El régimen jurídico de los drones militares de ataque. Ausencia de regulación internacional y aplicación de los principios generales del Derecho Internacional de los Conflictos Armados

Review: "The Legal Regime of Military Attack Drones" by Fernando López In this sharp and timely article, jurist Fernando López explores the regulatory vacuum and legal adaptability of military drones, particularly those with lethal capabilities, within the framework of International Humanitarian Law (IHL), also referred to as the Law of Armed Conflict (LOAC). The piece is situated within the context of an evolving battlefield landscape, where unmanned systems—ranging from remotely piloted MQ-9 Reapers to improvised civilian drones repurposed for combat—have come to play a defining role in modern warfare. López’s central thesis is clear: the legality of remotely piloted military drones under IHL is not in question per se, so long as their use adheres to the core principles of necessity, proportionality, and distinction—principles enshrined in Articles 35, 36, 48, and 51 of Additional Protocol I to the Geneva Conventions of 1949. The article persuasively argues that, in the absence of a specific international prohibition, these drones fall under the legal framework applicable to traditional manned aircraft, such as jets or helicopters, when operated in accordance with established humanitarian norms. A significant contribution of this article is its distinction between remotely piloted drones and autonomous lethal weapons systems (LAWS). While the former are generally seen as legally assimilable to conventional weaponry, the latter present profound legal, ethical, and technical uncertainties due to the lack of direct human oversight. López highlights ongoing international efforts—particularly within the United Nations Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons (CCW)—to develop guidelines or restrictions for LAWS, though he candidly notes the lack of binding outcomes to date. One of the most insightful dimensions of the article is López’s treatment of what he calls the “PlayStation syndrome”—a psychological detachment in operators due to the remote nature of drone warfare. This phenomenon raises fundamental questions not just of legality, but also of the morality and dehumanization of conflict, pointing toward an emerging domain of philosophical and ethical inquiry in contemporary military law. The review of Spanish domestic regulation, particularly Royal Decree 601/2016, adds an important national dimension. López notes that while this decree addresses operational aspects such as classification and authorization, it does not substitute for the overarching applicability of IHL in conflict scenarios. Spain’s status as a party to the core IHL treaties ensures that drone use remains subordinated to international norms.