This chapter is related to the adoption of discriminatory rules in respect of international and non-international armed conflicts. In this chapter, I intend to answer the following questions: Was it originally intended to have different set of rules regarding the two categories of armed conflict; second, were the States initially in favor of different restraints in both the armed conflict situations; third, how did France and United Kingdom ensure that only a limited number of rules would apply to non-international armed conflicts, and fourth, how are the different rules for both these categories of armed conflicts problematic and how do they demonstrate the façade of a “humanitarian” law. Subsequently, the chapter tries to argue that the difference in the rules makes it unavoidable to classify an armed conflict, and this exercise often gets very complex. The complexity involved in the classification delays the operation of the law and enforcement of whatever protection it makes available.