Regulating Artificial Intelligence in Modern Warfare: Challenges for International Humanitarian Law

Artificial Intelligence (AI) is transforming the way contemporary warfare is conducted. The advent of autonomous weapon systems, AI enabled drone technology, algorithmic surveillance and targeting platforms is changing the conduct of combat operations but it brings with itself fundamental legal and ethical concerns under International Humanitarian Law (IHL). This article uses comparative case study analysis within the framework of qualitative doctrinal research. The research explores independently verifiable reports that are publicly available through sources related to the Russia Ukraine conflict, and other contemporary AI-assisted warfare cases in Gaza or further examples of emerging AI enabled technologies examined from an IHL perspective. These conclusions are grounded in the legal analysis of primary international legal instruments, namely: Geneva Conventions, Additional Protocol I, custom International Humanitarian Law, as well as relevant United Nations documents and academic literature reviewed by peers. The article refrains from taking individual conflict reports as evidence to consider how cyber and AI enabled military technologies might compromise the fundamental IHL principles of distinction, proportionality, military necessity, humanity and meaningful human control through careful consideration of available information. These future principles will be translated into evaluative standards for examining the legality of AI assisted targeting systems. The paper continues to explore the justice gap that can result when autonomous or AI associated systems affect life and death targeting, with oversight from a human being that is not engaged. It claims that while AI may increase optimization and decision support, this poses major challenges for contemporary international legal institutions regarding transparency, accountability and meaningful judicial control of ever more autonomous military systems. The article finds that to remain compliant with International Humanitarian Law, international regulatory development must continue - bolstered by evidence based assessment, strict weapons review and internationally agreed standards on meaningful human control, transparency and accountability.

autonomous weapons systems, international humanitarian law, artificial intelligence, distinction, proportionality, accountability gap, lethal autonomous weapons

1. Additional Protocol I to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and Relating to the Protection of Victims of International Armed Conflicts. 8 June 1977, 1125 UNTS 3. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Al Jazeera. "US Israel Attacks on Iran: Death Toll and Injuries Live Tracker." Al Jazeera, 1 Mar. 2026. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. American Jewish Committee (AJC). "The Iran Strikes, Explained: How We Got Here and What It Means." AJC, 28 Feb. 2026. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Anderson, Kenneth, and Matthew Waxman. Law and Ethics for Autonomous Weapon Systems: Why a Ban Won't Work and How the Laws of War Can. Hoover Institution, 2013. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Arms Control Association. "Geopolitics and the Regulation of Autonomous Weapons Systems." Arms Control Today, Jan. 2025. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Asaro, Peter. "On Banning Autonomous Weapon Systems: Human Rights, Automation, and the Dehumanization of Lethal Decision Making." International Review of the Red Cross, vol. 94, no. 886, 2012, pp. 687 to 709. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Bondar, Kateryna. Ukraine's Future Vision and Current Capabilities for Waging AI Enabled Autonomous Warfare. Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), Mar. 2025. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Brookings Institution. "After the Strike: The Danger of War in Iran." Brookings, 1 Mar. 2026. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Cairo Review of Global Affairs. "Governing AI Under Fire in Ukraine." The Cairo Review, June 2025. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. CNN. "Why Did the US and Israel Attack Iran and Everything We Know on Day 5." CNN, 3 Mar. 2026. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons (CCW), Group of Governmental Experts on Lethal Autonomous Weapons Systems. Rolling Text on Possible Elements of an Instrument. United Nations Office for Disarmament Affairs, 8 Nov. 2024. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Docherty, Bonnie. "Staying in the Loop: The Case for a Preemptive Ban on Fully Autonomous Weapons." Harvard International Law Journal, vol. 56, 2015, pp. 1 to 36. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Geneva Conventions. Conventions I to IV. International Committee of the Red Cross, 12 Aug. 1949. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Henckaerts, Jean Marie, and Louise Doswald Beck. Customary International Humanitarian Law. Vol. 1, Cambridge University Press and ICRC, 2005. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. Human Rights Watch. Losing Humanity: The Case Against Killer Robots. Human Rights Watch, 2012. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Human Rights Watch. "Automated Apartheid: How Facial Recognition Fragments Palestinian Lives Under Israeli Occupation." Human Rights Watch, 2023. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC). Commentary of 1987 to Additional Protocol I of 1977. ICRC, 1987. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC). Interpretive Guidance on the Notion of Direct Participation in Hostilities under International Humanitarian Law. ICRC, 2009. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC). Autonomous Weapon Systems: Technical, Military, Legal and Humanitarian Aspects. ICRC, 2014. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC). ICRC Position on Autonomous Weapon Systems. ICRC, 2021. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. Israel Defense Forces (IDF). Official Statements and Updates on Operational Use of Artificial Intelligence during the Gaza Conflict. Israel Defense Forces, 2024. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

