Adapting the rules of armed conflict law to autonomous weapons systems

Abstract

This paper examines the legal characterization of the use of autonomous weapon systems in armed conflicts under international humanitarian law, in light of the rapid technological advancements in artificial intelligence and automated military systems. These developments have generated significant legal and ethical debates concerning the protection of civilians and the regulation of means and methods of warfare. The study begins by outlining the conceptual framework of autonomous weapon systems and highlighting the absence of a universally agreed international definition, followed by an analysis of their gradual historical development across air, maritime, and land domains. It emphasizes that autonomy in weapon systems has evolved incrementally through increasing levels of automation and that existing systems generally remain subject to varying degrees of human supervision. The paper then assesses the compatibility of autonomous weapons with core principles of international humanitarian law, particularly distinction, proportionality, precautions in attack, and military necessity, focusing on challenges related to predictability, reliability, and system behavior in complex operational environments. Special attention is given to the requirement of human control as a fundamental legal and practical safeguard to ensure compliance with humanitarian rules. Furthermore, the paper addresses the potential humanitarian benefits associated with reduced human error and enhanced targeting precision, while acknowledging the significant risks posed by diminished human judgment. Finally, the study analyzes accountability for violations committed through the use of autonomous weapons, distinguishing between state responsibility, individual criminal responsibility in cases of intent or recklessness, and possible civil liability arising from technical defects. The paper concludes by calling for internationally agreed legal standards to define permissible levels of autonomy and to preserve meaningful human control and effective accountability in the use of force.