International Humanitarian Law (IHL)

The armed conflict in Yemen is one of the most devastating and catastrophic crises the international community is currently facing. It is entering its seventh year. This situation has raised numerous questions under International Humanitarian Law (IHL) as the set of rules the main aim of which is to limit the effects of armed conflicts for humanitarian reasons. This is also an occasion to test the pertinence and efficiency of IHL rules in the face of current armed conflicts. Accordingly, the present article seeks to study certain important issues in IHL raised by Yemen armed conflict. Doing so, firstly, the type of armed conflict in Yemen is addressed (1). Then, it goes through the principles of distinction, proportionality and precautions (2). Thereafter, the issues of blockade and siege are dealt with (3). After that, the situation of certain persons is examined (4). And finally, the very challenging and significant question of humanitarian assistance is studied (5). I will conclude that most of the humanitarian problems except the issue of humanitarian assistance and sieges are adequately regulated by IHL and that the problem is mainly that those rules are not respected. The controversy about the classification of the conflict, whether it is an international armed conflict (IAC) or a non-international armed conflict (NIAC), does not fundamentally affect those rules.

Nowadays, the effects and consequences of armed conflicts are not limited to human beings and they adversely affect the environment and many species of animals as well. Animals are considered to be the unknown and forgotten victims of armed conflicts. In international humanitarian law (IHL) this issue is largely ignored and there are only few rules that indirectly and ambiguously deal with the protection of animals during armed conflict. However, in the sources of Islamic law there are explicit rules and regulations that directly protect the rights of animals during the war. These rules fall into two different categories. First, those concerned with those animals which are used during the conflict as tools and methods of warfare and are regarded as part of military property and equipment. Second, those relating to animals that are not used in the conflict but are affected by the effects and consequences of the war similar to civilians and individuals who do not have a direct participation in hostilities. This study attempts to comparatively examine the relevant rules and principles in IHL and Islam. Based on the findings of the paper, it could be concluded that due to inadequacy and insufficiency of IHL concerning the protection of animal rights during armed conflicts, it appears to be necessary to develop new rules in this regard and employing the existing sources such as religious ones, including Islamic teachings, that are closely linked with ethical treatment of animals.