International and non-international armed conflicts

Abstract

IHL rules applicable to international (IACs) and to non-international armed conflicts (NIACs) are different. This has disadvantages in terms of protection, and it requires politically difficult conflict classifications. There is a tendency to merge the two sets of rules by claiming that most customary rules are the same for both or making analogies between both regimes, but this may decrease protection in NIACs by displacing IHRL. States, however, want to maintain the distinction between IACs and NIACs to, among other things, retain their monopoly on the legitimate use of force. NIACs are governed by Common Article 3's fundamental guarantees, and Additional Protocol II, if applicable, provides further details and covers new issues. Combatant status and privilege, occupied territories and the inability of non-State armed groups to comply with rules designed for States impose limits to reasoning by analogy.