Editing Law of war (section)

==Purposes of the laws==

It has often been commented that creating laws for something as inherently lawless as war seems like a lesson in absurdity. But based on the adherence to what amounted to [[customary international humanitarian law]] by warring parties through the ages, it was believed by many, especially after the eighteenth century, that codifying laws of war would be beneficial.<ref>{{Cite book |last1=Dunant |first1=Henry |title=A Memory of Solferino |last2=Dunant |first2=Henry |last3=Dunant |first3=Henry |date=1986 |publisher=International Committee of the Red Cross |isbn=978-2-88145-006-8 |edition=Repr |location=Geneva}}</ref> Classifications of what kind of conflict is taking place is also important. Depending on how a conflict is classified certain actors may or may not use force against another power. This can lead to tactical classification of a conflict so that one actor has the sole right of force. Sometimes a new body of law is even created to do so.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Erakat |first=Noura |title=Justice for some: law and the question of Palestine |date=2019 |publisher=Stanford University Press |isbn=978-0-8047-9825-9 |location=Stanford (Calif.) |pages=179+181}}</ref>

Some of the central principles underlying laws of war are:{{Citation needed|reason=reliable sources needed for the whole section|date=April 2013}}
* Wars should be limited to achieving the political goals that started the war (e.g., territorial control) and should not include unnecessary destruction.
* Wars should be brought to an end as quickly as possible.
* People and property that do not contribute to the war effort should be protected against unnecessary destruction and hardship.

To this end, laws of war are intended to mitigate the hardships of war by:
* Protecting both [[combatant]]s and [[protected persons|protected]] [[non-combatant]]s from unnecessary suffering.
* Safeguarding certain fundamental [[human rights]] of protected persons who fall into the hands of the enemy, particularly [[prisoners of war]], the wounded and sick, children, and protected [[civilians]].
* Facilitating the restoration of [[peace]].

The idea that there is a right to war concerns, on the one hand, the jus ad bellum, the right to make war or to enter war, assuming a motive such as to defend oneself from a threat or danger, presupposes a declaration of war that warns the adversary: war is a loyal act, and on the other hand, jus in bello, the law of war, the way of making war, which involves behaving as soldiers invested with a mission for which all violence is not allowed. In any case, the very idea of a right to war is based on an idea of war that can be defined as an armed conflict, limited in space, limited in time, and by its objectives. War begins with a declaration (of war), ends with a treaty (of peace) or surrender agreement, an act of sharing, etc.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Stahn |first=C. |date=2006-11-01 |title='Jus ad bellum', 'jus in bello' . . . 'jus post bellum'? -Rethinking the Conception of the Law of Armed Force |url=https://academic.oup.com/ejil/article-lookup/doi/10.1093/ejil/chl037 |journal=European Journal of International Law |language=en |volume=17 |issue=5 |pages=921–943 |doi=10.1093/ejil/chl037 |issn=0938-5428}}</ref> Laws of war serve the conflicts that are currently taking place. As conflicts change over time so do the laws that govern them. New laws can therefore be created. This is recently seen in the "[[Assassination|assassination policies]]" adopted during the "[[War on terror|War on Terror]]".<ref>{{Cite book |last=Erakat |first=Noura |title=Justice for some: law and the question of Palestine |date=2019 |publisher=Stanford University Press |isbn=978-0-8047-9825-9 |location=Stanford (Calif.) |pages=187-194}}</ref>