One of the recurrent issues within Islamic government is the resolution of international conflicts via negotiation. Explanation of the scope of negotiations with non-Muslim governments and commitment and adherence to that based on the principles and rules of jurisprudence is the missing area of research. Using a descriptive-analytical method, this study aims at explaining the nature and the effects of rules and principles of jurisprudence governing negotiation relying on the duty-oriented perspective. The findings show that the institution of negotiation is a necessary primary concept but not a secondary emergency one within the Shi'a jurisprudence. The jurisprudential principles and fundamental rules of negotiation including no-domination rule, fitness of behavior rule, the principles of honor, wisdom, and rational expediency indicate active but not passive negotiation. Active negotiation is rooted in duty-oriented perspective. According to this jurisprudential view, to fulfill the duties within critical conditions of negotiation with enemies, the Islamic negotiators should adopt soft and flexible tactics in the process of negotiation in order that non-Muslim governments cannot impose limitations and sanctions through situational planning.