INTERNATIONAL
HUMANITARIAN
LAW
Tarun Sharma
Assistant Professor
DME law School
[email protected]
What is International Humanitarian Law?
International Committee of the Red Cross:
International humanitarian law (IHL) is
a set of rules that seeks, for humanitarian reasons, to limit the effects of armed
conflict. It protects persons who are not, or are no longer, directly or actively
participating in hostilities, and imposes limits on the means and methods of
warfare. IHL is also known as “the law of war” or “the law of armed conflict”
➢ IHL is part of public international law, which is made up primarily of treaties,
customary international law and general principles of law (see Article 38 of the
Statute of the International Court of Justice).
➢ IHL is a branch of Public International law that seeks to moderate the conduct
of armed conflict and mitigate the suffering that it causes
• IHL does not completely prohibit war but only allows for legitimate
military goals
“ it is not the purpose of IHL to prohibit war or to adopt rules rendering
war impossible”
When does international humanitarian law apply?
International humanitarian law applies only to armed conflict; it does not
cover internal tensions or disturbances such as isolated acts of violence.
The law applies only once a conflict has begun, and then equally to all
sides regardless of who started the fighting.
• International Armed Conflict
• Non- International Armed Conflict
What does International Humanitarian law cover?
International humanitarian law covers two areas:
i. The protection of those who are not, or no longer, taking part in
fighting
ii. The restrictions on the means of warfare –
a. in particular weapons and
b. the methods of warfare, such as military tactics.
Active Armed Conflicts
Armed
Conflicts
Non-
International
International
Russo-Ukraine
Syrian Conflict
War
Israel-
Palestine Yemen Conflict
Conflict
Conflict of
Sahil Region
Myanmar
Conflict
Movies and Documentaries that provide
insights into International Humanitarian law
Movies Documentaries
Saving Private Ryan 1998 The Fog of War (2003)
Schindler's List (1993) Ghosts of Rwanda (2004)
The Pianist (2002) E-Team (2014)
Hotel Rwanda (2004) There’s Something in the Water (2019)
Black Hawk Down (2001) Crip Camp (2020)
Eye in the Sky (2015) Living in Emergency: Stories of
Doctors Without Borders (2008)
Judgment at Nuremberg (1961) Ukraine two years of war (Vice)
Tokyo Trial 2016 The Cost of War (vice)
Pearl Harbor 2001 Gaza: Explained (Vox)
Nagorno-Karabakh: The War Between
Armenia and Azerbaijan Explained (the
WEBSITE
• International Committee of the Red Cross
• Institute for Defense Studies and Analyses
• Strategic Frontier
• International Law Observer
IHL
Law of Geneva Law of Hague
Principle of
Protecting Power
Reciprocity
Mutual Respect
for Protecting
Power
➢ ANIMUS BELLIGERENDI : Belligerent Intent
➢ JUS IN BELLO : Law of War & Law Governing the conduct of
hostilities.
➢ JUS AD BELLUM : Law governing the “ resort to War”
▪ Act of self defense
▪ Authorization by the UNSC
➢ TEMPERAMENTA BELLI : Restrictions on warfare
➢ JUS CONTRA BELLUM : Law on the prevention of war
➢ LEX SPECIALIS DEROGAT LEGI GENERALI :
Specific laws prevail over general law
➢ NECESSITAS NON HABET LEGEM : Necessity has
no law
BASIC PRINCIPLES AND LIMITATIONS OF
INTERNATIONAL HUMANITARIAN LAW
PRINCIPLES LIMITS
Distinction between civilians and Does not prohibit the use of violence
combatants
Protection to attack those hors de combat Cannot protect all those affected by
an armed conflict
Prohibition to inflict unnecessary suffering No distinction based on the purpose
of the conflict
Principle of necessity Does not bar a party from
overcoming the enemy
Principle of proportionality Presupposes that parties to an armed
conflict have rational aims that do
not contradict IHL.
JUS AD BELLUM
&
JUS IN BELLO
The origins of jus ad bellum and jus in bello trace back to the foundational
principles of just war theory, deeply rooted in ancient and medieval thought.