22. Modirzadeh, Naz, Dustin Lewis, and Emmeline B. Reeves. "Lethal Autonomous Weapons Systems under International Law." ASIL Insights, vol. 29, no. 1, 2024. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

23. Roff, Heather M. "The Strategic Robot Problem: Lethal Autonomous Weapons in War." Journal of Military Ethics, vol. 13, no. 3, 2014, pp. 211 to 227. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

24. Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. 17 July 1998, 2187 UNTS 90. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

25. Russell, Stuart, and Peter Norvig. Artificial Intelligence: A Modern Approach. 4th ed., Pearson, 2021. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

26. Sassoli, Marco. "Autonomous Weapons and International Humanitarian Law: Advantages, Open Technical Questions and Legal Issues to Be Clarified." Naval War College International Law Studies, vol. 90, 2014, pp. 308 to 340. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

27. Scharre, Paul. Army of None: Autonomous Weapons and the Future of War. W. W. Norton & Company, 2018. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

28. Schmitt, Michael N. "Autonomous Weapon Systems and International Humanitarian Law: A Reply to the Critics." Harvard National Security Journal Features, vol. 4, 2013, pp. 1 to 15. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

29. Schmitt, Michael N., and Jeffrey S. Thurnher. "'Out of the Loop': Autonomous Weapon Systems and the Law of Armed Conflict." Harvard National Security Journal, vol. 4, no. 2, 2013, pp. 231 to 281. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

30. Sharkey, Noel. "Automating Warfare: Lessons Learned from the Drones." Journal of Law, Information and Science, vol. 21, no. 2, 2012, pp. 140 to 154. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

31. Sparrow, Robert. "Killer Robots." Journal of Applied Philosophy, vol. 24, no. 1, 2007, pp. 62 to 77. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

32. Stop Killer Robots. "September 2025 GGE Joint Statement." Stop Killer Robots, Sept. 2025. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

33. Taddeo, Mariarosaria, and Alexander Blanchard. "A Comparative Analysis of the Definitions of Autonomous Weapon Systems." TRENDS Research and Advisory, 2024. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

34. Tallinn Manual 2.0 on the International Law Applicable to Cyber Operations. Edited by Michael N. Schmitt, Cambridge University Press, 2017. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

35. United Nations General Assembly. Resolution 79/62: Lethal Autonomous Weapons Systems. UN Doc. A/RES/79/62, 2 Dec. 2024. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

36. United Nations Office for Disarmament Affairs (UNODA). Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons (CCW): Group of Governmental Experts on Lethal Autonomous Weapons Systems. UNODA, 2025. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

37. United Nations Special Rapporteur on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights while Countering Terrorism. Report on Human Rights and Autonomous Weapons Systems. United Nations Human Rights Council, 2024. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

38. United States Department of Defense. Directive 3000.09: Autonomy in Weapon Systems. Updated 25 Jan. 2023. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

39. United States Department of State. Political Declaration on Responsible Military Use of Artificial Intelligence and Autonomy. U.S. Department of State, 2023. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

40. US Army War College, War Room. "Artificial Intelligence's Growing Role in Modern Warfare." War Room, 21 Aug. 2025. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• AI-Driven Marketplace Intelligence for Commercial Spaces