A Criminological Analysis of Israel’s Twelve-Day War Against Iran in Light of Islamic Sharia

Abstract

This study adopts a criminological–jurisprudential approach to analyze Israel’s twelve-day war against Iran and seeks to assess the alleged violent behaviors that occurred during this conflict in light of the principles and rules of Islamic Sharia. The central research problem is how—under conditions of limited field data, ambiguity in reports, and lack of direct access to the scenes of hostilities—one can, by relying on criminological concepts and the analytical capacities of Islamic jurisprudence, arrive at a coherent, reasoned, and ethics-oriented understanding of harmful behaviors and the responsibilities arising therefrom. The research method is descriptive–analytical and is based on the analysis of documents, reports, and criminological and jurisprudential theoretical frameworks. The findings indicate that principles such as the prohibition of harm to civilians, the no-harm rule (lā ḍarar), observance of proportionality in the use of coercive force, and the precedence of private rights (ḥaqq al-nās) possess substantial explanatory capacity for elucidating the material and mental elements of destructive conduct, including intent, knowledge, and the role of decision-makers in the process of exercising violence. Emphasizing scholarly humility and a clear distinction between scientific analysis and judicial proof, this study does not seek to issue a definitive judgment; rather, its aim is to present a methodological model for the preliminary, coherent, and justice-oriented analysis of violent conduct based on Islamic Sharia, demonstrating that the integration of criminology and jurisprudence can provide an indigenous and credible framework for understanding and ethically critiquing such events.