Volume 25 of the Yearbook of International Humanitarian Law (IHL) sheds light on the interplay between IHL and other adjacent branches of international law. This Volume moves beyond the traditional preoccupation of examining IHL’s relations with international human rights law, the law on the use of force and international criminal law. Authors were invited to discuss, both in general and specific terms, doctrinally and theoretically, interactions between IHL and other neighbouring frameworks. Accordingly, this Volume is dedicated to exploring the interrelationship between IHL and other adjacent frameworks, such as international environmental law, international investment law, the law on defences to state responsibility, and counter-terrorism law. The Volume contains four articles dedicated to the subject of IHL and neighbouring frameworks. The Volume further features a Focus section on IHL controversies arising from Russia’s aggression against Ukraine, and ends, as usual, with a Year in Review section. The Yearbook of International Humanitarian Law is a leading annual publication devoted to the study of international humanitarian law. The Yearbook has always strived to be at the forefront of the debate of pressing doctrinal questions of IHL, and will continue to do so in the future. As this Volume demonstrates, it offers a space where IHL-related issues can be explored both from a doctrinal and a theoretical perspective. It provides an international forum for high-quality, peer-reviewed academic articles focusing on this crucial branch of international law. Distinguished by contemporary relevance, the Yearbook of International Humanitarian Law bridges the gap between theory and practice and serves as a useful reference tool for scholars, practitioners, military personnel, civil servants, diplomats, human rights workers, and students.

Volume 24 of the Yearbook of International Humanitarian Law (IHL) is dedicated to investigating IHL's universalist claims from different perspectives and regarding different areas of IHL. While academic debates about "universalism versus particularism" have dominated much of the critical scholarship in international law over the past two decades, they remain relatively underexplored in the field of IHL. The current volume fills this gap in IHL literature by focusing on the ways in which different interpretive communities approach questions of IHL from differing perspectives. Authors were invited to use the concept of culture to deconstruct and take critical distance from the production, interpretation, and application of IHL, and those keen on challenging the idea that IHL needs critical deconstruction were also invited to argue their case. The Volume contains four articles dedicated to the subject of cultures of IHL. It also features a book symposium on Samuel Moyn's Humane: How The United States Abandoned Peace and Reinvented War (2021) and ends, as usual, with a Year in Review section. The Yearbook of International Humanitarian Law is a leading annual publication devoted to the study of international humanitarian law. The Yearbook has always strived to be at the forefront of the debate of pressing doctrinal questions of IHL and will continue to do so in the future. As this volume shows, it is also a forum for taking a step back and reflecting on the broader, theoretical issues that inform the practice and thinking about the field. The Yearbook provides an international forum for high-quality, peer-reviewed academic articles focusing on this crucial branch of international law. Distinguished by contemporary relevance, it bridges the gap between theory and practice and serves as a useful reference tool for scholars, practitioners, military personnel, civil servants, diplomats, human rights workers and students.

The Law of Armed Conflict is usually understood to be a regime of exception that applies only during armed conflict and regulates hostilities among enemies. It assigns privileges to states far beyond what they are allowed to do in peacetime, and it mandates certain protections for non-combatants, which can often be defeated by appeals to military necessity or advantage. The Laws of War in International Thought examines the intellectual history of the laws of war before their codification. It reconstructs the processes by which political and legal theorists built the laws' distinctive vocabularies and legitimized some of their broadest permissions, and it situates these processes within the broader intellectual project that from early modernity spelled out the nature, function, and powers of state sovereignty. The book focuses on four historical moments in the intellectual history of the laws of war: the doctrine of just war in Spanish scholasticism; Hugo Grotius's theory of solemn war; the Enlightenment theory of regular war; and late nineteenth-century humanitarianism. By looking at these moments, Pablo Kalmanovitz shows how challenging and polemical it has been for international theorists to justify the exceptional and permissive character of the laws of war. In this way, he contributes to recover a sense of the historical foundations and many still problematic aspects of the Law of Armed Conflict.