Asymmetrical Warfare is a new thesis within the last war strategies and doctrines of certain Countries. This dimension of use of force is intended to change the usual results of armed conflicts in accordance with a unique approach. In fact, if the different military capabilities of belligerents, the week party shall recourse to the unconventional methods and means of war to prevent the victory of the enemy. Then in the asymmetrical wars, the victory for the week party will depend on initiatives in war and military operations. But the tactics in this wars (for example, use of civilians as a warfare. extending the theater of war, use of new military technologies leading to unnecessary effects, etc.), are contradictory to humanitarian or cardinal principles of the law of Armed Conflict.This Article analyzes the conceptual dimensions of asymmetrical warfare and its implications in light of humanitarian law.

International humanitarian law, as a significant branch of international law, encompasses a variety of regulations aimed at limiting the devastating effects of armed conflict. This body of law, primarily focused on the protection of civilians, plays a crucial role in mitigating the impact of war. One specific area within these regulations concerns the use of human shields. Belligerent parties, often in an attempt to deter enemy attacks, may employ individuals as human shields. These individuals may include captured combatants or even civilians who voluntarily expose themselves to enemy fire.Various forms of human shields have been observed in past armed conflicts. This article seeks to conceptually analyze the notion of human shields, categorize their types, and examine the applicable legal framework governing each category. The existing rules generally prohibit the use of human shields; however, the legal implications may vary depending on the nature of the conflict—whether international or non-international. A key issue that arises is the question of absolute prohibition. The First Additional Protocol to the Geneva Conventions suggests that under certain conditions, the use of human shields might be conceivable under the doctrine of necessity, a concept examined in this study. It appears that, despite the desirability of a categorical prohibition, international humanitarian law does not currently recognize an absolute ban. Moreover, the phenomenon of voluntary human shields presents a legal dilemma: how should the law protect individuals who deliberately place themselves in harm’s way? Although international legal provisions in this area are often vague and general, it is argued that the rules governing involuntary human shields should likewise apply to voluntary cases.

Throughout history human life has changed and improved. Along with this developments and changes the way of the war has also changed. Cyber war is one of the most important transformations. By modifying the type of battles, weapons also have changed. With the development of virtual space, governments have set their eyes on cyberspace. State and non-state actors in cyberspace are working together but with no clear identity. In this context, computer attacks are increasing, however, there are no regulations to investigate cybercrimes. Attacks are increasing in cyberspace and they influence not only political conflicts but also impact negatively on the economy of civilians. As these attacks are capable of hitting civilians, so the application of international humanitarian law is mandatoryin this area.

This study offers a structured analysis of environmental protection mechanisms under international human rights law and international humanitarian law. Employing a descriptive-analytical approach, the research reveals that while these two legal regimes share common foundations such as the protection of life and human dignity they apply distinct methods to safeguard the environment. International human rights law provides indirect protection by “greening” core rights, particularly the rights to life, health, and an adequate standard of living. Conversely, international humanitarian law articulates explicit legal norms that limit environmental harm during armed conflict, as reflected in the 1977 Additional Protocol I and other relevant conventions. The comparative assessment highlights the advantages and shortcomings of both systems: human rights law demonstrates adaptability in addressing emerging environmental issues, whereas humanitarian law imposes stricter standards for preventing intentional environmental destruction. Despite their differing scopes, both frameworks face similar implementation and monitoring challenges. The study ultimately argues that fostering convergence between these regimes and enhancing oversight mechanisms is crucial for developing a comprehensive international legal framework for environmental protection. It further recommends that binding legal obligations be strengthened to address growing environmental threats and fill current legal gaps in both peacetime and conflict settings.