Jus ad bellum, governing the conditions under which states may resort to
war, finds its early articulation in the works of classical philosophers like
Cicero and Augustine, who emphasized moral justifications for war,
including self-defense and restoration of peace. During the Middle Ages,
Thomas Aquinas further codified these principles, blending Christian ethics
with Aristotelian philosophy. On the other hand, jus in bello, regulating
conduct during warfare, has roots in customary practices observed by
ancient civilizations and codified in Roman military traditions. These norms
were formalized over centuries, particularly through the development of
customary international law, treaties, and conventions, culminating in
modern frameworks like the Geneva Conventions. Together, these doctrines
have evolved to balance the imperatives of state sovereignty, morality, and
humanitarianism in the context of armed conflict.
❖ CICERO : The war was not justified unless the aggressor made an official
demand for satisfaction within a time frame allotted for a response and issued a
formal declaration of war.
JUS AD BELLUM
“the right to go to war”
“the body of international law governing the right of one state to resort to
war against another”
❖ Article 2(4) UN Charter: All States must refrain from War
➢ Exception
o Authorization by United Nations Security Council
o Use of Force in Self Defense
KEY PRINCIPLES OF JUS AD BELLUM
1. Just Causa
– Example: The United States’ use of force in response to the September
11, 2001, terrorist attacks was justified under Article 51 of the UN
Charter, which recognizes the inherent right of self-defense.
2. Right Authority
– Example: The UN Security Council's authorization of military
intervention in Libya in 2011 under UN Resolution 1973, citing the
responsibility to protect civilians.
3. Right Intention
– Give Examples
4. Reasonable Hope
– Example: Indo-Pak war, 1999
5. Proportionality
– Example: The limited scope of operations in the Gulf War (1990–1991)
was aimed at expelling Iraqi forces from Kuwait rather than broader
objectives?
6. Last Resort
– Will Galwan Clashes Qualify for this?
Jus ad Bellum in the UN Charter
• Article 2(4): Prohibits the threat or use of force against the territorial
integrity or political independence of any state.
• Article 51: Recognizes the inherent right of self-defense if an armed
attack occurs, until the UN Security Council takes measures to
maintain international peace and security.
• Chapter VII (Articles 39-42): Grants the Security Council authority
to determine threats to peace and authorize collective measures,
including military action.
Jus ad Bellum in NATO Treaty 1949: Article V
EXAMPLES OF JUS AD BELLUM APPLICATION
Iraq Invasion of Kuwait (1990)
• The UN Security Council condemned Iraq’s invasion of Kuwait as a violation
of jus ad bellum principles under Article 2(4) of the UN Charter.
• The subsequent Gulf War was authorized under Security Council Resolution
678 as a legitimate response.
The Korean War (1950-1953)
• Context: North Korea invaded South Korea. The UN Security Council
authorized a collective military response led by the United States.
• Jus ad Bellum Application:
• The UN Security Council Resolution 82 condemned North Korea’s actions
and established that the invasion constituted a breach of international peace.
• Subsequent resolutions authorized the use of force to repel North Korean
aggression and restore peace.
• Relevance: This was one of the earliest tests of the UN Charter’s collective
security framework.
NATO Bombing of Yugoslavia (1999)
• Context: NATO launched airstrikes against Yugoslavia (Serbia and
Montenegro) during the Kosovo conflict to stop ethnic cleansing.
• Jus ad Bellum Debate:
• NATO argued the intervention was for humanitarian purposes
under the principle of responsibility to protect (R2P).
• Critics noted that the intervention lacked explicit UN Security
Council authorization, raising questions about legality despite its
moral justification.
Resolution 1860 (2009)
• Context: Adopted during the Gaza War (2008–2009), involving large-
scale Israeli military operations in Gaza following rocket attacks by
Hamas.
• Key Provisions:
• Called for an immediate ceasefire and withdrawal of Israeli forces
from Gaza.
• Demanded an end to the smuggling of weapons into Gaza and
condemned acts of violence against civilians.
• Jus ad Bellum Relation:
• Highlighted the need for proportionality and the protection of
civilians, emphasizing that any use of force must align with
international humanitarian law.
• Debates centered on whether Israel’s actions constituted legitimate
self-defense or disproportionate retaliation.
JUS IN BELLO
“ Law in War”
It refers to the body of legal norms and principles that govern the conduct of parties
during armed conflict. It seeks to limit the effects of armed conflict by protecting
individuals who are not participating in hostilities (e.g., civilians, medical personnel,
and aid workers) and by restricting the methods and means of warfare.
