The Principle of Proportionality in Armed Conflict under International Law and Islam
Abstract
Proportionality plays a critical role in limiting the harms caused by armed conflict, particularly those affecting civilians and public infrastructure. However, the implementation of this principle can be challenging due to the uncertainties in customary international law status. This leads to differences in legal interpretation and the lack of transparency in military decision-making. This study investigates the principle of proportionality in armed conflict, focusing on its interpretation and application in international law and Islamic jurisprudence. The research examines the similarities and differences between Islamic jurisprudence and international humanitarian law on targeting, use of force, and treatment of non-combatants and detainees. The paper uses normative legal research methodology to explore the legal foundations and practical implications of proportionality in armed conflict, comparing legal frameworks like the Geneva Conventions, Additional Protocols, the Rome Statute, and Islamic legal literature. The study reveals commonalities and differences between International Humanitarian Law and Islamic law. The findings highlight the crucial role in reducing the impact of armed conflicts on civilians and infrastructure. The study advocates for ongoing dialogue and cooperation to improve global adherence to proportionality in armed conflicts.
Abstrak
Prinsip proporsionalitas berperan penting dalam membatasi dampak yang ditimbulkan oleh konflik bersenjata, khususnya terhadap warga sipil dan infrastruktur publik. Namun, penerapan prinsip ini menghadapi berbagai tantangan akibat ketidakpastian statusnya dalam hukum kebiasaan internasional. Hal ini menyebabkan perbedaan dalam interpretasi hukum serta kurangnya transparansi dalam pengambilan keputusan militer. Penelitian ini mengkaji prinsip proporsionalitas dalam konflik bersenjata, dengan fokus pada interpretasi dan penerapannya dalam hukum internasional dan yurisprudensi Islam. Selanjutnya, studi ini menganalisis persamaan dan perbedaan antara yurisprudensi Islam dan hukum humaniter internasional dalam hal penargetan, penggunaan kekuatan, serta perlakuan terhadap non-kombatan dan tahanan. Dengan menggunakan metode penelitian hukum normatif, studi ini mengeksplorasi landasan hukum serta implikasi praktis dari prinsip proporsionalitas dalam konflik bersenjata, melalui perbandingan berbagai kerangka hukum seperti Konvensi Jenewa, Protokol Tambahan, Statuta Roma, dan literatur hukum Islam. Penelitian menunjukkan adanya titik temu dan perbedaan antara Hukum Humaniter Internasional dan hukum Islam. Temuan ini menekankan pentingnya prinsip proporsionalitas dalam mengurangi dampak konflik bersenjata terhadap warga sipil dan infrastruktur. Studi ini mendorong adanya dialog dan kerja sama berkelanjutan untuk meningkatkan kepatuhan global terhadap prinsip proporsionalitas dalam konflik bersenjata.
Keywords
References
Abbou, T. (2020). Prisoners of War in International Conventions Versus Islamic Law. El-Ihyaa Journal, 20(52), 1071–1088.
Abū Zahrā, Muḥammad. (1995). Al-‘Alāqāt al-Dawliyah fī al-Islām. Dār al-Fikr al-Arabī.
Additional Protocol I to the Geneva Conventions of August 12, 1949, and Relating to the Protection of Victims of International Armed Conflicts, Pub. L. No. 07.12.1978, International Committee of the Red Cross (1977).
Additional Protocol II to the Geneva Conventions of August 12, 1949, and Relating to the Protection of Victims of Non-International Armed Conflicts, June 8, 1977. Pub. L. No. 28, International Committee of the Red Cross (1977).
Akhtar, S et al., (2021). The Outstanding Military Command of Prophet Muḥammad PBUH and Role of His War Strategies & Tactics in The Success of Early Islamic Expeditions (Historical Analysis). Al-Azva, 36(56), 13–26. www.aladwajournal.com
Al-Ḥasan, Muḥammad Alī. (1982). Al-‘Alāqāt al-Dawliyah fī al-Qur'ān wa al-Sunnah (1st ed.).
