The Legal Status of AI-Enabled Weapon Systems in International Law: 'Autonomous Weapons' and the Conundrum of State Responsibility

The rapid maturation of artificial intelligence (AI) is propelling the development of weapon systems capable of selecting and engaging targets without direct human intervention. These Lethal Autonomous Weapon Systems (LAWS), colloquially termed 'killer robots', represent a paradigm shift in warfare, moving beyond remotely-operated drones to systems with genuine cognitive autonomy. This article provides an exhaustive analysis of the legal status of LAWS under contemporary international law. It argues that while the challenges LAWS pose to the substantive rules of International Humanitarian Law (IHL)—namely distinction, proportionality, and precaution—are profound, the more fundamental crisis lies in their incompatibility with the structural principles of international accountability. The unique characteristic of AI-driven autonomy, particularly the potential for unpredictable or emergent behavior, systematically dismantles the established frameworks for both individual criminal responsibility and, most critically, state responsibility. The high threshold for attributing the conduct of a non-sentient, unpredictable actor to a state under the customary rules codified in the Articles on Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts (ARSIWA) creates a legal chasm, threatening to leave wrongful acts in a state of perpetual impunity. After examining the fractured geopolitical landscape of regulation, where strategic competition between major powers like the United States, Russia, and China has stalled progress, this article concludes that existing legal frameworks are conceptually insufficient. It posits that only a new, legally binding international instrument can address this accountability chasm. Such a treaty must not only establish clear prohibitions and regulations but also introduce a lex specialis rule of attribution for LAWS, such as a rebuttable presumption of state responsibility, to restore a meaningful system of accountability for the algorithmic age of warfare.