War WATCH combines comprehensive global coverage of classification of armed conflict and assessment of IHL compliance in relation to civilian harm with rigorous legal analysis. All data is gathered, evaluated, and assessed by experts with deep knowledge of IHL, following strict verification of sources and legal findings.
WHAT LEGAL FRAMEWORK DO WE USE?
IHL governs our entire analysis – both for classifying armed conflicts and assessment of IHL compliance in relation to civilian harm during those conflicts.
For classification: We use IHL criteria to determine whether a situation counts as an armed conflict, what type it is (international or non-international), and who the parties are, and whether a situation of military occupation exists. While we note what governments, international organizations, or other actors say about a situation, we make independent determinations based on legal criteria, not political labels.
For analysis of compliance with IHL: IHL provides the framework for assessing how parties to an armed conflict behave. This includes both the rules protecting people in the hands of an enemy (like prisoners of war in an international armed conflict) and the rules governing how fighting is conducted (like prohibitions on conduct of hostilities). We pay special attention to conduct that causes civilian harm.
A note on scope: We focus specifically on IHL. This does not mean other bodies of law – such as international human rights law, international criminal law, or refugee law – do not also apply during armed conflict. They do. But by focusing on IHL, we can precisely identify where this particular set of rules is being not respected and what needs to be done to strengthen compliance. Conduct we analyze may well violate other legal frameworks too, even if we do not explicitly say so.
CLASSIFYING ARMED CONFLICTS
Why Classification matters
Determining whether a situation qualifies as an armed conflict under IHL is not just an academic exercise – it has concrete legal consequences.
First and foremost, classification determines which international legal frameworks apply. When there is an armed conflict, IHL applies and regulates the rights and duties of the parties to the conflict. Most notably, IHL contains specific rules governing the use of deadly force, detention and humanitarian access. International human rights law applies both in peace and war time, but is generally more restrictive regarding the use of lethal force and detention. IHL will generally apply to every conduct in connection (nexus) with the conflict; acts without such a nexus remain governed by domestic law and IHRL.
The distinction matters for purposes of legal accountability, too. War crimes can only be committed in connection with an armed conflict. Finally, IHL must be respected by all parties to an armed conflict – including non-state armed groups – whereas whether and how international human rights law binds non-state actors remains debated.
What is an armed conflict?
Albeit there is no generic category of armed conflicts under IHL, a widely accepted definition of the notion comes from the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY): according to this court:
An armed conflict exists whenever there is a resort to armed force between States or protracted armed violence between governmental authorities and organized armed groups or between such groups within a State.1 ICTY, Tadić, Appeals Chamber, Decision on the Defence Motion for Interlocutory Appeal on Jurisdiction, IT-94-1, 2 October 1995, para 70, https://www.icty.org/x/cases/tadic/acdec/en/51002.htm>.
Within this over-arching notion, there exists two major categories of armed conflicts, each with its own set of criteria and legal regimes: international armed conflicts (IAC) and non-international armed conflicts (NIAC). The distinction between these two categories is based on the identity of the parties to the conflict. Despite their convergence under customary international law, important differences between their respective legal regimes remain. Most notably, combatant privilege, prisoner of war status or the formal status of protected civilians only exist under the regime governing IACs. Likewise, military occupation is a specific type of IACs, triggering its specific legal regime. In the context of a NIAC, the concept of military occupation with the ensuing legal regime does not apply, even if a territory may be military governed by a non-state armed group party to the armed conflict.
How Classification works in practice
In practice, the exercise of conflict classification is subject to the opposing risks of under- and over-classification. Governments may deny they are taking part in an armed conflict, insisting they are simply conducting counter-terrorism operations not governed by IHL. Other governments may invoke the rights and powers established under IHL in relation to situations that do not actually meet the threshold for its application. Similarly, non-state armed groups may exaggerate the intensity of violence or their level of organization to claim that an armed conflict exists.
To counter these challenges, classification must be based on objective legal criteria applied to factual circumstances, irrespective of the parties’ views or any related claim. To this effect, relevant rules of IHL provide a set of detailed criteria to assess for legal purposes if, when and between whom an armed conflict exists. This legal classification matters because it determines what rights and obligations the parties to the armed conflict and third parties have under IHL.
HOW DO WE SELECT WHICH ARMED CONFLICTS TO ANALYZE IN DEPTH?
There is a distinction between the armed conflicts we classify and those we analyze for the assessment of compliance with IHL.
Classification of armed conflict: War WATCH aims to cover all situations of armed violence worldwide that qualify as armed conflict under IHL – it is meant to be universal in scope, just like our former RULAC project was.
Assessment of compliance with IHL: We select a smaller number of country situations for in-depth analysis of compliance with IHL.
We select country situations for the analysis of civilian harm and related legal analysis in terms of compliance with IHL based on:
- Volume of military operations and conflict-related incidents
- Scope and scale of civilian impact
- Nature and gravity of apparent IHL compliance concerns
- Risk of escalation
- Geographic representation
WHICH IHL THEMES DO WE FOCUS ON?
Within the country situations we analyze, we focus on specific IHL themes chosen because they:
- Cause the most civilian harm
- Can be reliably assessed through open-source information
- Are significant in scope, scale, gravity or potential for remedy
- Are likely to increase in coming decades
Our analysis is organized around three main themes:
- Attacks on civilian objects (like hospitals, schools, water systems)
- Attacks on civilians (including issues with weapons and tactics used)
- Protection of people in enemy hands (looking at different categories of people and different types of harm)
WHERE DOES OUR INFORMATION COME FROM?
We rely on secondary sources gathered through desk research. We have built a list of trusted sources through extensive consultation, literature review, and lessons learned. These include:
- UN agencies and regional organizations
- International NGOs and human rights groups
- Open-source intelligence (OSINT) organizations
- Conflict data repositories (particularly ACLED and Uppsala Conflict Data Program)
- Media outlets at all levels – international, regional, national, and local
Wherever possible, we triangulate information across multiple sources to verify accuracy. When information about a conflict or issue is scarce or missing, we explicitly note this – not just to avoid suggesting that absence of evidence means absence of violations, but to highlight situations that need more international attention.
WHAT TIME PERIOD DO WE COVER?
War WATCH currently covers a defined initial time frame, which will be progressively expanded in the coming years as part of the project’s phased development. At this stage:
For conflict classification, we cover all armed conflicts from July 1, 2023 to June 30, 2025.
For assessment of IHL compliance. the period from July 1, 2024 to June 30, 2025.
While July 31, 2025 is the official data collection cut-off, researchers have included more recent material wherever possible.
HOW CAN THE DATA BE USED?
War WATCH enables detailed monitoring of multiple aspects of armed conflict. Users can track:
- How many armed conflicts exist at any given time
- Whether they are international or non-international
- Who the parties to an armed conflict are
- What types of IHL violations are occurring in selected conflicts
- How these patterns change over time
Over time, as more data accumulates, users will be able to identify trends – in the number and nature of conflicts, in how long they last, in patterns of behavior by different types of actors, in which categories of civilians face particular risks, and in what forms of harm recur most frequently.
This data can inform humanitarian, political, and legal responses to armed conflict. It provides evidence to support advocacy, guide policy decisions, and identify where international pressure and assistance are most needed.
- 1ICTY, Tadić, Appeals Chamber, Decision on the Defence Motion for Interlocutory Appeal on Jurisdiction, IT-94-1, 2 October 1995, para 70, https://www.icty.org/x/cases/tadic/acdec/en/51002.htm>.