Al-Dawoody, A. (2011). The Islamic Law of War. In The Islamic Law of War. Palgrave Macmillan US. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230118089
Al-Dawoody, A. (2013). Armed Jihad in the Islamic Legal Tradition. Religion Compass, 7(11), 476–484. https://doi.org/10.1111/rec3.12071
Al-Dawoody, A. (2015). Al-Sarakhsī’s Contribution to the Islamic Law of War. UCLA Journal of Islamic and Near Eastern Law, 14. https://doi.org/10.5070/n4141029067
Al-Dawoody, A. (2017a). Islamic law and international humanitarian law: An introduction to the main principles. In International Review of the Red Cross (Vol. 99, Issue 906, pp. 995–1018). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1816383118000310
Al-Dawoody, A. (2017b). Islamic law and international humanitarian law: An introduction to the main principles. In International Review of the Red Cross (Vol. 99, Issue 906, pp. 995–1018). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1816383118000310
Al-Dawoody, A. (2017c). Management of the dead from the Islamic law and international humanitarian law perspectives: Considerations for humanitarian forensics. In International Review of the Red Cross (Vol. 99, Issue 905, pp. 759–784). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1816383118000486
Alexander, A. (2007). The Genesis of the Civilian. Leiden Journal of International Law, 20(2), 359–376. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0922156506003347
Al-Fawwaz, A., & Abualkanam, A. S. (2021). Turkey’s Intervention in Libya: Evaluating the Crisis and Consequences of the Decision. In Decision Article in the Hong Kong Journal of Social Sciences.
Al-Khaṭṭāb, Naṣīruddīn. (2008). Sunan Abū Dāwūd. Dār al-Salam.
Al-Khaṭṭab, Naṣīruddīn. (2012). Musnad Imām Aḥmad ibn Ḥanbal. Dār al-Sālam.
Al-Kulaynī, Syekh Muhammad b. Yaʿqub. (nd). Al-Kāfī. Islamic Seminary INC NY.
Al-Mahbashi. (2020). UN humanitarian office puts Yemen war dead at 233,000, mostly from ‘indirect causes.’ https://operationalsupport.un.org/en/un-humanitarian-office-puts-yemen-war-dead-233000-mostly-indirect-causes
Al-Nawāwī, Abd al-Khāliq. (1974). Al-‘Ilāqāt al-Dawliyah wa al-Nuẓūm al-Qadhā'iyyah fī al-Sharī’ah al-Islāmiyyah (1st ed.). Dār Al-Kitāb al-Arabī.
Al-Ṣālihīn, 'Abd al-Majid Maḥmūd. (2005). Asliḥat al-Dammar al-Shāmil wa Aḥkamuhā fi al-Fiqh al-Islāmī. Majallah al-Sharī'ah Wa al-Qānūn, 23, 95–182.
Al-Shaybanī, al-Imām Muḥammad ibn al-Ḥasan, & Imām Muhammad ibn Aḥmad al-Sarakhsī. (1992). Sharh Kitāb al-Siyār al-Kabīr. Dār al-Kutub al-Ilmiyah.
Amin, Abd. Rauf Muhammad et al.,(2024). Problematic Fatwa: An In-Depth Sociological Investigation of MUI’s Fatwa on Supporting Palestine’s Struggle. El-Usrah: Jurnal Hukum Keluarga, 7(1), 237–252.
An-Na’im, A. A. (1996). Toward an Islamic Reformation: Civil Liberties, Human Rights, and International Law. Syracuse University Press.
An-Na’im, A. A. (2009). Islam and the Secular State Negotiating the Future of Shari`a. Harvard University Press.
Arestizábal, Pamela Urrutia. (2020). War in Yemen: Saudi responsibility, European complicity.
Arsyad, Azman, Mahmuddin Daud, & Aisyah Idris. (2025). Religious Moderation, Pela Gandong, and Jihad Reconstruction: Conflict Prevention in Maluku through the Lens of Maqāṣid Al-Sharī’ah. Samarah: Jurnal Hukum Keluarga dan Hukum Islam, 9(1), 394–415.
Azeem Gul, Rizwana Karim Abbasi & Syed Arslan Haider. (2021). Iran and Saudi Arabia’s strategic rivalry and the Middle Eastern security: An assessment. Liberal Arts and Social Sciences International Journal, 5(2), 17–29.
Badawi, N. (2020). Islamic Jurisprudence on the Regulation of Armed Conflict: Text and Context. Brill.
Baderin, M. A. (2005). International Human Rights and Islamic Law. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199285402.001.0001
Beres, L. R. (2024). War With Iran: Israel’s Legal Obligation to Prevent Iranian Nuclear Weapons. www.besacenter.org
Bhuiyan, J. H & Khan, B. U. (2020). Revisiting the Geneva Conventions : 1949-2019. Brill Nijhoff.
