One of the most important discussions regarding the scope of authority of the ruler of the Islamic system during the Occultation, especially with the establishment of an Islamic government, concerns the jurist’s authority in initiating war or peace. Regarding the limits of this authority, based on the various types of jihad defined in Islamic jurisprudence, there exist numerous differences of opinion among the Twelver Shia jurists. Examining the scope of this authority, based on the distinction between international and domestic conflicts, requires addressing two fundamental issues: first, standardizing the types of conflicts in the jurists’ discourse in terms of being domestic or international, and second, resolving the ambiguity regarding the exercise of this authority during the Occultation. In light of the above, this study seeks to answer the question: “What are the authorities of the Islamic system’s governance in armed conflicts. The research hypothesis, in an analytical-descriptive approach, proposes that, considering the distinctions between citizens (Muslim and non-Muslim) and non-citizens in the context of conflict, a framework exists regarding the type of war. Accordingly, conflicts are divided into international and domestic: International conflicts include two types: Offensive and Defensive. Domestic conflicts manifest in three types:
Repelling the non-compliance of non-Muslim citizens
Repelling the non-compliance of Muslim citizens in case of rebellion against the ruler of the Islamic system
Repelling the non-compliance of Muslim citizens in case of apostasy from Islam
In the next stage, the permission and authority of the ruler of the Islamic system regarding all the aforementioned types of conflict are examined. The outcome of the discussion indicates that the ruler of the Islamic system, even in the case of Elementary Jihad (jihad ebtedayi), possesses the capability to initiate and command war during the Occultation.