CORE PRINCIPLES OF JUS IN BELLO
1. Distinction
2. Proportionality
3. Military Necessity
4. Humanity
5. Neutrality
JUS IN BELLO
Customary
Geneva Hague
International
Convention Convention
Humanitarian law
AGGRESSION
UNGA Res 3314 (XXIX), UN Doc A/RES/3314 (14 December 1974)
HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT
OF INTERNATIONAL
HUMANITARIAN LAW
History of IHL can be traced back to the ancient times when war was permissible.
Traditional forms of humanitarian principles were governed solely by humanity. A
vague sense of morality guided the combatants about behavior between
themselves and towards the innocent non-combatants.
Principles of IHL were particularly visible in ancient Indian and Greek culture,
while they had also made their space in the rising religions such as Islam and
Christianity. The war of ‘Mahabharata’ can be seen as one of the earliest sources
of principles of humanitarian law. One of the crucial principles that originated
from the Mahabharata was that of ‘Dharma Yuddha’ or the principle of righteous
war.
→ Principles of War found in Mahabharata and Ramayana
▪ Practice of Stopping war after the sunset.
▪ Not attacking unarmed civilians
▪ Arjun’s Decision to not use Ultra-Destructive weapon
▪ No Strick Below the Belt
▪ Honoring Surrender and Truce
▪ Respect of the Dead
▪ Code of Honor Among Warriors
→ Indian Manusmriti and Rig Veda lays down elaborate principles of
war including
▪ the prohibition of concealed poisoned or barbed weapons
▪ engagement in an honest duel
▪ different treatment for unmounted or innocent people who do not
wish to engage in battle
▪ and humane treatment of the combat prisoners and civilians in
conquered territories.
▪ Provisions related to protection of enemy’s property and POW
→ Greek Goddess Athena was considered a protectress who could engage
in civilised combat for just causes.
→ In Islamic Laws, the killing of women, old and children was
Disallowed.
▪ Focus on the Principles of Precaution, Proportionality and
Limitation
→ Regulation of war was not a western concept and various cultures like
Chinese, Japanese, Indian and Arabic gave initial origination of these
laws
→ Initial warefare codes are found in texts like
➢ Code of Hammurabi
➢ Mahabharta
➢ Code of Manu
➢ Bible
➢ Koran
➢ Japanese Code of Bushido
→ SUMERIANS WARS
▪ Sumerians considered that the war should be started with a declaration and should
end with a treaty
→ LAW OF THE HITTIES
▪ Declaration of war should be done with the expectation of Peace
→ Law of Manu prohibited killing of surrendering opponents who were
no longer capable of fighting.
▪ Banned killing by means of Poisoning and Burning Arrows
▪ Provisions related to protection of enemy property and POW
→ The Japanese Code of Bushido, which translates to “The Way of the
Warrior” is a moral and ethical code followed by samurai warriors,
emphasizing honor, loyalty, respect, and self-discipline. While deeply
rooted in Japanese feudal traditions, Bushido shares striking parallels
with International Humanitarian Law (IHL) principles, which seek to
regulate conduct during armed conflicts to protect non-combatants and
ensure humane treatment.
Key Principles of Bushido:
1. Humanity (Jin)
2. Honor (Meiyo)
3. Justice (Gi)
4. Respect (Rei)
5. Loyalty (Chūgi)
6. Courage (Yu)
7. Self-Control (Jisei)
→ CHURCH JUST WAR DOCTRINE
▪ Focus on the Justice of resorting to war
▪ The gravity of military decision makes it subjected to rigorous conditions of
moral legitimacy
→ Morden Concept of IHL found in the writing of Dutch Philsopher & Father of
International law Hugo Grotius in his famous work DE JURE BELLI AC
PACIS, 1625
→ Jean- Jacques Rousseau in his social contract theory (1762) reflected on the
abysmal conditions of prisoners of war and the wounded.
He propounded that :-
1. Once a solider lay down its weapon, they become mere man
2. Use of force is only permitted against combatant
3. He argued that the prisoners or the wounded should not be further exposed to
reciprocal attacks of belligerents.
“War is in no way a relationship of man with man but, a relationship b/w one state
& another state”
Rousseau’s theory could be considered one of the first attempts to pen down the
humanitarian principles that existed in the society.