Boisard, M. A. (1980). On the Probable Influence of Islam on Western Public and International Law. International Journal of Middle East Studies, 11(4), 429–450.
Boothby, W. (2018). Dehumanization: Is There a Legal Problem Under Article 36? In W. H. Von Heinegg, T. Singer, & R. Frau (Eds.), Dehumanization of Warfare: Legal Implications of New Weapon Technologies (pp. 21–52). Springer International Publishing.
Bothe, M et al., (2013). New Rules for Victims of Armed Conflicts : Commentary on the Two 1977 Protocols Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 1949 (second edition). Martinus Nijhoff Publishers. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004254718
Çakmak, C & Güneysu, G. (2020). Exploring foundational convergence between the Islamic law of armed conflict and modern international humanitarian law: Evidence from al-Shaybani’s Siyar al-Kabir. International Review of the Red Cross, 102(915), 1153–1178. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1816383121000503
Center for Preventive Action. (2024). War in Yemen. https://www.cfr.org/global-conflict-tracker/conflict/war-yemen
Christoffersen, J. (2009). Fair Balance: Proportionality, Subsidiarity, and Primarity in the European Convention on Human Rights. Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.
Christoffersen, J. (2010). Straight Human Rights Talk-Why Proportionality does (not) Matter. Scandinavian Studies in Law, 55, 11–44.
Cohen, A & Zlotogorski, D. (2021). Proportionality in International humanitarian law: Consequences, Precautions, and Procedures, (M. N. Schmitt, Ed.; Vol. 6). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780197556726.001.0001
Cohen, Amichai et al., (2009). Proportionality in modern asymmetrical wars. Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs.
Convention (I) for the Amelioration of the Condition of the Wounded and Sick in Armed Forces in the Field. Geneva, August 12, 1949. Pub. L. No. 64 + 2 annexes, International Committee of the Red Cross (1949). https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/ihl/full/GCI-commentary
Convention (II) for the Amelioration of the Condition of Wounded, Sick and Shipwrecked Members of Armed Forces at Sea. Geneva, August 12, 1949. Pub. L. No. 63 + 1 annex, International Committee of the Red Cross (1949).
Convention (III) Relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War. Geneva, August 12, 1949. Pub. L. No. 143 + 5 annexes, International Committee of the Red Cross (1949).
Convention (IV) Relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War. Geneva, August 12, 1949. Pub. L. No. 159 + 3 annexes, International Committee of the Red Cross (1949).
Coppieters, B. C. C & N. F. (2020). Moral Constraints on War Principles and Cases: Vol. Third Edition.
Corn, G. S. (2015). War, Law, and the Oft Overlooked Value of Process as a Precautionary Measure. Pepperdine Law Review, 42(3), 419–466.
Crawford, E. (2015). Identifying the Enemy: Civilian Participation in Armed Conflict. Oxford University Press.
Department of Political and Peacebuilding Affairs. (2023). UN Libya Result Report 2023.
Desgagné, R. (2000). The Prevention of Environmental Damage in Time of Armed Conflict: Proportionality and Precautionary Measures. Yearbook of International Humanitarian Law, 109–129. https://doi.org/10.1017/S138913590000060X
Distefano, Giovanni. (2014). Use of Force. In The Oxford Handbook of International Law in Armed Conflict (pp. 1–33). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/law/9780199559695.003.0022
Dolgopol, U & Gardam, J. (2006). The Challenge of Conflict: International Law Responds. Martinus Nijhoff Publisher.
El Fadl, K. A. (2009). Rebellion and Violence in Islamic Law. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511560163
Fahmi, Irfan et al., (2024). Analysis of Hybrid Warfare Elements in the 2023 Asymmetric War between Hamas and Israel. Indonesian Journal of Interdisciplinary Research in Science and Technology, 2(4), 359–368.
Fatwa, Ach Fajruddin. (2012). Islam dan Doktrin Militerisme. Al-Ahkam Jurnal Pemikiran Hukum Islam, 22(1), 81–100. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.21580/ahkam.2012.22.1.5
Fenrick, W. J. (2009). The Law Applicable to Targeting and Proportionality after Operation Allied Force: a View from the Outside. In Yearbook of International Humanitarian Law (Vol. 3, pp. 53–80). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1389135900000581
Flamer, Netanel. (2025). Asymmetric Battle of Wits: Deception in the Israel Versus Hamas Conflict. International Journal of Intelligence and CounterIntelligence, 1–20.
