Open Collections

Abstract

The integration of artificial intelligence (AI) into autonomous weapons systems (AWS) and their use in modern warfare has damaging consequences on the environment that remain insufficiently addressed in international law. While the current AWS regulation debate is often confined to ethical and humanitarian concerns, the cumulative ecological consequences of AWS deployment remain structurally unaddressed in international law. This thesis examines the extent to which international humanitarian law (IHL) and international environmental law (IEL) frameworks provide accountability for environmental destruction resulting from the deployment of AI-enabled AWS. Through a doctrinal and conceptual analysis of IHL, specifically the Additional Protocol I, and IEL, such as the ENMOD Convention, the thesis demonstrates that existing frameworks, rooted in anthropocentric notions of human control and intent, struggle to assign clear accountability for long-term ecological damage resulting from the use of these modern weapons. Using two terrain-varied, drone warfare case studies, the research diagnoses a technological–normative gap in accountability. To address the gap, this thesis proposes that responsibility must be reconceptualized, shifting from an anthropocentric and state-centric liability structure to a systemic, risk-based model capable of mandating accountability for ecological destruction. The research asserts the need for incorporating environmental protection as a core normative principle to strengthen the legal and moral case for the prohibition of Lethal Autonomous Weapons Systems.