→ BATTLE OF SOLFERINO, 1859
▪ This Battle was part of the on-going war
between France and Austria
▪ HENRY DURANT, young Swish Citizen and
Businessman
▪ Visited the battlefield of Solferino
▪ Wrote about his experience in the book “A
MEMORY OF SOLFERINO, 1862”, and
gave certain suggestion so as to ease the
suffering in the war like:
1. A society should be created at the
national level for caring the sick and
wounded regardless of the Race,
Nationality and Religion
2. States should formulate an
International Treaty for prevention
and regulation of war
3. Neutral voluntary medical aid
society should be established
4. A unified Emblem for Neutrality
should be adopted
▪ Dunant with the help of his 4 friends laid foundation of
INTERNATIONAL COMMITTEE FOR AID TO THE WOUNDED
(ICAW) 1863
• It later came to be known as ICRC in 1876
→ LIEBER CODE
▪ An attempt to codify war was made by USA
▪ Abraham Lincon asked Columbia University Professor FRANSIS LIBER
to frame law related to war in 1862
- It was mainly aimed to formulate rules concerning conduct of Union
army during the war ( American civil war)
- “Instruction for the government of armies of the US in the field”
▪ Promulgated as GENERAL ORDER NO. 100 in 1983
▪ Consisted of 157 Articles in 10 sections
▪ Recognized in ST PETERSBURG DECLARATION 1868
▪ Collected in 1st Geneva Convention 1864
▪ It made distinction that was permitted towards Combatants and Non-
Combatants
▪ All soldiers were to be treated equally regardless of their social, ethnic or
Economic origins
→ THE GENEVA CONVENTION, 1864
▪ In 1863, ICAW persuaded the Swiss Government to convene a diplomatic
conference in Geneva in 1864
▪ “Geneva Convention for the Amelioration of the condition of the
wounded in Armies in the Field”
▪ 10 Articles
▪ Based mainly on the principle of Universality & Tolerance of Race,
Nationality & Religion
▪ Red Cross on White field Emblem was adopted as the official symbol of
ICAW
▪ For Islamic Countries it was Red Crescent
▪ In 2005, Red Crysal was adopted as a third neutral symbol by ICRC
→ THE HAGUE CONVENTION OF 1899 & 1907
▪ It was Negotiated at the 1st & 2nd peace conference in Netherlands
▪ 1st PEACE CONFERENCE
o held in May 1899 & signed in July 1899
o Came into force on 4th September, 1900
o 4 Sections & 3 Declarations
i. Pacific Settlement of International Dispute
ii. Laws and Customs of war on land
iii. Adaptation to Maritime Warfare of Principles of Geneva Convention
of 1864
iv. Prohibition launching of Projectile & Explosives from Balloons
❖ Declaration 1: Launching of Projectiles & Explosives from Ballons
❖ Declaration 2 : Use of Projectile for diffusion of AXPHYXIATING or
Delirious Gas
❖ Declaration 3 : Expanding & flatten Bullets
▪ 2nd PEACE CONFERENCE
o Held from 15 June to 18 October, 1907
o It Expand upon the existing original Hague Convention & adding regulations
of Naval Warfare
o Came into force on
o 13 sections were considered from which 12 sections were ratified
→ MARTENS CLAUSE
▪ It is based upon a declaration read by Professor VAN MARTENS ( the
Russian delegate at the Hague Peace Conference, 1899
▪ It was developed to deal with the disagreement b/w Parties to the conference
about status of resistance movement in the occupied territory
▪ It was taken as a part of Hague Convention
o It regulated military situations occurring in the course of hostilities b/w
conflicting parties that are not covered by existing laws
▪ Modified in 1907
o Principle of Laws of the Nations was added
“Something which is not expressly prohibited is not IPSO FACTO permitted “
SOURCES OF INTERNATIONAL
HUMANITARIAN LAW
Customary
IHL
International
Treaties
Sources of
IHL
Military
Manuals
National
Legislations
CUSTOMARY IHL (CIHL)
▪ CIHL fills the gap created by IHL treaties
o When some states does not ratified treaties
o Relative Weakness of treaty law
▪ Advantages of CIHL
o Does not require express act of Ratification
o Bind all belligerents on both sides of the conflict
o Fill the gaps created by IHL treaties
o Supplement grey areas of treaty law
o Helpful in cases where conflicting parties are not signatory to treaties to IHL
o Applicable in evolving nature of armed conflicts
➔ The Study on Customary IHL, 2005
o 161 rules identified
o 159 applied to International Armed Conflict
o 149 applied to Non- International Armed Conflict
Case: Military & Paramilitary Activities in & against Nicaragua case
Court held that multilateral treaty reservations could not preclude the court from
relying customary international law because customary law exists independently of
treaty law
Case: Prosecutor v. Hadzihosanovic & Kubura 2004 ICTY
Hague Regulations amounted to war crimes because these treaties had crystallized
into customary law by the time of WW2
EXAMPLE
UN Commission on Human Rights declared that Israel’s continuous grave breaches
of the 4th Geneva Convention & Additional Protocol 2 constitute war crimes
– Israel has not ratified Additional Protocol 2, but breaches Customary
International Humanitarian law
INTERNATIONAL TREATIES
International humanitarian treaties are legal agreements or conventions that
aim to regulate the conduct of armed conflict and ensure protection for those
who are not participating directly in hostilities, such as civilians, prisoners of
war, and wounded soldiers. These treaties establish rules to limit the effects
of war, prohibit certain types of weapons and tactics, and promote
humanitarian principles.
