INTERNATIONAL HUMANITARIAN LAW AS A DECISION FRAMEWORK IN TECHNOLOGY-MEDIATED WARFARE: EVIDENCE FROM SCENARIO-BASED DRONE DILEMMAS IN MILITARY EDUCATION

Andra-Ioana PÎNZARIU, Raluca RUSU, Col. Laviniu BOJOR

Abstract


Contemporary military operations are increasingly mediated by advanced technological systems that distance human decision-makers from the physical battlefield. The widespread use of unmanned aerial systems (UAS) and networked targeting processes raises complex ethical and legal questions regarding the application of International Humanitarian Law (IHL) in technologically mediated environments. This study examines how military cadets interpret and apply core IHL principles when confronted with scenario-based dilemmas involving UAS operations. By analyzing decision-making patterns in contexts characterized by operational ambiguity, the research explores whether IHL functions as an effective cognitive framework or remains primarily theoretical knowledge within military education. The findings contribute to broader debates on military ethics, remote warfare, and the role of education in sustaining humanitarian norms.


Full Text:

PDF

References


T.A. Tran, J. Abonyi, and T. Ruppert, Technology-enabled cognitive resilience: what can we learn from military operation to develop Operator 5.0 solutions? Production & Manufacturing Research, vol. 12, no. 1, p. 23, Dec. 2024, doi: 10.1080/21693277.2024.2368232, https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/21693277.2024.2368232.

M. Coeckelbergh, Drones, information technology, and distance: mapping the moral epistemology of remote fighting, Ethics and Information Technology, vol. 15, no. 2, pp. 87–98, Jun. 2013, doi: 10.1007/s10676-013-9313-6, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/257560397_Drones_Information_Technology_and_Distance_Mapping_The_Moral_Epistemology_Of_Remote_Fighting

J. M. Prescott, Internalizing IHL: Melding humanitarian law with military ethics for junior leaders, Int. rev. Red Cross, pp. 1–32, Jan. 2026, doi: 10.1017/S1816383125100908, https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/international-review-of-the-red-cross/article/internalizing-ihl-melding-humanitarian-law-with-military-ethics-for-junior-leaders/1019D21F2B0D230A5B99F83E2138BE83

A. Van Coller, Redefining doubt in cases of uncertainty: an analysis of the 2023 US DoD Law of War Manual revision to the presumption of civilian status in armed conflict, Int J Humanitarian Action, vol. 9, no. 1, p. 3, Jan. 2024, doi: 10.1186/s41018-023-00145-2, https://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s41018-023-00145-2

D. Whetham, Military Ethics Education – What Is It, How Should It Be Done, and Why Is It Important?, Conatus, vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 759–774, Dec. 2023, doi: 10.12681/cjp.35160, https://ejournals.epublishing.ekt.gr/index.php/Conatus/article/view/35160.

S. Guţan, The Role of Operational Law in the Development of Military Doctrine, International conference KNOWLEDGE-BASED ORGANIZATION, vol. 29, no. 2, pp. 89–94, Jun. 2023, doi: 10.2478/kbo-2023-0040, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/372535208_The_Role_of_Operational_Law_in_the_Development_of_Military_Doctrine.

Y. Dinstein, The conduct of hostilities under the law of international armed conflict, Third edition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 149–152, 155–160, 978-1-107-11840-9, 2016, chrome-extension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://assets.cambridge.org/97811071/18409/frontmatter/9781107118409_frontmatter.pdf

A. Cohen and Y. Shany, A Development of Modest Proportions: The Application of the Principle of Proportionality in the Targeted Killings Case, Journal of International Criminal Justice, vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 310–321, Apr. 2007, doi: 10.1093/jicj/mqm016, https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=979071.

J.-M. Henckaerts, L. Doswald-Beck, and C. Alvermann, Eds., Customary

international humanitarian law, Vol. 1: Rules, Repr. with corr., Chapter 5: Precautions in Attack, pp. 51-68 Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 2009, chrome-extension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://www.onlinelibrary.iihl.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/Cust-Intl-Hum-Law_Vol-I_Rules.pdf.

V. Yazdanpanah et al., Reasoning about responsibility in autonomous systems: challenges and opportunities, AI & Soc, vol. 38, no. 4, pp. 1453–1464, Aug. 2023, doi: 10.1007/s00146-022-01607-8, https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00146-022-01607-8.

M. Schulzke, The Morality of Drone Warfare and the Politics of Regulation, London: Palgrave Macmillan UK, Chapter 5 Drones and the Principles of Jus in Bello, 2017. doi: 10.1057/978-1-137-53380-7, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/312002314_The_Morality_of_Drone_Warfare_and_the_Politics_of_Regulation.

E. V. Baarle, J. Bosch, G. Widdershoven, D. Verweij, and B. Molewijk, Moral dilemmas in a military context. A case study of a train the trainer course on military ethics, Journal of Moral Education, vol. 44, no. 4, pp. 457–478, Oct. 2015, doi: 10.1080/03057240.2015.1087389, https://www.sci-hub.box/10.1080/03057240.2015.1087389.

J. Mattingsdal, When seconds count: a data-driven exploration of military leaders’ performance in simulated irregular warfare, Small Wars & Insurgencies, pp. 1–26, Nov. 2025, doi: 10.1080/09592318.2025.2588440, https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/09592318.2025.2588440.10.1080/09592318.2025.2588440.

***, Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to the Protection of Victims of International Armed Conflicts (Protocol I), (Article 48 AP I), proportionality (Article 51(5)(b) AP I), precautions in attack (Article 57 AP I), and command responsibility (Articles 86–87 AP I), 8 June 1977, https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/en/ihl-treaties/api-1977, https://www.ohchr.org/en/instruments-mechanisms/instruments/protocol-additional-geneva-conventions-12-august-1949-and.


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


JOURNAL INDEXED IN :