Gardam, J. (2009). Necessity, Proportionality and the Use of Force by States. Cambridge University Press.
Gardezi, Mahmood Akhter Hussain, S. (2021). Comparative Study Of Islamic Laws Of War And Ihl – Points Of Convergence For Universal Consensus On Laws Of War. Margalla Papers, Number 1, 115–130.
Gill, T. D. (2021). International humanitarian law applied to cyber-warfare: Precautions, proportionality and the notion of ‘attack’ under the humanitarian law of armed conflict. In T. D. Gill & D. Fleck (Eds.), The Handbook of the International Law of Military Operations (Second Edition, pp. 457–470). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781789904253.00033
Goldsmith, J. L & Posner, E. A. (1999). A Theory of Customary International Law. University of Chicago Law Review, 66(4), 1113–1132.
Greenwood, C. (2024). Self Defense and the Conduct of International Armed Conflict. In Y. Dinšṭein & M. Tabori (Eds.), International Law at a Time of Perplexity: Essays in Honour of Shabtai Rosenne (pp. 273–288). Brill | Nijhoff. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004633704_019
Hamidullah, M. (1953). Muslim Conduct of State. Islamic Book Trust. https://archive.org/details/MuslimConductofStateDr.MuhammadHamidullah/mode/2up
Hamidullah, M. (2017). The Battlefields of The Prophet Muhammad: Vol. 2017 6th Edition (2017 6th Edition). Kitab Bhavan.
Haykal, Muhammad Khayr. (1997). Al-Jihād wa al-Qitāl fī al-Siyāsah al-Shar‘iyyah. Dār al-Bayariq.
Hayward, J. S. A. (2012). Warfare in the Quran.
Heinze, Eric A.. (2024). International Law, Self-Defense, and the Israel-Hamas Conflict. The US Army War College Quarterly: Parameters, 54(1), 71–86.
Henderson, I. (2011). The Contemporary Law of Targeting: Military Objectives, Proportionality and Precautions in Attack under Additional Protocol I. Journal of Conflict and Security Law, 16(2), 411–414.
Hensel, H. M. (2008). Perspective of Just War Doctrine, International Relations, and Armed Conflict. In The Legitimate Use of Military Force: The Just War Tradition and the Customary Law of Armed Conflict (pp. 5–63). Ashgate.
Houba, 'Abd al-Qadīr. (2020). Muqaddimah fī al-Qānūn al-Dawli al-Insanī min Manẓūr al-Islāmī.
International Committee of the Red Cross. (2024a). International Humanitarian Law Database. International Committee of the Red Cross. https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/en/customary-ihl/v1
International Committee of the Red Cross. (2024b, August). Customary International Humanitarian Law. International Humanitarian Law Databases.
Jan, I & Haruna, L. (2015). Social Sciences & Humanities Saudi-Led Military Intervention in Yemen and International Law. Pertanika J. Soc. Sci. & Hum, 23, 191–200.
Kalshoven, F. (1973). The law of warfare: a summary of its recent history and trends in development. The Henry Dunant Institute & Sijthoff.
Kamaludin, Ahmad, Iskandar. (2022). Islamic Fanatism and Terrorism Cases in Indonesia: The Perspective of Islamic Criminal Law. El-Mashlahah, 12(2), 153–163.
Karkazis, J et al., (2024). Iran - Israel Military Confrontation. In Defense & Security Series.
Kazemi, M. A., & Pourbehi, M. R. (2018). Saudi-led Arab coalition’s military intervention in Yemen from an international law perspective. Año, 34(15), 1464–1495.
Kelly, J. P. (2000). The Twilight of Customary International Law. Virginia Journal of International Law, 40, 639–672.
Kelsay, J. (2007). Arguing the just war in Islam. Harvard University Press.
Khadduri, M. (2006). War and peace in the law of Islam. Clark : Lawbook Exchange.
Khalīl, Abū. (2007). Jāmi’ at-Tirmidhī. Dār al-Salām.
Khan, Muḥammad Muḥsin. (1997). Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī. Dār al-Salām.
