Just War

The Islamic Resistance Front planned a massive attack on the positions of the Zionist regime on October 7, 2023, and presented it in the form of the Battle of Al-Aqsa Storm. The main question of this research, which was developed based on the descriptive-analytical method, is to evaluate and examine the extent to which ethical principles were applied and observed in the recent battle between Hamas and the Zionist regime, looking at the theory of just war and within the framework of the theories of Al-Farabi and Michael Wallers. Therefore, according to the research findings, the Al-Aqsa Storm operation itself had a moral justification in the form of the right of Palestinians to self-determination, while the invocation of self-defense by the Zionist regime and the brutal attacks against civilians do not fit into positive moral practices and self-defense. However, the Zionist regime produces the power of language in what can be called the seduction of power, something to which not only humans in general, but also the victims in particular are exposed, which in turn often encourages and justifies oppression.

Throughout history, mankind has always been involved in numerous crises, including war and bloodshed and its consequences and adverse effects. Establishing peace and resolving conflicts has always been the concern of thinkers, and based on this, two main views in this regard have proposed different opinions and viewpoints on the axis of "authenticity of peace" or "just war". In the meantime, sea banditry or piracy, which has a very old history and is as old as the history of human domination of the sea, has become a serious threat in recent years due to reasons such as the change in the behavior pattern of pirates, which often takes hostages and blackmail. It is considered for international trade. This crime, which is one of the first international crimes with universal jurisdiction, has always been the subject of debate among thinkers of different legal systems. One of the important topics in this field is how to make peace or conduct a just war with this phenomenon. The Islamic legal system and international law have presented mostly similar and sometimes different views in this context, so it is necessary to apply and research the jurisprudential teachings related to the principles and regulations of international law. Therefore, in this treatise, the subject of "comparative analysis of countering "sea piracy" from the perspective of just war in Islamic jurisprudence and international law has been discussed. In this research, which was carried out using descriptive and analytical methods and using library sources and texts, these results were obtained that today the issue of war as an important issue and challenge in the international arena has limitations and only when its position as a Acceptable discourse is accepted as a just war. Therefore, according to the principles of international law and the actions taken by sea pirates, in many cases it has many similarities with the title of war in Islamic jurisprudence, and their behavior and actions, which often lead to the deprivation of the security of the seas, can be compared to He knew it as war. However, observing the principles of just war in both the Islamic legal system and international law is necessary and necessary.

This study aims to provide a comprehensive philosophical critique of warfare in the contemporary era, focusing on ethical justifications and competing theoretical frameworks. It examines the extent to which classical just war theory remains applicable and explores how contemporary philosophers contribute to the redefinition of the ethics of war. Employing an applied, descriptive-analytical, qualitative approach, the study gathers data from library sources, theoretical literature, previous research, and scholarly articles. It reviews such sources to critically analyze the philosophical and ethical foundations of war. The findings show that states resort to war for reasons including the defense of human rights, protection of sovereignty, and response to significant threats. Just war theory distinguishes between conflicts that are ethically justified and those that are not. Although ethical principles invariably influence warfare, some conflicts can be justified on grounds of justice, rendering absolute pacifism impractical. Also the analysis reveals that classical frameworks, while foundational, are insufficient for addressing the moral complexities of contemporary warfare. Emerging forms of conflict challenge traditional notions of legitimacy and moral accountability, highlighting significant gaps in existing theories. Contemporary warfare necessitates a revised and integrative philosophical framework capable of accommodating new modes of violence and global security concerns. Such a framework should synthesize insights from just war theory, pacifism, and political realism to provide a robust basis for evaluating the morality of modern conflicts and international bodies must prioritize disarmament and ethically based legislation to safeguard human rights and dignity.