In an armed conflict the respect for international humanitarian law is the essential element to reduce its destructive effects. The application of international humanitarian law is, however, not always taken into account by states and members of the armed forces. When this obligation is seriously violated, the international community, through the UN, must intervene to restore international peace and security. Unfortunately, current armed conflicts have proven that this system is not effective, especially when it has to be activated against a permanent veto-wielding member of the Security Council, such as Russia. To make this system effective and to make such a state to apply correctly international humanitarian law, the UN must be reformed. But all these reform proposals do not take into account the efficiency of the measures in Chapter VII of the Charter and the strengthening of international authority.

This article is focused on studying the emergence and evolution of operational law as a support for the planning and conducting of military operations in times of peace and war. Issues regarding its curricular area, differences with international humanitarian law, how it can support the evolution of military doctrine and science are addressed. In this context, I analyse the case of the implementation of operational law in the USA, following the military failure in Vietnam, and its role in the reformation of American military doctrine. Finally, I analyse the new reform of the American military law system, the transition from operational law to national security law, triggered by the multiplication of armed threats and the emergence of new types of military actions and battle spaces (especially hybrid warfare, information warfare and cyber warfare). I also analyse the importance of implementing operational law within the Romanian army and the benefits for the evolution of Romanian military doctrine.

The adoption of The Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW) by the UN General Assembly in July 2017 is a real success for the international community in the fight against armaments and the danger of an apocalyptic war. Despite the scepticism of many, the treaty entered into force in January 2021, with its 50th ratification. Although this story seems to have come to a happy end, it is only now that the turmoil begins. No nuclear-weapon state has supported the adoption of the treaty and they refuse to recognize its legal power. The implementation of this treaty will be the hardest test for the UN. Nuclear states are the strongest and most decision-making, especially within the Security Council. In this context, the question arises whether the UN will succeed in finding an effective way to persuade nuclear states to give up these weapons or whether we will witness an international “putsch” of nuclear states.

The Syrian Revolution aimed to remove the dictatorial regime from power and liberate the Syrian people. Following the example of other peoples, such as the Libyan and Egyptian, Syrian citizens began protests, initially peaceful, against the authorities. Authorities’ response was harsh, punishing very hard protesters of all ages. More and more people came out to protest; more and more people have been arrested by authorities, imprisoned under inhuman conditions, tortured, murdered. The authorities resorted to starving the civilians to force them to give up protests. Supported by deserted soldiers, the protesters organized and began the armed struggle against government forces. The dictatorial regime resorted to many illegal means and methods of war to maintain its power: killings, torture, bombings without discrimination, use of chemical weapons, collaboration with criminal and terrorist organizations, starvation of civilians, retaliation, etc. Unfortunately, the international community has remained powerless in the face of these atrocities. Thus, the gaps and inequities of the functioning of the international system for the defence of international peace and security, human rights and international humanitarian law are observed once again.

The violent events of December 1989 in Romania, which led to the removal of the Communist regime from power are still shrouded in mystery today. The social disorder and the political chaos of those days overlapped with the violent use of the armed forces that used all kinds of weapons. During the armed confrontations, many casualties (military and civilian) and destruction of goods, including cultural ones, took place. In the years following these events a series of theories, hypotheses, controversies, and trials have emerged, but no one has clearly defined the legal nature of this social-political crisis. The purpose of this scientific approach is not to analyze the events and crimes committed in December 1989, but to determine whether and to what extent the international humanitarian law can be applied to these events.