نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی
نویسندگان
1 استادیار جامعه المصطفی(ع) العالمیه - قم ایران
2 فارغ التحصیل دکتری قرآن و حقوق ، جامعه المصطفی العالمیه ، قم، ایران ( نویسنده مسئول) از کشور افغانستان
چکیده
کلیدواژهها
عنوان مقاله [English]
نویسندگان [English]
In contemporary times, the threat posed by weapons of mass destruction looms over humanity. The absence of a universally ratified law prohibiting the use of such weapons has driven international law advocates to seek remedies. This article employs a comparative methodology to describe and analyze the viewpoints of the Quran and international law regarding the theory of prohibiting the use of weapons of mass destruction. Through this comparative analysis, it becomes evident that the principle of non-aggression in the Quranic school and the principle of non-intervention in international law stand as some of the strongest arguments against the use of weapons of mass destruction. The prohibition of resorting to force binds nations to abstain from using any weaponry against others. Similarly, in the context of justifiable defense, the observance of proportionality and necessity is obligatory. However, the use of weapons of mass destruction inherently violates these criteria. Both the Quran and international law recognize the customary prohibition of using weapons of mass destruction in the realm of legitimate defense. However, according to the view of the Quran and Islamic jurisprudence, the use of weapons of mass destruction is not permissible even under such circumstances.
کلیدواژهها [English]