Legal Permissibility of Autonomous Weapon Systems, with Specific Reference to the Principles of International Humanitarian Law

Autonomous weapon systems have been used in armed conflicts for the past twenty years. The first country in the world to use them was the United States. Namely, they have proven to be a very effective tool in the fight against terrorism, but also a very effective means of warfare. In recent years, other states have been using them as well. For instance, Azerbaijan was using operational-tactical drones in the Second War against Armenia and was the first state to win a convincing victory by employing them. At present, drones are also being used in the Russo-Ukrainian war. Many world governments are showing massive interest in purchasing them, as well as other types of autonomous weapon systems, for military-strategic advantages. However, it is not only states that are acquiring that kind of weapons. Terrorist organizations, as well as other non-state actors, do so as well. The international community is divided on the issue of permissibility of the use of autonomous weapons. Some states require an absolute ban on their employment, while others do not entirely oppose them, but propose the adoption of an internationally binding agreement to regulate their use. As there is yet no such binding agreement, their permissibility should at the present moment be assessed by examining their compatibility with the existing principles of international humanitarian law. This paper aims at demonstrating that autonomous weapon systems do not meet the requirements of the IHL principles, although development of such weapons is still in progress and is yet to be seen whether this development will lead to a different conclusion.