The Use of Weapons of Mass Destruction: A Comparison of the Restrictions and Justifications in Islamic Law of Armed Conflict and International Humanitarian Law
The Use of Weapons of Mass Destruction: A Comparison of the Restrictions and Justifications in Islamic Law of Armed Conflict and International Humanitarian Law
Sophie Timmermans
 
Abstract: The use of weapons of mass destruction (WMDs) greatly concerns the international community. While Muslim states have been featured heavily in this debate since the 1960s, little has been done to offer clarity on the issue of legality of the use of WMDs in Islamic law. This article compares the restrictions and justifications of the use of WMDs in Islamic law of armed conflict with the same international humanitarian law (IHL). It first examines the prohibitions and restrictions under IHL as well as the possible legality of the use of WMDs in reprisals. Then, it examines the positions held by Islamic scholars on the use of WMDs, as well as classical Muslim jurists’ discussions on the permissibility of certain weapons. The article then explains the restrictions based on the Islamic principles of warfare as well as the justifications based on general welfare and reciprocity in Islamic law. Finally, the article compares the restrictions, prohibitions, and justifications on the use of WMDs in both legal systems. It concludes that there are significant similarities regarding restrictions based on the principles on the conduct of hostilities, but there are certain divergences as well on justifications as IHL allows reprisals under strict conditions whereas Islamic law relies on reciprocity and necessity.

Please Sign in if already registered Subscriber.

Or

Please Register and make the necessary subscription payment to activate your account.

Adobe Reader