international humanitarian law
In plain wordsThe rules of international law that limit how wars may be fought, protecting civilians, the wounded and prisoners. They apply to every weapon, including ones that use AI.
The body of international law, also called the law of armed conflict or jus in bello, that applies once a war or other armed conflict is under way, whoever started it. It restricts the weapons and tactics that may be used and shields those outside the fighting — civilians, and combatants who are wounded, sick or captured. Its main sources are the four Geneva Conventions (1949), their Additional Protocols (1977), the Hague Conventions and customary law. Core principles require attackers to distinguish combatants from civilians, to refrain from attacks expected to cause civilian harm excessive in relation to the anticipated military advantage (proportionality), and to take feasible precautions. Article 36 of Additional Protocol I obliges states to review whether new weapons can be used lawfully. In AI debates it is the yardstick for autonomous weaponslethal autonomous weapons system, n.: A weapon that, after a person sets it going, picks out and attacks targets — including people — on its own, with no human deciding each strike. Critics call them killer robots. and AI decision-support for targeting: whether machines can apply these context-dependent judgments, and who is accountable when they fail.
The weapons review found the targeting aid compatible with IHL only if a human approves every strike.
Origin
Modern codification began with the first Geneva Convention (1864), inspired by Henry Dunant, and the Hague Conventions of 1899 and 1907. The name 'international humanitarian law', promoted by the International Committee of the Red Cross, came into general use in the 1970s, notably at the 1974–1977 diplomatic conference that produced the Additional Protocols.
Usage note
Distinct from international human rights law, which applies at all times, and from jus ad bellum, the law on when force may be used at all. Many AI-weapons debates turn on whether existing IHL suffices or a new treaty is needed.
Related
- lethal autonomous weapons systemlethal autonomous weapons system, n.: A weapon that, after a person sets it going, picks out and attacks targets — including people — on its own, with no human deciding each strike. Critics call them killer robots.
- human-in-the-loophuman-in-the-loop, adj.: Describes AI systems in which a person checks, corrects or approves the machine's work at key points, rather than letting it act entirely on its own.
- dronedrone, n.: An aircraft that carries no one aboard to fly it: a person steers it from the ground, or its own software does. Small camera-carrying quadcopters are the most familiar kind.
- dual-usedual-use, adj.: Describes technology or knowledge that can be used both to help and to harm: the same AI that finds software bugs for defenders can find them for attackers.
- AI governanceAI governance, n.: The rules, institutions and habits that shape how AI is built and used — from laws and treaties to technical standards and a company's own review processes.
Sources
- Henckaerts, J.-M. & Doswald-Beck, L. (eds.) (2005). Customary International Humanitarian Law, Vol. 1: Rules. International Committee of the Red Cross / Cambridge University Press.
Defined in law or standards
Geneva Conventions (1949) and Additional Protocols I and II (1977); Additional Protocol I, Art. 36 (review of new weapons)
Mentioned in
lethal autonomous weapons systemlethal autonomous weapons system, n.: A weapon that, after a person sets it going, picks out and attacks targets — including people — on its own, with no human deciding each strike. Critics call them killer robots.