International Humanitarian law Approach to the Armed Retaliations against the Environment

The present study, using a descriptive-analytical method, seeks to answer the main question: Is it generally permissible to deal with retaliations against the natural environment during armed conflicts? In this regard, one of the worst consequences of retaliations in armed conflicts is its devastating effects on the environment. These actions are sometimes intense, extensive and long-term that can threaten the health and life of humans. Examples of such actions have taken place in the Israel-Lebanon War (2006) and the Syria War (from 2011 til now). Article 55(2) of the Additional Protocol I(1977) to the Geneva Conventions of 1949, and Rule 1006 (j) of the 1999 Model Manual on the Law of Armed Conflicts are the few conventional and customary rules that prohibit retaliations in armed conflicts imperatively. The approach of governments and the practice of international judicial tribunals also confirm this prohibition. Despite the fact that in some conventional and customary international treaties, the serious violations of international humanitarian law, including the prohibition of retaliations and environmental devastations, have been described as war crimes, ‘’military use of the environment’’ and ‘’the concrete military advantage’’, are considered as exceptions to these actions. This research refers to the structural weakness of the existing rules and the necessity to focus on guaranteeing the implementation of the documents.