International humanitarian law is in a generality and peculiarity in some aspects with international criminal law. International humanitarian law is used as a reference point in understanding and interpreting the rules of war crimes. Conversely, international criminal law is considered as one of the methods of guaranteeing the implementation of the violation of the fundamental rules of international humanitarian law. Therefore, with the aim of examining the degree of mutual influence of these two legal systems from each other and review the scope and examples of this effect, the main question is how the mutual influence of these two legal systems on each other's development and evolution has been? The hypothesis under consideration is based on the fact that these two legal systems help each other to the continuous development and evolution of each other in a mutual effect and in a cyclical relationship. In this descriptive-analytical research conducted in a library manner, the findings show that due to the necessity of a precise definition of crime as one of the basic notions of the international criminal law system, the development of this system has inevitably been led to the elimination of ambiguity in defining cases of serious violations of international humanitarian law and the rules of humanitarian law have also caused the gradual development of international criminal law in the field of new criminalizations and as a result the development of international law In the fields of environmental crimes and crimes against cultural and historical works.

One of the most important issues in the international scene in recent decades has been humanitarian law. The purpose of humanitarian law is to protect human beings in armed conflicts and limiting the use of certain warfare and methods during a war. In fact, humanitarian law deals with principles principles which limits inhuman behavior during a war. Imam Khomeini who was the chief commander of the eight year war, strictly adhered to these rules and regulations based on Islamic laws and regulations. In spite of violating such regulations by the Iraqi army, he never allowed infringement of those laws. In this contribution, by using analytical -descriptive method, I have tried to explain Imam Khomeini’s views on humanitarian law. At the end, the conclusion indicates that human behavior, denial of raid and ambush in armed conflicts, the distinction between military personnel and civilians, restrictions on the use of weapons, proportionality and necessity of military action, love and kindness to prisoners of war and protection of environment have been considered as the most important principles of humanitarian law in Imam Khomeini’s thoughts.

The naval conflict has undergone many changes due to environmental factors and various tools, as well as the increasing growth and development of marine technologies, aligned with the inclusion of new tools and methods in naval conflict and electronic warfare at sea. The procedure taken by countries indicates the acceptance of electronic warfare as one of the methods and tools of agreed warfare. However, from the perspective of international humanitarian law, the use of electronic warfare tools and methods is challenging, and international treaty law lacks a legal rule regarding this method of warfare. Indeed, the only guideline that has sought to regulate electronic warfare is the Air and Missile Warfare Directive, which imposes no legal requirements on governments. So the question we are going to answer in this brief is that, can humanitarian law be applied to electronic warfare? The purpose of this study is to explain and investigate the various dimensions of naval electronic warfare from the perspective of international humanitarian law, and proving that international humanitarian law can be applied to the methods and tools of electronic warfare at sea. The research method selected for the present paper is an analytical-explanatory method and the data collection method used is the library research method.

The existence of non-state actors (NSAs) in new world’ s order exposes some opportunities and threats. Humanitarian law is generally based on traditional nation-state divisions and this is acomplicated determination of extraterritorial conflicts with non-state actors. In the absence of such a precise determination, IHL provisions can not properly be implemented while a State fights against a NSA in other State’ s territory. Furthermore, regarding their especial status, NSAs are faced with some problems in accomplishment of rights and duties in light of international humanitarian law. Due to the exceedmilitary operations against non‐ state armed groups, some scholars and politiciansclaim that international humanitarian law as it stands was developed at another time and is not adequate for the new challenges raised by the contemporary kind of conflicts with transnational armed groups thereby justifying transgression to the international boundaries.

In the information age, because the battlefields are shifted, the international community is threatened by cyber war fares. Today, cyber-attacks are considered as a separate category in different methods of warfare and at the same time, they can represent a novel type of use of force since they may lead to impacts such as massive damages to the critical infrastructure of a government, property damages, and loss of human lives. Therefore, when using this novel method of confliction, whether a war operation in a conflict solely consists of cyber-attacks or cyber warfare is a part of a military conflict with several tactics, principles of international humanitarian law must be applied and the governments must abide by the obligation according to which, the new means and methods they use in cyber warfare are in accordance with the existing principles of international humanitarian law. This article aims to prove that until specific principles of international humanitarian law in cyber war fares are not developed, by means of resorting to the existing principles and rules, cyber conflicts can still be defined within the framework of the principles of international humanitarian law.