Is the military committing the crime of omission? Beyond active measures, the military’s failure to deploy available resources and coordinate effective relief may constitute a culpable omission. With de facto control over large parts of the State, the military is legally obligated to protect civilians, even if it is an unlawful government. Its failure to ensure access to humanitarian aid may also satisfy the threshold for crimes against humanity. Is the military committing the acts intentionally? Establishing intent is crucial for establishing a crime against humanity. The military is unlikely to admit it, so international law says intent can be inferred from circumstantial evidence. For instance, the military’s history of restricting access to conflict-displaced populations from opposition-controlled areas suggests an established pattern of “weaponising” aid. Postearthquake, continued airstrikes on civilian areas, despite a belated ceasefire, demonstrate that military objectives are consistently prioritised over humanitarian assistance. The military may also lack capacity, but such actions, reinforced by pervasive surveillance and administrative burdens on aid distribution, strongly indicate that these measures are taken intentionally. Are the military’s acts a widespread and systematic attack? A crime against humanity involves a series of individual criminal acts, such as obstructing aid to cause death, that are known as an “attack” when coordinated together. An “attack” involves acts of violence but does not need to be violent itself. Therefore, the mistreatment of a population after a natural disaster such as an earthquake meets the definition of an “attack”. A crime against humanity also requires that individual acts are committed on a large “widespread” scale and in an organised “systematic” manner. Multiple diverse sources indicate that thousands of people may be affected, out of 17 million living in earthquake-affected areas. Organised restrictions on local aid and the systematic surveillance of relief deliveries, combined with historical patterns, confirm that the military’s actions are both widespread and systematic. Is the military targeting the civilian population? Finally, a crime against humanity is an attack directed against civilians. Deliberately obstructing aid because it is destined for resistance-controlled areas deprives vulnerable civilians of lifesaving resources, is never a legitimate war aim, and qualifies as an "attack" under international law.