IHL
Law of Geneva Law of Hague
→ Limitations of Treaty Laws:
▪ Cannot come into force until it is ratified by the states
▪ Application of such laws are based on the characterization of armed conflicts
▪ Treaty laws related to Non-International armed conflicts are still in
developmental phase
▪ Conflict where parties has not ratified such laws, only customary laws are
applicable
MILITARY MANUALS
Charles Garraway: Divided Military Manuals into 3 categories
INTERNATIONAL NATIONAL INTERNAL
▪ Service personnel should be provided with clear, understandable instructions for
use in military operations
▪ Military Manuals lays down standard on which a soldiers will be judged for
his actions
Hans- Peter Gasser: Appointing legal advisers to armed forces and issuing military
manuals are two sides of the same coins
▪ Art 80, 82,83 of Additional Protocol 1, 1977
NATIONAL LEGISLATIONS
• Constitutional law
• Executive Orders
• Legislations
Examples
– Geneva Convention Act, 1960
– IPC/BNS
– Armed Forces Act, 1962
RESOLUTIONS OF UN & OTHERS INTERNATIONAL ORGANISATIONS
– Resolutions adopted by UN bodies like UNSC, UNGA, ECOSOC, UNHRC
etc.
DECISIONS OF JUDICIAL & QUASI JUDICIAL BODIES
– Judgements, Advisory Opinions
PRINCIPLES OF INTERNATIONAL
HUMANITARIAN LAW
The Principles of International Humanitarian Law (IHL) are foundational
norms aimed at mitigating human suffering during armed conflicts,
ensuring the protection of persons who are not or no longer participating
in hostilities, and regulating the means and methods of warfare to balance
military necessity with humanity.
Principle of
Principle of Principle of not to cause
Distinction Proportionality Unnecessary
Suffering
Principle of
Military
Necessity
PRINCIPLE OF DISTINCTION
▪ Considered as foundational principle of International Humanitarian law
▪ This principle simply states that
“A Distinction must be made b/w Combatants & Civilians and b/w Civilians Objects
& Military Objects”
Means this principles forbids all means & methods of warfare that
cannot make a distinction b/w those who take an active part in
hostilities to those who do not
Hence, people who are not taking part in hostilities are protected
under IHL
→ IHL protects following persons and property under this principle:
1. Members of the armed forces who are
1. Wounded
2. Sick
3. Infirmed
4. Shipwrecked
2. POW
3. Power of Parties
4. Medical and religious personnel
5. Parliamentarians
6. Civil defense forces personnel
7. Personnel dealing with cultural properties
8. Hospital, Safety Zones, Demilitarized zone, Installations containing
dangerous forces & natural environment
→ UNGA Resolution 2444 (XXIII of 1968): It is prohibited to launch
attack against the civilian population.
→ Art 44, 48 of Additional Protocol 1 of 1977
What is “Military Objective”
2nd Optional Protocol to the Hague Convention for the protection of Cultural
Property
1st Optional Protocol to Geneva Convention: Prohibits employment of
human shields to protect Military objectives
PRINCIPLE OF PROPORTIONALITY
Main purpose of this principle is to weigh the anticipated gains of a military
operation against reasonably foreseeable consequences to the civilian
population.
