Military, War, and Peace Commons^™

Autonomy And Precautions In The Law Of Armed Conflict, Eric Talbot Jensen

International Law Studies

Already a controversial topic, legal debate and broader discussions concerning the amount of human control required in the employment of autonomous weapons—including autonomous cyber capabilities—continues. These discussions, particularly those taking place among States that are Parties to the 1980 Certain Conventional Weapons Convention, reveal a complete lack of consensus on the requirement of human control and serve to distract from the more important question with respect to autonomy in armed conflict: under what conditions could autonomous weapons “select” and “attack” targets in a manner that complies with the law of armed conflict (LOAC).

This article analyzes the specific LOAC rules …

Lethal Autonomous Weapon Systems: Translating Geek Speak For Lawyers, Linell A. Letendre

International Law Studies

This article provides an overview of robotics and autonomous systems so that attorneys can better understand the systems and design principles of lethal autonomous weapon systems (LAWS) that may be used in an armed conflict. Using the lens of establishing a common language between engineers and attorneys, the article introduces the basics of robotics terminology, explores how autonomous systems work by explaining control systems and control architecture, and examines how autonomous systems learn and reason. It also suggests a number of questions attorneys should ask engineers during the design process in order to ensure autonomous systems are designed in a …

Beyond Human Shielding: Civilian Risk Exploitation And Indirect Civilian Targeting, Geoffrey S. Corn

International Law Studies

Few violations of the law of armed conflict (LOAC) are as pernicious as using civilians to shield military objectives from attack. This unlawful tactic unfortunately seems to be an all too common practice of organized armed groups, especially in conflicts against tactically superior conventional state armed forces. The very term "human shielding" presupposes, however, the ultimate objective is to prevent an opponent from attacking the shielded military objective or, in the alternative, substantially complicate that attack decision. But is a shielding effect always the ultimate objective of such civilian exploitation? This article argues that the answer is no; that there …

Strategic Proportionality: Limitations On The Use Of Force In Modern Armed Conflicts, Noam Lubell, Amichai Cohen

International Law Studies

The nature of modern armed conflicts, combined with traditional interpretations of proportionality, poses serious challenges to the jus ad bellum goal of limiting and controlling wars. In between the jus ad bellum focus on decisions to use force, and the international humanitarian law (IHL) regulation of specific attacks, there is a far-reaching space in which the regulatory role of international law is bereft of much needed clarity. Perhaps the most striking example is in relation to overall casualties of war. If the jus ad bellum is understood as applying to the opening moments of the conflict, then it cannot provide …

The (Erroneous) Requirement For Human Judgment (And Error) In The Law Of Armed Conflict, Eric Talbot Jensen

International Law Studies

One of the most intriguing and important discussions in international law is the potential impact of emerging technologies on the law of armed conflict (LOAC), including weapons that incorporate machine learning and/or artificial intelligence. Because one of the likely characteristics of these advanced weapons would be the ability to make decisions implicating life and death on the battlefield, these discussions have highlighted a fundamental question concerning the LOAC: Does the law regulating armed conflict require human input in selecting and engaging targets or can that decision be made without human input? This article analyzes views expressed by scholars and NGOs, …