Khdir, Rebaz R.. (2017). The Fate of Prisoners of War Between the Quran, Traditions of the Prophet Muhammad, and Practice of the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria. European Scientific Journal, 13(34), 30–47. https://doi.org/10.19044/esj.2017.v13n34p30
Kilcup, J. (2016). Proportionality in Customary International Law: An Argument Against Aspirational Laws of War. Chicago Journal of International Law, 17(1), 244–262.
Langan, J. (1984). The Elements of St. Augustine’s Just War Theory. The Journal of Religious Ethics, 12(1), 19–38.
Lopes, A. C. C. H. (2015). Conduct Of Hostilities: Precautions In Attack [Universidade Católica Portuguesa Centro Regional do Porto ]. https://doi.org/https://repositorio.ucp.pt/handle/10400.14/20456
Luban, D. (2010). Opting out of the Law of War- Comments on Withdrawing from International Custom. The Yale Law Journal, 120, 151–167.
Maalim, Siyat Abdi. (2023). Implications of Realist Defensive Foreign Policy: Towards a Turkish Intervention in Libya During the First and Second Libyan Crises. Journal of International Relations and Political Science Studies, 8, 27–50.
Malik, Bin Anas. (2016). al-Muwaṭṭa' (Nasrullah, Ed.). https://ia600206.us.archive.org/30/items/terjemah-al-muwatha/Terjemah-Al-Muwatha.pdf
May, L. (2007). War crimes and just war. Cambridge University Press.
Munir, M. (2012). The Protection of Civilians in War: Non-Combatant Immunity in Islamic Law. SSRN Electronic Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1797045
Munir, Muhammad. (2014). The Protection of Civilians in War: Non-Combatant Immunity in Islamic Law. Hamdard Islamicus, XXXIV(4), 7–39. https://doi.org/https://ssrn.com/abstract=1797045
Neff, S. C. (2005). War and the Law of Nations: A General History. Cambridge University Press.
Newton, M & L. M. (2014). Proportionality in International Law-Oxford University Press, Incorporated (2014). Oxford University Press.
Palupi, D. A & Rosra, D. (2023). Distintion Principle dalam Hukum Humaniter sebagai Jaminan Penghormatan Terhadap Hak Asasi Manusia dan Perspektifnya Menurut Syari’at Islam. Nagari Law Review, 7(2), 327. https://doi.org/10.25077/nalrev.v.7.i.2.p.327-340.2023
Petrila, Jim. (2024, March 5). Conflict in Gaza: The Law of War and Irregular Warfare in Urban Terrain. Foreign Policy Research Institute. Foreign Policy Research Institute.
Pouw, E (2021). Some Thoughts on the Role of the Notion of ‘Control’ in ‘Choosing’ the Paradigm of Hostilities or Law Enforcement as the Governing Framework for the Use of Force in Military Operations: Is There Any? In R. Bartels, P. A. L. Ducheine, J. Voetelink, J. C. Van den Boogaard, & E. Pouw (Eds.), Military Operations and the Notion of Control Under International Law (pp. 195–218). Asser Press & Springer. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6265-395-5
Ramzan, M. T et al., (2021). Islamic Injunctions on Prisoners’ Immunity and Termination of Captivity in War: The Case Study of Afghanistan. Journal of Religious and Social Studies, 1(02 Jul-Dec), 17–36. https://doi.org/10.53583/jrss03.0102.2021
Revkin, Mara R.. (2024). The Israel-Hamas Conflict: International Law, Accountability, and Challenges in Modern Warfare. Judicature International Bolch Judicial Institute Duke Law School.
Riyanto, S., & Muhammadin, F. M. (2019). The Urgency to Incorporate the Islamic Concept of Rights into the International Human Rights Law Course in Indonesian Law Schools. Al-Ihkam: Jurnal Hukum Dan Pranata Sosial, 14(1), 178–200. https://doi.org/http://doi.org/10.19105/al-Ihkam.v14i1.1844
Rogers, A. P. V. (2016). The Principle of Proportionality. In H. M. Hansel (Ed.), The Legitimate Use of Military Force: The Just War Tradition and the Customary Law of Armed Conflict (pp. 189–209). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315556185
Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, Pub. L. No. ICC-PIOS-LT-01-003/18_Eng, International Criminal Court 2021 (1998).