Rule 14, CIHL
This Principle is described under Hague Convention, 1907
Rights of Belligerents to adopt means of injuring
the enemy is not unlimited
“If there is a clean military target, it must not be attacked if the risk of
civilians or civilian property being harmed is larger than the expected
military advantage”
Codified under : Art 51(5)(b) of Additional Protocol 1
PRINCIPLE OF NOT TO CAUSE UNNECESSARY SUFFERING
Under IHL the act of killing or wounding enemy combatants in the
battlefield is a legitimate act if accomplished by lawful means and methods
of warfare.
“use of specific means are prohibited if it causes unnecessary suffering”
It Includes :
1. Poison
2. Chemical
3. Biological Weapon
4. Non- Detectable Munition ( which is not traceable on X
ray)
5. Blinding Laser Weapon
“The Method or weapon should not cause suffering beyond necessity”
Case: Nuclear Weapons Case (Advisory Opinion) ICJ
ICJ defines “Unnecessary Suffering” as harm greater than that unavoidable
to achieve legitimate military objectives
Suffering is not measured in terms of the suffering of the victim but
rather, by suffering that can be caused by a particular weapon by its
design or employment.
Rule 70 CIHL: Prohibits use of means & method of warfare which are of a
nature to cause unnecessary suffering.
MAX SUPERFLUS: Superfluous injury or unnecessary suffering
Declaration of SAINT PETERSBURG, 1868
HAGUE REGULATIONS ON LAND WARFARE, 1899
REGULATIONS TO HAGUE CONVENTION IV, 1907
– Forbids arms, projectiles or material calculated to cause unnecessary
suffering
→ GENEVA GAS PROTOCOL
Prohibition on the use of chemical & biological weapons
→ OTTAWA CONVENTION
Banned Anti-Personal landmines
→ GENEVA CONVENTIONS, ADDITIONAL PROTOCOL 1, 1977
1. Rights of parties to the conflict to choose methods or means of warfare is
not unlimited
2. Prohibition to Employ
1. Weapons
2. Projectiles
3. Materials
Which causes SUPERFLUOUS INJURY or UNNECESSARY
SUFFERING
3. Prohibition on Methods or Means of Warfare which is expected or
intended to cause
Widespread, long term & severe Damage to ENVIRONMENT
→ ROME STATUTE OF ICC
PRINCIPLE OF MILITARY NECESSITY
“Balance b/w the principles of military necessity and humanity”
“use of force is inherent to waging war because the ultimate aim of military
operations is to prevail over the enemy’s armed forces”
→ This Principle of military necessity permits the use of force required to
accomplish necessary military objectives
Principle of Unnecessary Suffering
Principle of Proportionality
This Principle forms part of Customary IHL:
Codified Under: Regulations to 1907 Hague Convention IV
Art 23 para (g)
This principle forbids a belligerent to destroy or seizure the
enemy’s property unless such destruction or seizure is imperatively
demanded by the necessity of war
“ MILITARY NECESSITY”
It has been mentioned in all four Geneva Conventions but has not been
defined
Rome statute of ICC provides prosecution for violations of
military necessity
What cannot be included in Military Necessity:
1. Extensive Destruction and appropriation of property
2. Destroying & seizing enemy’s property (not demanded by
necessity in war)
LINKS FOR REFERNCE
• https://youtu.be/wF5Z1RHxKTs?si=t-cyby7j9Ply7qJH
• https://youtu.be/oIwB-Y6FUjY?si=O7s6SknMzHKGHHhg
• https://youtu.be/jCOgepwYEhY?si=sBcv1biwb9Obh0Le
• https://youtu.be/yBIS2mj0vQ4?si=5Ak1hPRGoD2Hzllg
• https://youtu.be/ESwfxu_1Ko0?si=62Mby3aPD5VLkDUX
• https://youtu.be/HRq6Z_rIDmc?si=D3ai9fMyn7o3EXBX
• https://youtu.be/HwpzzAefx9M?si=MYJx3PMMVQe_dLNn
• https://youtu.be/3kuAG7lU-as?si=R5-rnsduGaXAQ9UJ
• https://youtu.be/lMbyvC4mkiY?si=B1TyBFaTii9LUQcL
• https://youtu.be/dOsNmLlv4oo?si=mp_5ohTJ9mhbpoLl
