Review and critique of separation theories in using of nuclear weapon

Nuclear weapons as the first result of the use of nuclear energy has high efficiency to end war and to protect the sovereignty and territorial integrity. Nevertheless, it can lead to wide and mass killings and large-scale of human, animal and environmental waste and its damaging consequences may expand in terms of space and time. This ethical challenge caused the issue of its production, stockpiling and use in various arenas of war be put to discussion in ethics, law and security and strategic science from the early days of the production of these weapons.
The multiplicity theories were raised to justify the ethical challenges arising out of use of nuclear weapons and to address humanitarian concerns in Fiqh and law in war. The theory of "double effect" in law was launched in war the theoretical foundations of which, in the context of Islamic law, can be seen in the notion of "separation of intention and act in the use of Amm al-ihlak and Amm al-ifsad weapons and attacks". the permissibility ofthe use of nuclear weapons may be justified, based on thesetheories, referring to the lack of intention of their users for themassive killings and destruction. same literature and foundations raised on these two theories has made the context for giving same arguments to justify the use of nuclear weapons. This article attempts to review and criticize arguments and foundations of these theories by defining their content, principles, requirements and multiplicity approaches.