Schindler, D & J. T. (2004). The Laws Of Armed Conflicts: A Collection of Conventions, Resolutions, and Other Documents.
Schmitt, M. N. (2010). The Interpretive Guidance on the Notion of Direct Participation in Hostilities: A Critical Analysis. Harvard National Security Journal, 1, 5–44.
Schmitt, M. N. (2012). Deconstructing Direct Participation in Hostilities: The Constitutive Elements. New York University Journal of International Law and Politics, 42, 697.
Scobbie, I. (2014). A View of Delft: Some Thoughts about Thinking about International Law. In International Law. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/he/9780199654673.003.0003
Selján, Péter. (2020). Military Intervention and Changing Balance of Power in Libya: A Strongman, Russian Mercenaries, and Turkish Drones. Academic and Applied Research in Military and Public Management Science, 19(3), 71–84.
Shafie, M. S et al., (2021). War Ethics in Armed Conflicts under International Humanitarian Law and Islamic Perspective. Journal of Contemporary Islamic Studies, 7(1), 1–25. https://ir.uitm.edu.my/id/eprint/47126
Shany, Y & Cohen, A. (2007). A Development of Modest Proportions: The Application of the Principle of Proportionality in the Israeli Supreme Court Judgment on the Lawfulness of Targeted Killings. Hebrew University International Law Research Paper No. 5-07.
Shaw, M. N. (2021). International Law (9th Edition). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108774802
Spoerl, J. S. (2010). Islam and War: Tradition versus Modernity. Comparative Islamic Studies, 4(1–2), 181–212. https://doi.org/10.1558/cis.v4i4.1-4.2.181
Süsler, Buğra. (2022, August). Turkey’s Involvement in the Libyan Conflict, the Geopolitics of the Eastern Mediterranean and Drone Warfare. LSE IDEAS Strategic Update, 225–259.
Tzimas, T. (2018). Legal Evaluation of the Saudi-Led Intervention in Yemen: Consensual Intervention in Cases of Contested Authority and Fragmented States. In ZaöRV (Vol. 78).
Van den Boogaard, J. (2015). Proportionality and Autonomous Weapons Systems. Journal of International Humanitarian Legal Studies, 6(2), 247–283. https://doi.org/10.1163/18781527-00602007
Van den Boogaard, J. (2019). Proportionality in International Humanitarian Law: Principle, Rule and Practice [Universiteit van Amsterdam]. https://pure.uva.nl/ws/files/39875296/Front_matter.pdf
Van den Boogaard, J. (2023). Proportionality in International Humanitarian Law: Refocusing the Balance in Practice. Cambridge University Press.
Van Steenberghe, Raphaël. (2024). The armed conflict in Gaza, and its complexity under international law: Jus ad bellum, jus in bello, and international justice. Leiden Journal of International Law, 37(4), 983–1017.
Vanhullebusch, Matthias. (2015). War and Law in the Islamic World (Vol. 8). Koninklijke Brill NV.
Velásquez-Ruiz, C & Alberto, M. (2009). The Principles of Distinction and Proportionality under the Framework of International Criminal Responsibility-Content and Issues. International Law, Revista Colombiana de Derecho Internacional, 14, 15–42.
Velimirović, Kristina. (2024). (De)-escalation in the Iran-Israel Conflict: An Analysis of the April 2024 Incidents and their Aftermath.
Watkin, K. (2010). Opportunity lost: organized armed groups and the ICRC “Direct Participation in Hostilities” interpretive guidance. New York University Journal of International Law and Politics, 42, 641–695.
Watr, Muhammad Dhahir. (2011). Military Management in the Battles of the Prophet/ Al‐Idārat al‐Askariyya fi Hurub al‐Rasul Muhammad. In the Heritage International Inc.
World Bank Group. (2017). The Toll of War: The Economic and Social Consequences of The Conflict in Syria.
Yüksel, E. (2021). Turkey’s interventions in its near abroad: The case of Libya.
Zemam, Eman Ali Sholeh, & Hidayatil Muslimah. (2023). al-Aḥkām al-Fiqhiyyah al-Mutaratibah ’Ala al-Aṡar al-Bī’ī li Istikhdām Asliḥah al-Damār al-Syāmil. The Proceeding of the 4th Dirundeng International Conference in Islamic Studies, 226–241.
DOI: 10.15408/ajis.v25i1.42273
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
