens the entire global economy. Neither superpower is going to fundamentally change the other. What matters is rewriting the rules of how they coexist.

The Agenda Is Set

Personal diplomacy is doing the heavy lifting right now. Wang credited direct, top-level engagement between the two leaders as the crucial shock absorber keeping the relationship steady through relentless turbulence.  

Make no mistake: 2026 is shaping up to be a defining year for US-China relations, and the playbook for high-level talks is already locked in. The challenge now is clearing the runway. China insists it is ready and open, but Washington needs to meet Beijing halfway to ensure the year ends in stable, sustainable growth rather than crisis.

Read between the lines of Wang’s carefully calibrated response. He entirely bypassed the Iran conflict, effectively signaling that Middle East violence won't torpedo the bilateral summit. By stressing that failing to engage only triggers miscalculation, Beijing is quietly confirming that Trump’s trip is still on the calendar.

The friction points are obvious. When Wang talks about an "agenda on the table" and the urgent need to "manage existing differences," he is pointing directly at Taiwan. US arms sales to the island remain the single biggest flashpoint threatening to derail the dialogue.

The summit is happening, but the optics are shifting. Early whispers suggested Trump would arrive backed by a massive entourage of American corporate heavyweights. Now, the momentum has stalled, and business leaders might stay home. This sudden downsizing of the delegation is the biggest wild card still in play.

Pragmatism Meets Pushback

Beijing is treating this summit as a containment strategy. While Washington’s bureaucratic ranks are packed with anti-China hawks, Trump operates as a transactional pragmatist. The reality is that he is a bully who backs down only when punched in the nose. Look at last year's brutal trade war: Trump jacked up tariffs to a staggering 145%, but when Beijing fired back with sweeping counter-tariffs and a chokehold on rare earth exports, the White House was forced back to the negotiating table.

Now the American president has flipped the script completely. Trump is pitching the idea of a "G2" framework—a grand bargain where the US and China effectively carve up and co-govern the globe. But Beijing wants no part of it. This tension prompted another reporter to press Wang Yi on the contentious "co-governance" concept.

Wang’s rejection was absolute. He acknowledged the massive footprint both nations have, but firmly reminded Washington that the world belongs to more than 190 sovereign states. History proves that whenever great powers try to dominate or divide the world into rival camps, catastrophe follows. China refuses to follow the tired, imperial playbook of seeking hegemony and flatly rejects the logic of a two-power monopoly.

Consider this: the chaos currently gripping the globe flows directly from Washington. The United States is actively dismantling the international order, violating laws, and retreating into isolationism. In stark contrast, China is stepping up as the builder and defender of global stability. By keeping its markets open and playing by the rules, Beijing has secured the moral high ground. It is an anchor of certainty in a fractured world—and that gives China the ultimate advantage moving forward.

Lo Wing-hung